Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Case study on performance appraisals
Case study on performance appraisals
Words for performance appraisal
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Case study on performance appraisals
1. Was the employer negligent in how it conducted its performance appraisals? Explain.
The term performance appraisal is defined in the textbook as, “Providing welcome recognition of accomplishments and needed feedback on how to improve performance.” (Walsh, Pg. 589). According to this definition, I would say that the employer was negligent in how they conducted their performance appraisals.
During the female customer services manager employment period, she was evaluated several times, each time receiving nothing but a positive review. As a result of her favorable review, she was reward with a bonus in April and an all expenses-paid trip to Hawaii in May. It was upon her return to work from her trip that she was informed that she was no longer
…show more content…
Did it engage in fraudulent misrepresentation? Explain and Interpret with cited support, your position.
The term fraudulent misrepresentation is summarized in an online article titled, “Fraudulent Misrepresentation Lawyers” as, “Fraudulent misrepresentation is one of the three recognized varieties of misrepresentations in contact law. Basically, it means that you not only lied or misrepresented something about a transaction, but that you did it on purpose, in order to trick the other party. Therefore, it is the most serious of all the types of misrepresentation and has the worst penalties.” (Clarke, 2015). Based on the definition provided for this term, I would say this scenario engaged in fraudulent misrepresentation. The employer intentionally lied and fired the female employee with no real reason, because of this the employee suffered personally. The employers decision was made to deceive the employee and could not provide a valid reason as to why they employee needed to be laid off, especially after returning from her expenses-paid trip to Hawaii that the organization awarded her with. The employer could have avoided fraudulent misrepresentation if they were just honest with the female employee during her performance appraisals. If they gave the employees corrections and voiced their concerns, then there would have been a valid reason as to why she had to be laid
through a public way online, which seemed very unprofessional. I think the outcome of her getting fired
In this case, Taylor who was the Vice President of Meritor Bank hired Vinson as a teller for Meritor Savings Bank. For Taylor, there was an instant attraction to Vinson and he pursued her sexually. Vinson started meeting Taylor outside of work and the relationship grew to be of the sexual nature. Taylor, being her boss, started showing possessive displays of affection within the work place in front of job candidates and current employees. Taylor then suggested that Vinson apply for a higher-ranking job he supervised. Vinson deliberated on it, decided to interview, and was then promoted. Taylor and Vinson had many sexual encounters, 40-50 times, during the course of her employment with the bank. Taylor started getting more aggressive with his impromptu barrage of sexual encounters in places like the women's bathroom. When Vinson notified Taylor that she had developed and was embarking on a relationship with another male, Tay...
Maria DeSimone, 40 years old; wife and mother of two children of Palm Bay, Florida, was refused employment at the establishment in which she applied to. The circumstances surrounding the case were as follows. Ms. DeSimone possessed two years of previous restaurant experience, she applied for a position at Texas Roadhouse of Palm Bay to the manager of the facility. When she never heard back from the manager (who said he would get back to her); she happened to be discussing the situation with a friend; the friend told her that Texas Roadhouse had just hired her 19-year-old daughter to the position in which she had just applied for. Previously when she had not heard back from the manager about the position, he told her that “they weren’t hiring at this time” (Lee and Hymowitz,
Making false or misleading statements with the purpose of securing goods or services under the Workers' Compensation Act;
Facts of the case: Anna’s immediate supervisor, Michael, repeatedly required that she have “closed door” meetings with him. Closed-door meetings violate company policy. Other employees were aware of these closed-door meetings and, as a result, rumors began to spread that Anna and Michael were having an office romance. In fact, in these closed-door meetings Michael tried to convince Anna to lend him money, a practice that also violates company policy. Anna repeatedly denied the request and Michael stopped asking. However, the rumors continued and affected Anna deeply. She was treated like an outcast by her co-workers. Anna asked Michael to clear up the rumors, but he found them amusing. Anna had two evaluations where she scored low points for “integrity” and “interpersonal relations” as a consequence of the rumors. She was passed over for two promotions for which she applied where her skills and experience were superior to the employees who were promoted. She filed an action against her employer on the ground that her supervisor had created a hostile work environment because he refused to stop the rumors.
There are several types of false statement. One of them is a deliberate lie, which goes under the Tort of Deceit. Another one is negligent misstatement, which is basically the statement made carelessly or without reasonable background and is included into the Law of Tort.
In this case, I see issues with personal bias and poor management decisions which caused Marcus Singh to receive an unfair appraisal. First, it was unjust for Singh to be evaluated on the same criteria on a job he had just began as people who were doing the same job much longer. It is reasonable to assume he is still learning his job duties, especially since he was moved from his previous job of 10 year in industrial development to his new job in a completely different area of Research and Evaluation. Second, Garth Frye exhibited personal bias by choosing to rank Jason Taft, an employee he knew well and had previously worked with, the same, at the expense of Signh. The appraisal system created by Frye also lacks objectivity since he formulated the ratings and completed the appraisals himself, which resulted in employees who Frye was close with, to receive higher remarks than employees Frye was less familiar with. Since this is also the first appraisal the company has done, more effort should have done to train supervisors on how to conduct fair and balanced reviews that can point out areas of improvement and do not seek to label a certain amount of employees as superior and another as inferior. It also makes no since that Frye would sign off the first review stating Singh was “a valuable employee” but
There is an array of key components and factors involved in making an organization a successful business. One of those elements consists on evaluating employee’s performance; this sole component is critical in determining how effective is the organization’s productivity and which are the necessary steps to ensure proper functioning. “The performance appraisal may be one of the few times during the year where an employee and the reviewer, typically the employee's supervisor, can sit down and have a lengthy face-to-face discussion about all aspects of the job” (Joseph, 2016). Employees’ performance assessment serves as an instrument to gather important information as to which areas of the job description are being performed according to standards
Both omissions suggest a complete lack of effective internal control. This converted the possibility of material misstatement from a probability to an almost certainty. One of these errors could be taken as a human error or a side effect of negotiation to arrive to an unqualified opinion. However, what took place in this case was the result of mixing fraud by collusion with lack of professional
Section 1: The focus of many managers is most often on the wrong things. They focus on appraisal rather than planning. Performance appraisal is not performance management. Managers often focus on a one-way flow of words (manager to employee) rather than dialogue. Performance management and the end of the year appraisal are often seen as a necessary evil. They don’t realize that if carried out properly, performance management has the potential to fix many of the problems they’re facing.
Misrepresentation – giving a false statement to the other party with the intentions to benefit or to exploit the other party than the law can end the contract in that case.
The information given may not be correct. A case where the interviewee lost his job is British royal servant George Smith, who suggested falsely that Prince Charles of Wales was having a homosexual relationship with a servant. George Smith was caught lying and lost his
Although performance is a major objective at top organizations, successfully addressing poor performance is also a key focus. Although many employees feel or dread performance appraisals they are directed to enforce clarity with individual employees day-to-day work-load, performance appraisals develops responsibility while making employees accountable for performance expectations, reinforces future career planning, helps the organization with determining training needs, and provides a stem of documentation for legality purposes. Performance management in detail is much broader than many employers, and employees assume and necessitates so much more. Proficient appraisals should represent a summary of on-going dialogue. Focusing only on an annual performance evaluation leads to misrepresentation of the performance management process in its
A 2017 survey by Harris Poll on behalf of CareerBuilder - encompassing over 2,500 U.S. employers - reveals that 75% of Human Resource (HR) managers have caught lies on résumés (CareerBuilder, 2017). Moreover, HireRight’s 2017 benchmarking survey of over 4,000 HR managers reveals an 85% fraud detection rate (Maurer, 2017). With these recent polls, we can see that today’s measure of applicant fraud is astonishing high. Yet, there are a wide variety of ways applicants lie. For example, job experience, job duties, employment dates, and education are the most common form of applicant lies (Passy, 2017).
Grubb, T. (2007). "Performance Appraisal Reappraised: It's Not All Positive." Journal of Human Resource Education. Vol. 1, (No. 1,): 1-22.