Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Discrimination within the workplace
Discrimination in the workplace sample paper
Discrimination in the workplace sample paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Discrimination within the workplace
Situation 2 – Fighting on the Job Situation 2 Background Roberta Jones has been an employee of Ted’s Financial Services Firm for six months. Ted’s is an accounting firm specializing in providing services for small businesses throughout the Central Valley in California. The company has been experiencing rapid growth over the last year and hired Roberta to fill the company’s need for a sixth certified public accountant that was willing to work second shift, 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. On July 2nd, 2015, Gerald Toner the account manager and Ted Viveneau the owner of the company left Ted’s office and observed Roberta verbally berating one of the administrative assistants. Roberta was utilizing unacceptable language that violated the company’s discrimination and harassment policy, including racial epithets. As Ted and Gerald ran to where the altercation was occurring, they witnessed Roberta hit the administrative assistant Pamela, with an open hand across her left cheek, leaving a red mark. Gerald and Ted separated the two individuals. Pamela requested that charges be pressed against Roberta. An internal …show more content…
The company also submitted documentation that proved Roberta had undergone training at her orientation that explained the company’s employee handbook, and the organization’s policies on acceptable language in the workplace, zero tolerance policy on discrimination and harassment, as well as their violence in the workplace policies. Furthermore, Roberta had attended a two-day training on conflict resolution in May, 2015. The company was also able to present statements from several employees that Roberta had established a negative pattern of behavior in her interactions with Pamela. Repeatedly berating her and using derogatory and racially charged language with Pamela who is a
Based on the case what are two defenses against sexual harassment that can be used by an employer?
through a public way online, which seemed very unprofessional. I think the outcome of her getting fired
This puts his lawyer Ken Murray in a difficult ethical position. Karla had told the prosecutors about the tapes, and they tapped into Ken and Paul’s conversations. Once the pressure got too much, Ken turned over to the prosecutors and he withdrew from the case, John Rosen took his place. Paul’s case started in May of 1995, where he faced two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of aggravated sexual assault, two counts of forcible confinement, two counts of kidnapping and one count of performing an indignity on the human body. On September 1, 1995 Paul was convicted on all the charges against him regarding Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French..
Direct supervisors are not trained to ensure consistency when training employees at worksite facilities. The trainees were
Defamation is a tort action that has been widely recognized, nonetheless, it has only been within recent years, that the concept has been increasingly utilized in the employment context (Mcconnell, 2000, p. 78) . However, it is useful to first lay out the elements of the defamation tort as they occur in the employment setting. First, there must be a false, and defamatory statement. A statement is defamatory if it harms the employee's reputation or discourages others; such as potential employers, from wanting to have any contact with the employee. Second, the statement, be it written or oral, must be "published," that is, transmitted to a third party. Next, the defendant/employer must be responsible for the publication of the false and defamatory statement. Last, defamation damage to the plaintiff must occur; caused either by the statement itself, or by its actionable
There is a woman by the name of Theresa Drummond who is a licensed medical assistant; she went through the company of Nursefinders to help assist her in placing her into a job and they did exactly that. They found her a medical assisting job at a Kaiser Medical Facility and at the Kaiser Facility where she got employed to is where she met the plaintiff in this case whose name is Sara Montague, she is also employed as a medical assistant. During a few different occurrences at the Kaiser Medical Facility both Theresa Drummond and the plaintiff Sara Montague had their differences and got into arguments while on the job. One of the arguments was about how the rooms were being stocked improperly and the argument following that was regarding some lab slips that had been lost, during this particular incident Theresa Drummond raised her voice at the plaintiff Sara Montague (Montague v. AMN Healthcare, Inc.,
The Utilitarian Approach seems to be the best approach in this situation as it focuses on the option that produces the most good and do the least harm (A Framework for Thinking Ethically, n.d.). Krista made the decision to tell Eve 's boss about the situation and accompanied him to HR to gather the required information. This was done to ensure compliance of labor regulations before counseling Eve. However, we believe the greatest care and attention that Eve could have received is not having Krista present during the reprimanding. Krista was supposedly Eve 's friend and a supervisor, but not Eve 's supervisor. Although Krista witnessed the incident, we believe she should not have been present in the counseling session. We feel Eve 's supervisor should have handled everything and if a witness was needed during the reprimand then someone from HR would have sufficed. After a week at home without pay, Eve came back to work on time, and her punishment as well as her changed behavior set a good precedent for the other employees. Krista 's and Bob 's decision to send Eve home for one week without pay appears to be for the good of Eve as she could have been
When analyzing the whole case the NLRB’s decision was that pier sixty violated the NLRA by discharging Perez. The abusive behavior stands out to be the issue Perez’s use of obscenities within the company in which qualifies for protection under the NLRA, four- factor test established by the NLRB. The test factors out, the place of discussion, the subject matter, the description of the employee’s outburst and was it provoked in anyway by the employers unfair practice. In conclusion, the NLRA decided that the Facebook post was hardly a threat in the workplace and shouldn’t have received such an unlawful consequence.
The next class that is going to be protected is harassment. The EEOC is going to state harassment as any unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. Anna could possibly be protected under this class if the harassment came form the boss. Since the harassment came from others in the
The purpose of this paper is to analyze a specific, hypothetical employment situation encountered and to include the information regarding employment conflicts, questions, grievances, lawsuits, etc., in terms of how the situation was handled or resolved. Employment conflicts are a constant issue everyday in any organization; it is how you handle them both legally and professionally that counts.
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.
Two weeks later: After Memorial Day, Carl decides to follow up on the task that Monica went over with him on May 15. Carl states this is when he realized there were errors that were made because no mandatory drug screens were completed, no transcripts or applications were submitted to complete the new hires files, three out of fifteen policy manuals were missing pages, and the scheduled date for the training room overlapped with Technology Services Department reservations. Alternatives The possible alternatives as the situation was discussed to come to a solution were several, such as: „« Mediation with a third party that is neutral between both parties considering there is two departments that are involved. „ « Contacting all the new hires to inform the hires that the tentative start date will be pushed further, possibly another month, this is August or September.
Miranda is being inconsiderate of her staff and their lives. Human Resources should constantly be involved with the lives of all the employees in all departments to ensure that they are happy with their work hours, pay, and how they are treated. This will ensure a positive and productive work environment where goals and profits are achieved.
Namie, Ph.D., Gary, and Ruth Namie, Ph.D. The Bully at Work: What You Can Do to Stop the Hurt and Reclaim Your Dignity On the Job. First Edition. Naperville: Sourcebooks, Inc., 2000. 274-275. Print.
In this paper, I will write my answers to questions pertaining to Case 7, Mary Corey and Case 16, Kathy’s temper. These found in the textbook The Management Training Tool Kit.