Court decisions regarding harassment and workplace hazards
Not what you're looking for?
1: Please use reading question 1
Read Burlarley v. Walmart Stores, Inc pages 386-387.
Respond to the three Case Questions found in Cheeseman Text page 387.
Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions as noted in the Critical Legal Thinking, Ethics, and Contemporary Business questions. Argue both sides of all issues.
2: Please use reading question 2
Read Dessert Cab, Inc. v. Marino - page 395.
Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions on the "work related test" of Agency.
Provide convincing arguments for both sides of your recommendations.
3: Please use reading question 3
Read Sections 19.7 Sex Discrimination (p. 419); 20.6 Workers' Compensation (p. 434); 20.5 Unemployment Benefits (p. 434); 21.3 Plant Closing (p. 448); and Family and Medical Leave Act (p. 430).
Check the decisions of the highest appellate courts, if a case is cited, for each fact pattern.
Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions on whether each of the subjects affect business in the United States and if so, provide the worst and best case scenarios.
4: Please use reading question 4
Read Section 20.8 Ethics page 435
Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions on the 3 questions found at the end of Section 20.8. Argue both sides of all issues.
Purchase this Solution
Solution Summary
Court decisions regarding harassment and workplace hazards are examined. Brief facts on the case are provided.
Solution Preview
1: Please use reading question 1
Read Burlarley v. Walmart Stores, Inc pages 386-387.
Respond to the three Case Questions found in Cheeseman Text page 387.
Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions as noted in the Critical Legal Thinking, Ethics, and Contemporary Business questions. Argue both sides of all issues.
If the work-related test were applied in this case, the outcome would have been different, and the plaintiff would have won their lawsuit. Under the work-related test, the Court would have been compelled to reverse the decision reached by the trial court because it would not have mattered what motivated the employee to engage in her actions. The mere fact that she engaged in an intentional tort within a work-related time or space would have been justification to hold the employer responsible.
Wal-Mart should have compensated the customer in my opinion. I believe that their employee should have been removed from their duties once it became apparent that the employee was engaging in behavior that was dangerous or not appropriate for the workplace. Wal-Mart has customer service managers who are responsible for monitoring the behavior of employees, and this should have occurred in this situation.
Employers' prefer the motivation test because it enables them to use the defense that an agent's motivation in committing an intentional tort wasn't in promotion of a principal business interest.
Chapter 030 - Liability of Principals & Agents wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/3251/.../cheeseman6e_ch30.ppt
2: Please use reading ...
Purchase this Solution
Free BrainMass Quizzes
Organizational Behavior (OB)
The organizational behavior (OB) quiz will help you better understand organizational behavior through the lens of managers including workforce diversity.
Operations Management
This quiz tests a student's knowledge about Operations Management
Team Development Strategies
This quiz will assess your knowledge of team-building processes, learning styles, and leadership methods. Team development is essential to creating and maintaining high performing teams.
Business Processes
This quiz is intended to help business students better understand business processes, including those related to manufacturing and marketing. The questions focus on terms used to describe business processes and marketing activities.
Balance Sheet
The Fundamental Classified Balance Sheet. What to know to make it easy.