Share
Explore BrainMass

Employment Law: Justifying Employer Actions

Review Clippings, McDonald's strip search incident, imagine a scenario that is not quite as egregious as the one referenced. Instead, imagine that a female assistant manager performed the same cavity search of the 18-year-old female employee because she thought the employee had stolen some money from the register. The assistant manager was alerted by a co-worker that the female employee in question had just walked from the front of the store (where the registers are located) immediately to the employee bathroom with some paper-like object balled up in her hands. The female employee was humiliated by the search and felt sexually assaulted by the assault and helpless because she was held there for three hours despite her objections. In this changed scenario, do you believe McDonald's would have faced a similar judgment from the courts ($6 million award and guilty of negligence, sexual harassment, and false imprisonment)? Why, or why not? What defense(s) would the employer likely raise in order to try and justify the actions taken? Do you think these defenses would be persuasive? Why, or why not?

Solution Preview

CASE
Imagine a scenario that is not quite as egregious as the one referenced. Instead, imagine that a female assistant manager performed the same cavity search of the 18-year-old female employee because she thought the employee had stolen some money from the register. The assistant manager was alerted by a co-worker that the female employee in question had just walked from the front of the store (where the registers are located) immediately to the employee bathroom with some paper-like object balled up in her hands. The female employee was humiliated by the search and felt sexually assaulted by the assault and helpless because she was held there for three hours despite her objections.

IN THIS CHANGED SCENARIO, DO YOU BELIEVE MCDONALD'S WOULD HAVE FACED A SIMILAR JUDGMENT FROM THE COURTS ($6 MILLION AWARD AND GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE, SEXUAL HARASSMENT, AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT)? WHY, OR WHY NOT?

I certainly believe that McDonald's would have faced a similar judgment from the courts given the case above, as in the 2005 case brought forth by Ogborn. Although the case with Ogborn was fueled by the lack of evidence initially (evidence was reported via telephone), it is important to note that the McDonald's strip search incident was ...

Solution Summary

This solution provides information regarding a lawsuit that was filed against a manager of McDonald’s for sexually harassing a female worker. Based upon a scenario described in the solution, the follow questions are addressed using legal expertise/ rationale:
In this changed scenario, do you believe McDonald's would have faced a similar judgment from the courts ($6 million award and guilty of negligence, sexual harassment, and false imprisonment)? Why, or why not?

What defense(s) would the employer likely raise in order to try and justify the actions taken?

Do you think these defenses would be persuasive? Why, or why not?

$2.19