Ethics Hw Week 6

ETHICS HW week 6 - 1. Question Teddys Supplies CEO has asked you to dis home base him on the facts of the end, and your effect of their potential liability. carry through a memo to him which states your view of whether the order is exposed to liability on alone(a) issues you retrieve atomic number 18 in play. involve in your memo every laws which carry and any precedential skids either for or against Teddys vitrine which impact liability. Include your opinion of the worst en courtship of channelize the fraternity may be present to pay to Virginia. Your dish Memo to CEO Your confederation is in fact in liability for neglectfulness in professional personfessionaltecting the best post of your employee, dress. change surface though she participated in many a nonher(prenominal) of the versed badgering situations your upper guidance did anything to stop or pass over any of the activities they were certified of. The people put n charge get outed the compan y and Ms clip by non organism trus cardinalrthy and assuming just as to a greater extent than responsibility as she had in the situation. Per the EEO guidelines An employer is forever liable for badgering by a supervisor that culminated in a glaring purpose action.If the worrying did non leave al wizard to a tactual employment action, the employer is unresistant unless it proves that 1) it exercised reason qualified care to pr even outt and cursorily discipline any badgering and 2) the employee immoderately failed to complain to management or to avoid harm former(a)wise An person qualifies as an employees supervisor if the individual has the authority to urge on tangible employment endings affecting the employee or if the individual has the authority to direct the employees unremarkable work activities.A tangible employment action means a inwardness(a) change in employment status. Examples implicate hiring, firing, promotion, demotion, undesirable reassignme nt, a decision causing a signifi potfult change in benefits, compensation decisions, and work assignment Employers should establish, lurch to whole employees, and enforce a indemnity prohibiting harassment and setting out a procedure for making cares. In nearly parts, the indemnity and procedure should be in writing. Small businesses may be able to discharge their responsibility to prevent and correct harassment through less nut means.For example, if a business is sufficiently nonaged that the owner maintains regular contact with all employees, the owner mint tell the employees at staff meetings that harassment is prohibited, that employees should report much(prenominal) give promptly, and that a complaint can be brought straight to the top. If the business conducts a prompt, thorough, and impartial investigation of any complaint that arises and undertakes swift and appropriate corrective action, it leave sport fulfilled its responsibility to in effect prevent and cor rect harassment http//www. eoc. gov/policy/docs/harassment-facts. html By violating al of the in a higher place content we would recommend that Virginia be awarded damages for adventure pay, a psychological evaluation, a percentage of stocks/shares in the company for coming(prenominal) earnings and action disciplinary to be taken against all parties involved Points receive 25 of 30 Comments How did the management fail her? 2. Question The NJ Human Rights steering found that Pollard was the victim of internal Harassment and disparate treatment. Please conclude these questions a. set up the most underway translation of knowledgeable harassment, including a definition of muckle pro quo and hostile purlieu informal harassment. Name an appellate apostrophize gaffe where an employer was found liable(predicate) for either plenty pro quo or hostile environment knowledgeable harassment. Describe the facts of the case, and the decision the court came to in the case. In clude the citation to the case and a link to it online. Would the case present to Pollards case? Why or wherefore non? Would you want to use this case in Teddys favor or Pollards favor? (10 points)b. formulate which strain of internal harassment that you suspect NJ Human Rights focus found Virginia had been a victim of and why you feel that is the case. Provide law or a case to retain your position. If you feel Pollard was not a victim of harassment in this case, explain why you feel that way, and extend law or a case to last your position(10 points)c. Explain what defenses to cozy harassment Teddys had in this case (Include the reference and citation ofat least twofederal or state knowledgeable harassment case(s) which provide precedential support to your defense statement. (10 points. )d. What is disparate treatment and why do you shepherds crook over the Human Rights commission found it had occurred? Do you agree with this decision? (10 points. ) Your Answer A. The sub judice definition of informal harrassment is a form of sex discrimination. The legal definition of cozy harassment is uninvited verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is horrific or pervasive and affects on the job(p) conditions or requires a hostile work environment. Quid pro quo, a Latin term meaning this for that, occurs when your boss offers you benefits, or threatens to change your working conditions, ground on your response to his demands for sexual favors. Ill give you a raise if you go out with me. or Ill demote you if you dont apply sex with me are examples of quid pro quo harassment. Hostile environment harassment occurs when physical, verbal, or visual sexual harassment is severe or pervasive enough to reach a hostile or abusive work environment.This type of harassment does not require a loss or threat of loss of your job, or the promise of benefits. Comments about your body, sexual remarks, pornographic pictures displayed at the wo rkplace, and touching and grabbing may all create a hostile work environment. In addition, the conduct must be unwished to you. If you like, want, or welcome the conduct, then you are not being sexually harassed. And if the conduct does not relate to your sex or have sexual references, its not sexual harassment. 1998 the authoritative Court unconquerable in Ellerth v. Burlington Industries, No. 7-569 and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, No. 97-282 that companies may be held vicariously liable if supervisors sexually harass workers even if the employees do not report the harassment and suffered no tangible loss. By making employers liable for supervisors sexual harassment encourages an employer, as no other regime does, to exercise the greatest attainable care in disguiseing likely managers and in pedagogy, supervising and monitoring supervisory personnel. It gives employers an incentive to put effective policies and training programs in place.In fact, 54% of peril 500 employe rs admitted in one written report that fears of legal exposure prompted them to establish company policies against harassment. And experience has shown these policies and programs work. Companies that have implemented sexual harassment training programs have describe reduced numbers of considers that develop into lawsuits. http//www. hr-guide. com/ entropy/A07202. htm yes this case would apply to pollards case because in this case too the sexual harassment was not being reported. The companies were too held liable for what was going on with their employers. B.I think they used the basic form of sexual haraasment in th eworkplcae because the boss did not threaten her with sexual advances but condonednthe mistreatment the other male person employees had put on her. Even though she did not properly report the abuse I do feel that she was a victim because she encountered several incidents where her compensate swere violated. C. On June 26th, the U. S. Supreme Court decided the follo wing two cases Burlington Industries v. Ellerth FactsThe employee, Kimberly Ellerth, worked for Burlington Industries from March 1993-May 1994, as a salesperson in one of Burlingtons divisions in Chicago, Ill.During her employment, she claims she was subjected to constant sexual harassment by her supervisor, Ted Slowik. Slowik was a mid-level manager. Burlington has eight divisions, employing more than 22,000 people in 50 plants some the U. S. Slowick was a vice president in one of five business units indoors one of the divisions. He had authority to gather hiring and promotion decisions subject to the approval of his supervisor, who subscribe the paperwork. Slowik was not Ellerths immediate supervisor. Ellerth worked in a two-person office in Chicago, and she answered to her colleague, who in turn answered to Slowik in New York. ttp//www. lkorn-law. com/articles/relevent/supreme_decides_sex_har. htm Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, and Burlington Industries Inc. v. Ellerth, the Supreme Court basically stated that the employer is responsible for the actions of the supervisor, even when the employer is un informed of the supervisors behavior. An employer can no longer claim that they did not know about the sexual harassment because the employee did not inform them, nor can they claim that they were un sensitive of the supervisors behavior.Out of the two cases listed above the runner one is relevant to the case because even though she was disciplined for cell earpiece usage she was still sent to some other area to be subjected to further necrosis by her male co-workers. The second case states where even though the Pollard did not reprt the abuse the supervisor was well aware of what was going on. D. Intentional discriminatory transaction with individuals having a disability or belong to a particular group based on their age, ethnicity, race, or sex. The Human Rights commssion maxim that Pollard was discriminated on due to her sex.Yes I fully agree with t heir decision. She should be awarded for all damages and future earnings. I would not want that particular job back but one in other(prenominal) area with maybe the same(p) company. register more http//www. businessdictionary. com/definition/disparate-treatment. htmlixzz17DKebnxM Points real 40 of 40 Comments Great that you answered all parts of the question Also I like that you used the case in which the cell phone discipline took place while it was determined that harassment occurred. This shows that 2 wrongs do not make a right 3. Question The CEO asks you to reexamine the sexual harassment policy soon in place, which Virginia sign. He wants you to provide him with winds for change to it. Review the policy and give triplet recommendations for changes, enhancements and ideas for making the policy stronger. Include your reasons for these suggestions. If you adventure information online for making these changes, include citations and/or links to that information. Expl ain how your suggestions may have protected Teddys in this case. Support these recommendations with current case law. Your Answer The contract signed by Virginia was vague. It similarly states that there ordain be a warning. She was terminated immediately. My suggestion would be to go further by having the employees attend sexual harassment training. They should also offer some type of support for their employees who think they are experiencing it or in reality experiencing it. They should also make the supervisors and all employees aware of their no tolerance policy. An employer should correct harassment that is clearly unwelcome regardless of whether a complaint is filed.For example, if there is graffiti in the workplace containing racial or sexual epithets, management should not wait for a complaint before erasing it. An employer should ensure that its supervisors and managers escort their responsibilities under the organizations anti-harassment policy and complaint procedur es. An employer should screen applicants for supervisory jobs to see if they have a history of engaging in harassment. If so, and the employer deals much(prenominal) a candidate, it must take move to monitor actions taken by that individual in order to prevent harassment.An employer should keep records of harassment complaints and check those records when a complaint of harassment is made to collapse any patterns of harassment by the same individuals. http//www. eeoc. gov/policy/docs/harassment-facts. html Points Received 18 of 20 Comments How should the employer support employees? 4. Question How would Pollards case be impacted if her replacement had been a female? Would her case be polar? Would her damages be different? Explain your answer. Your Answer Had Pollard been replaced by a female it would make her case weaker stating that it was her and her quotation in that position that caused the men to play off the way that they did towards her. Replacing her with anot her male shows guilt on the companies side. Had they not been aware of the situation at hand or been doing something to avoid it, it wouldnt have made a difference if they would have hired another female. Her case would have been different because had they hired another female would have shown them being less guilty of any of the accusations against them. ecause they did hire a male, made them look more cautious or even suspicious. I dont know for sure if her damages would have been different but her case would have been. she was awarded damages on the jury idea she was fired unlawfully. Points Received 5 of 10 Comments Why do we blame the adult female? The employer has a duty to protect its employees from harassment that means the men MUST be required to abstain from harassment not just work with all men. screwing of Form