ENGL 101 Capella University Actions Errors and Omissions Contributing to The Six Wrongful Death Complaints Paper

Assessment 3: Critical Incident Analysis

Write a 5-6 page paper analyzing the critical incident at CapraTek.

Introduction

As a result of the chart and memorandum you created for your consulting client, legal counsel for CapraTek has determined that the company experienced a critical incident related to COVID-19 that has resulted in serious legal risks. The critical incident includes a potential failure to implement appropriate precautions in the workplace and a potential failure to properly select essential workers to remain onsite during the pandemic. The company has hired an outside investigator to interview five key CapraTek employees regarding this incident. The CEO has now asked you to analyze the interviews of these employees and write a memorandum in narrative form addressing the six deaths reported in the wrongful death worker complaints.

In this assessment, you will analyze the transcript of interviews with five key CapraTek employees and write a memorandum in narrative form addressing the following for each of the wrongful death complaints. See the

CapraTek Key Employee Interviews [DOCX]

.

1. Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints; assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.
2. Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.Refer to the specific U.S. law, regulation, recommendation, or order involved.
3. Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint. Include a summary of the plaintiff’s case and potential defenses against each claim. Address the severity of potential legal liability.Summarize the plaintiff’s potential case. Describe any defenses CapraTek might be able to assert to avoid liability.Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed, providing your rationale indicating why they should be interviewed.
4. Evaluate the skills of the interviewer, including their selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.Indicate what, if anything, you believe the interviewer left out that should have been included, or that they included that should have been left out.
5. Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript that address protections for both the company and the interviewed employees. If this transcript were obtained by a plaintiff’s attorney, could it be used at trial against the wishes of CapraTek? For the interviewed employees, what are the limits of confidentiality that protects them?

Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.Memorandum should be concise, well organized, and written in narrative form, Adhere to conventions for spelling, grammar, sentence structure, legal/business terminology, and word usage.Adhere to APA citation and referencing standards.

Additional Requirements

As you complete your assessment, be sure it meets the following guidelines:

• Written communication: Use error-free doctoral-level writing, with original (non-plagiarized) content, logical phrasing, and accurate word choices.
• Scholarship: Use 3–4 professionally reputable sources to support your main points and analysis. Be sure to include scholarly sources. Course readings may be included among the required sources.
• APA formatting: All resources and citations should be formatted according to current APA style and formatting guidelines.
• Length: 5–6 typed, double-spaced pages, in addition to the cover page, illustrations, reference page, and appendix.
• Font and font size: Consistent, APA-compliant font, 12-point.

Please also note:

• For this assessment, you are required to follow the Standard Naming Convention requirements and the Track Changes requirements for any files you upload. You will find the requirements on the DBA Submission Requirements page.
• Before submitting your assessment, you are required to use Recite to check that your in-text citations match the reference list at the end of your assessment. Recite also checks for stylistic errors related to referencing. Make any corrections to your assessment based on the Recite report.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 1: Create rule- and value-based arguments from human resource models and theories, supported with clear and relevant evidence that convey professional tone and style.Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
• Competency 4: Appraise multiple responses to a managing a human resource problem for compliance within ethical, legal, or regulatory frameworks.Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint, including a summary of the plaintiff’s case, and potential defenses against each claim.Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed with a rationale for each choice.Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript addressing protections for both the company and the interviewed employees.
• Competency 5: Analyze an organization’s human resource management problem from the perspective of the legal and regulatory environment in which the organization operates.Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints; assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.Evaluate the skills of the interviewer including selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.Resources: Workplace Investigations
• Dwoskin, L. B., & Squire, M. B. (2018). Best practices in conducting internal workplace investigations of discrimination and harassment complaints. Employee Relations Law Journal, 44(2), 20–38.This article explains key considerations in conducting investigations of worker complaints, such as confidentiality, privilege, and investigation procedures. Branigan, K. S., Nowicki, C. L., Buza, L. A., & Allen, J. S. (2019). Conducting effective independent workplace investigations in a post- #MeToo era. Dispute Resolution Journal, 74(1), 85–110.This article explains key considerations in conducting investigations of worker complaints and supplements the above article. NLRB issues decisions for week of Dec. 16-20. (2020, January 7). Targeted News Service.Search for the ruling on “Apogee Retail LLC d/b/a Unique Thrift Store.” This case explores the limits of confidentiality in workplace investigations. Workers may be asked to keep their part in an investigation confidential as a condition of continued employment, despite an earlier ruling by NLRB that found such a condition would infringe on worker rights under NLRA.
• Resources: COVID-19 Business Impacts
• Dey, M., Frazis, H., Loewenstein, M. A., & Sun, H. (2020, June). Ability to work from home: Evidence from two surveys and implications for the labor market in the COVID-19 pandemic. MLR. Monthly Labor Review, pp. 1–18.This resource shows how to determine if workers can perform their job remotely or must report to an onsite workplace.McWilliams, P.L. (2020). Employment law implications of a refusal to work due to fear of COVID-19. Employee Benefit Plan Review, 74(5), 6–9.This resource offers practical suggestions for how an employer can respond to COVID-19 legal requirements. Hemel, D., & Rodriguez, D. B. (2020). Public health framework for COVID-19 business liability. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7, 1–19.This article suggests ways to defend lawsuits brought as a result of a plaintiff contracting COVID-19.

Assessment 3

In this assessment, you will analyze the transcript of interviews with five key CapraTek employees.NOTE – This is an outline of the assessment requirements. Be sure to read the entire assignment to understand all of the nuances of the requirements.For good organization – Head each section of your paper e.g., Errors and Omissions; Potential Legal Liabilities, etc., and follow the outline below.Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints; assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.Refer to the specific U.S. law, regulation, recommendation, or order involved.Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint. Include a summary of the plaintiff’s case and potential defenses against each claim. Address the severity of potential legal liability.Summarize the plaintiff’s potential case. Describe any defenses CapraTek might be able to assert to avoid liability.Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed, providing your rationale indicating why they should be interviewed.Evaluate the skills of the interviewer, including their selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.Indicate what, if anything, you believe the interviewer left out that should have been included, or that they included that should have been left out.Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript that address protections for both the company and the interviewed employees. If a plaintiff’s attorney obtained this transcript, could it be used at trial against the wishes of CapraTek? For the interviewed employees, what are the limits of any confidentiality that protects them?Remember –Use error-free doctoral-level writing, with original (non-plagiarized) content, logical phrasing, and accurate word choices. Use 3–4 professionally reputable sources to support your main points and analysis. Be sure to include scholarly sources. Course readings may be included among the required sources.All papers, resources and citations should be formatted according to APA 7 style and formatting guidelines.Use Recite to check that your in-text citations match the reference list at the end of your assessment. Recite also checks for stylistic errors related to referencing. Make any corrections to your assessment based on the Recite report.As always, let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of any help.

Be sure you consider the information found at the following links as you work on Assessment 3!

covid faq 11232020 (002).pdf (illinois.gov)

Alabama_USLAW_Compendium_COVID19_WorkersCompQuickGuide_2020.pdf

.

2020 GA WC Covid-19 Compendium (00217965.DOCX;1) (uslaw.org)

CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Background
CapraTek is a 45-year-old company that specializes in the design and manufacture of computer
server components. Today, an outside investigator, Louise Jones, an attorney for an
investigative firm, is conducting interviews of key CapraTek executives in order to gather facts,
reach conclusions, and advise CapraTek relative to its potential legal liability for 6 employee
deaths. The employees’ personal representatives are bringing “wrongful death” claims against
CapraTek for the loss of their loved ones, as follows:
Deceased
Individual
Bhashar
Quan,
age 60,
employee,
hired 2020
Plant
AL
Job Description of
Employee/Worker
Manufacturing
Associate (Labor)
Personal
Representative
or Attorney
Keena Quan,
Daughter, New
York, NY
Details of
Claim, if
Known
Demand
letter
seeking
>$2M
Michael
Haskill,
age 49,
employee,
hired 2020
AL
Distribution Center- PM
Stock Associate
Jefferson Haskill,
Son and Derrick
Simon, Attorney
Demand
letter
seeking
$1.9M
Susan
Harewood,
age 25
nonemployee
GA
UPS employee,
Delivery Driver on
CapraTek premises (no
date given)
Marshall and
Sandra
Harewood,
parents, and
Emerson Carter,
Attorney
Demand
letter
seeking
$6M
James
Clarke, Sr.
GA
Customer Service
Representative
Leah Clarke,
surviving spouse
Demand
letter
Additional
Comments, if Any
COVID-related
death claim.
Liability possible
regarding COVID.
Liability unlikely
based on
designation as
“essential” because
performed labor
onsite.
Not COVID-related.
Machinery
accident. This
injury is covered by
Workers’
Compensation
insurance.
COVID related,
died 9/15/2020.
Claims to have had
contact with
infected employee
Samantha Lopez at
the Georgia
distribution center.
Upon learning of
his daughter’s
death, Marshall
Harewood suffered
a disabling,
massive stroke.
This incident not
covered by
Workers’ Comp
because decedent
was not a
CapraTek
employee.
Claim states that
“local officials”
recommended
1
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Deceased
Individual
age 42,
employee,
hired 2020,
married
Plant
Job Description of
Employee/Worker
Personal
Representative
or Attorney
and Winsome
Meyers, Attorney
Details of
Claim, if
Known
seeking
$2.575M
Richard
Howell,
age 24,
employee,
hired 2010,
unmarried
IL
Manufacturing CenterLabor
Evander Seals,
attorney
representing the
“family.”
Demand for
insurance
and COVID19 written
policies
information
Boris
Senty,
age 34,
employee,
hired 2017,
married
IL
Logistics Engineer
George Morgan,
Attorney
representing
unidentified
clients.
Demand
letter seeks
$2.5M
Additional
Comments, if Any
plant shutdown, but
CapraTek refused
to close the plant.
This allegation
must be
investigated.
COVID-related
death on
9/15/2020. Again,
this worker would
be deemed
essential under any
standard.
COVID-related
death on
9/10/2020. This
worker may be
deemed essential,
but, as an
engineer, it may
also be possible he
could have worked
at home?
Interviews of the following key employees of CapraTek
•
•
•
•
•
Nathaniel Matthews, Chief Operations Officer, Chicago Headquarters
Marcus Norris, Director of Operations, Illinois Plant
Renee Martin, Director of Human Resources, Georgia Plant
Anthony Tsu, Director of Human Resources, Alabama Plant
Matt Hayes, Director of Staffing, Alabama Plant
2
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Interview of Nathaniel Matthews, Chief Operations Officer
Louise Jones: Mr. Matthews, thank you for attending this interview today. I wanted to take a
minute first to advise you of some preliminary matters before we begin your interview.
Nathaniel Matthews: Okay
Louise Jones: First, I want to tell you that I am recording this interview, and that this interview is
confidential. The company is asking you as a condition of your employment not to
disclose any details about this investigation with anyone unless authorized by
CapraTek’s General Counsel, Marjorie Schmidt. Do you agree to this, Mr. Matthews?
Nathaniel Matthews: Sure, of course I do.
Louise Jones: Next, I want to ensure you are aware that I am acting as an attorney on behalf of
CapraTek in this matter, and the purpose of the interview is for me to gather facts
surrounding the deaths of six (6) people at various manufacturing plants in Alabama,
Georgia, and Illinois. I am giving legal advice to CapraTek on how to handle these
complaints. My firm, Jones Investigations, is a Chicago law firm that focuses solely on
conducting workplace investigations and advising employers on how to defend lawsuits.
I will be interviewing various CapraTek employees, including you. It’s very important that
you know I do not represent you individually, even though you are the Chief Operating
Officer of CapraTek. Correct?
Nathaniel Matthews: Yes, Marjorie told me you would be explaining this to me.
Louise Jones: My firm has been hired by CapraTek, through your General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt, to conduct independent investigations surrounding the deaths of these six (6)
individuals in 2020.
Nathaniel Matthews: Okay, I understand that you don’t represent me.
Louise Jones: So, Mr. Matthews, as far as we know, these 6 letters from the personal
representatives of these deceased individuals are the only notice we have received
regarding these claims. Have you personally received notice of any claims against
yourself?
Nathaniel Matthews: No
Louise Jones: Has anyone suggested to you that you could have any responsibility for these
deaths?
Nathaniel Matthews: No. But I’m starting to feel like you might be about to do that.
Louise Jones: Mr. Matthews, I hope you understand that my job is to gather facts and advise
my client, and I am not in the habit of drawing conclusions until I have all the evidence.
Nathaniel Matthews: Of course, I was only half joking.
Louise Jones: Okay, have you read the 6 complaint letters?
Nathaniel Matthews: Yes, I have read them.
3
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Louise Jones: I’m sure you’ve noticed, then, that a recurring theme in these letters is the
allegation that COVID-19 precautions were not in place. The letters state that personal
protective equipment—PPE—was not given to employees and social distancing was not
enforced.
Nathaniel Matthews: That is actually not accurate at all. In the very beginning, like in February
of 2020, we had not yet implemented precautions because there was no guidance. The
CDC was initially saying not to wear masks. They even said masks would make the
problem worse. It wasn’t until about early to mid-March that Governor Pritzker issued his
stay-at-home order and the Illinois plant was affected.
Louise Jones: Did CapraTek close?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, we were deemed essential. Right here, it says in the Governor’s
order, “the provision of essential global, national, and local infrastructure for computing
services, business infrastructure, communications, and web-based services.” We
manufacture computer server components. If we shut down, the world shuts down, or at
least the Internet, and, today, the world relies on the Internet for just about everything.
Louise Jones: Did your offices, at headquarters in Chicago, shut down?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, of course not. We are essential. We continued to do our jobs.
Louise Jones: At home or in headquarters?
Nathaniel Matthews: Mostly at home. Our offices were essentially abandoned, and we let our
workers work from home. We conducted work nearly 20 hours a day preparing the
company for the shift to work-at-home. We did business by Zoom. Our workers could
come into the building if needed, but it was rare to see anyone in our suite. Working from
home worked, and still is working.
Louise Jones: What was your involvement in determining which workers were essential to work
in the 3 plants and which workers could work from home?
Nathaniel Matthews: We held a Zoom meeting. I met with the Directors of all three plants.
Louise Jones: When did this happen?
Nathaniel Matthews: I would say the beginning of April.
Louise Jones: Why so late?
Nathaniel Matthews: Well, all of our workers were healthy. We had no cases in March or April.
Our facilities are clean and very well run. They always have been. Our workers wear
protective masks and safety glasses in the plants already. Masks aren’t something new
to our manufacturing workers. They wear them already as part of the safety protocol. Not
necessarily for COVID-19, but to protect their faces from debris. Our manufacturing
workers come into contact with potentially toxic materials in the manufacturing process.
They are well protected. We had no cases until after April and much later.
Louise Jones: Okay, tell me about the Zoom meeting you held with the Directors.
4
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Nathaniel Matthews: I met with Marcus Norris. He’s the Director of Operations for all of the
plants. His office is in the Illinois plant. I met with the HR Directors of all three plants.
Margaret Leone, she’s the HR Manager of the Illinois plant. The HR Director position
there is still not filled. Renae Martin, she’s the HR Director of our Georgia operation. And
Anthony Tsu, he’s the HR Director in Alabama. They are all very much on top of things.
Louise Jones: Was this one meeting or did you meet with these individuals more than once?
Nathaniel Matthews: I believe we had several meetings, but this first meeting in April was the
one where we planned our COVID-19 response to follow the CDC and OSHA guidelines
for masks, hand sanitizer, and social distancing for our workers.
Louise Jones: Did you develop written policies about COVID-19 precautions in the workplace?
Nathaniel Matthews: Yes, I thought it best for each plant to develop its own set of guidelines.
These are very large plants. They are not all the same. Each has its own unique building
structure and set-up. The Illinois plant is an older building. The other two are newer
buildings. Their policies would differ, so I felt it was best for each plant to develop its own
policies.
Louise Jones: How do the plants differ?
Nathaniel Matthews: Well, for example, the Illinois plant is all on one floor, and a basement.
There are only a few freight elevators; whereas, in Alabama and Georgia, there are 5
floors to each building with lots of passenger elevators.
Louise Jones: Okay, so do you have a copy of each plant’s written policies?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, but I can get that for you.
Louise Jones: Have you read them?
Nathaniel Matthews: Yes, I have.
Louise Jones: Can you tell me what they say about protective gear, social distancing, and what
precautions are outlined for the plants?
Nathaniel Matthews: Yes, they put into place all of the precautions that are commonly in place
now. Plexiglass between workers who have to talk to people in person, face coverings,
hand sanitizer at each employee’s workspace, painted directions on the floors that show
what 6 feet distancing looks like. Posters reminding everyone to keep 6 feet of distance
from others. We re-routed the walkways where people have to navigate through the
plant.
Louise Jones: How long did that take?
Nathaniel Matthews: It took a long time. They worked quickly, but I’m sure it took quite a while
because these are large buildings. Oh, and one more thing. This was and still is a very
big deal. We significantly improved our cleaning standards. The janitorial schedules
were practically doubled. I believe we had to hire new maintenance workers to keep up
with the new cleaning schedule. Every night after the day shift workers went home, the
entire building was cleaned and disinfected. All surfaces were wiped clean. Floors were
5
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
mopped every night. They used antibacterial sanitizer to get the place germ-free. I heard
there were a lot of complaints from the janitorial staff about being overworked.
Louise Jones: Did you conduct any trainings or provide learning resources for employees about
COVID-19, its seriousness, and how to avoid contracting the illness?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, we did not get that far. I am not aware of any trainings or efforts to
educate employees on the virus, although I think most people know about it by now,
thanks to the media. We did put posters on the walls and cubicles with information about
COVID-19.
Louise Jones: Okay, I’d like to move on to another topic now. What do you know about the
policies or procedures used to determine who got to work from home and who was
required to work onsite after the stay-at-home orders were initiated?
Nathaniel Matthews: I don’t know a lot about that. I do know that many workers were given the
option to work from home. In fact, I believe most of our workers who can do their job
from home, are working at home now. However, you must realize these are
manufacturing plants. You can’t manufacture computer parts from home. So, I am sure
my HR Directors handled this methodically and carefully, but I have not seen their actual
written policies or discussed with them how they determined who was essential to work
onsite in the plants, in person, and who could work from home. As far as I know, and
what I have learned, is that workers are deemed essential onsite if their job involves
meeting with people they must see in person (such as emergency room physicians, or
an eye doctor or dentist) and, of course, workers who work with supplies and materials.
They, obviously, have to work onsite. Drivers who have to transport goods and supplies.
We have quite a number of drivers. Engineers who use and share mechanical
equipment and specialized computers we have onsite typically prefer to be onsite to do
their jobs.
Louise Jones: Do you have any emergency room physicians or eye doctors in your plants?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, I was just using that as an example to illustrate to you the vast
differences between workers who can perform their job at home, and those who need to
be onsite.
Louise Jones: Okay, Mr. Matthews. One last question. Did you have any knowledge of
government officials in Georgia demanding the shutdown of the Georgia plant?
Nathaniel Matthews: No, I did hear that rumor, and I investigated it. I Googled it and found no
such report. I talked to my Operations people. They never received such a demand.
Louise Jones: I appreciate your attendance at this interview. I may need to interview you again.
Please remember the confidentiality of this interview. In addition, I’d like to take this
opportunity on behalf of the company to give you some legal advice as the COO of the
company. It sounds like the measures you took to protect onsite workers from being
infected with COVID-19 were not fully compliant with OSHA guidelines. OSHA
recommends that employers assign a dedicated workplace coordinator to focus solely
on mitigating exposure to the virus. It doesn’t sound from your answers that this was
done. All workers should receive training and direction on how to avoid the virus. Some
6
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
of the workers in manufacturing may not speak English. We don’t know if they all can
read. It’s important that all of the workers deemed essential to work onsite received inperson training about COVID-19. Any high-risk elderly workers or those with pre-existing
conditions should be given information on the risks. OSHA recommends a hazard
assessment that identifies particular hazards unique to your facilities for onsite workers.
In addition to these precautions, I will be informing the CEO of additional steps to be
taken after we have done a thorough analysis.
Nathaniel Matthews: I understand. Thank you.
7
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Interview of Marcus Norris, Director of Operations at Illinois plant.
Louise Jones: Mr. Norris, thank you for attending this interview today. I wanted to take a minute
first to advise you of some preliminary matters before we begin your interview.
Marcus Norris: Okay
Louise Jones: First, I want to tell you that I am recording this interview, and that this interview is
confidential. The company is asking you not to disclose any details about this
investigation with anyone unless authorized by CapraTek’s General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt. Do you agree to this, Mr. Norris?
Marcus Norris: Yes, I do.
Louise Jones: Next, I want to ensure that you are aware that I am acting as an attorney on
behalf of CapraTek, and the purpose of the interview is for me to gather facts
surrounding the deaths of six (6) people at various manufacturing plants in Alabama,
Georgia, and Illinois. I am giving legal advice to CapraTek on how to handle these
complaints. My firm, Jones Investigations, is a Chicago law firm that focuses solely on
conducting workplace investigations and advising employers on how to defend lawsuits.
I will be interviewing various key CapraTek employees, including you. It’s very important
that you know I do not represent you individually, even though you are the Director of
Operations at the Illinois plant, as, as I was told, you are the Director of Operations at all
3 plants, Illinois, Alabama, and Georgia, correct?
Marcus Norris: Yes, that is correct, under Mr. Matthews.
Louise Jones: My firm has been hired by CapraTek, through its General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt, to conduct independent investigations surrounding the deaths of six (6)
individuals in 2020 across these 3 plants. Are you aware of these complaints?
Marcus Norris: Yes, I am.
Louise Jones: Mr. Norris, I must ask you how you are able to manage operations at all 3
plants?
Marcus Norris: I travel to the other plants often, about once a month at least. I inspect the
plants, so to speak. I talk to the employees. I talk to my managers. I am quite familiar
with operations at all 3 of the plants.
Louise Jones: Did you attend a meeting with Nathaniel Matthews, Chief Operating Officer of
CapraTek, in April, on Zoom?
Marcus Norris: Yes, I did.
Louise Jones: What was the purpose of that meeting?
Marcus Norris: Oh, COVID-19 had just hit. Nathaniel wanted to get us all on the same page
with how we would comply with stay-at-home orders. How we would keep our
employees safe.
Louise Jones: Were you given directions on how to do this?
8
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Marcus Norris: Yes, we instituted a lot of changes. We made it a safer environment. We told
employees they had to keep a safe 6 feet of distance from others, they had to wear face
coverings, had to wash their hands, use hand sanitizer and wipes, and generally to keep
safe and avoid close contact. I think we did well for a while, but then, during the peak of
the outbreak, late April and May, we did have cases.
Louise Jones: Did you have a protocol for how to handle the cases?
Marcus Norris: Yes, we placed a worker outside of each plant to take temperatures of anyone
entering the building. If someone had a fever, they were sent home and asked to get a
COVID-19 test. They could return to work if the test was negative and they did not have
symptoms. There were some employees who showed symptoms at work, and they were
asked to go home and return to work when they had a negative test result. We ended up
having about 70% of our workers contract COVID-19, which is a high amount, and 6
people died. The virus was just very contagious, and even with the precautions we put in
place, it got away from us. We lost control of the situation.
Louise Jones: Is the situation under control now?
Marcus Norris: Yes, I believe on the advice of our general counsel, we ended up changing the
status of some of our onsite workers to work-from-home instead of essential, and that
has made a difference.
Louise Jones: Are you telling me there were workers onsite who could work from home?
Marcus Norris: Yes, that is my understanding.
Louise Jones: Can you tell me why anyone whose job could be done from home was still made
to come into the plant?
Marcus Norris: My understanding is that there was a mix-up. I really don’t know enough about
it, but if you talk to Anthony Tsu, he’s the HR Director of the Alabama plant, he can
explain it better than I can. Apparently, there were a lot of new workers hired right before
the outbreak of COVID-19. These new workers were hired around the end of 2019 until
about January or February of 2020. It was part of an effort the company was making
called a Diversity and Inclusion Initiative. I think in 2019, the company did an evaluation
of its equal employment hiring and promotion practices and found out that only a small
percentage of our workers were diverse. We had mostly young males. Females held
mostly traditional female positions. We were not seeking workers of various races, such
as Black, Hispanic, or Asian. We didn’t have diverse sexual orientations or anyone who
was transexual. We had very few workers over the age of 50. So… the long and short of
it is the company sunk a lot of money into trying to change this. They hired some
consulting firm to help, and paid them a bundle of money to recruit minorities. The plan
was to create new positions to try to get to 15% minority hires. But then COVID-19 hit
and that plan was suspended. I do believe they hired a number of new workers under
that plan, though, perhaps 20 or 30.
Louise Jones: Can you tell me who was in charge of this initiative?
9
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Marcus Jones: Yes, it was Anthony Hsu, HR Director of Alabama and Renae Martin, HR
Director in Georgia.
Louise Jones: So, what does all this have to do with the workers not working from home?
Marcus Jones: Okay, so as odd as this is going to sound, here is what I have been told by
Anthony and Renae. Since they hired all these new employees, they decided to do it
right this time and write detailed job descriptions for the new employees. We had never
been that efficient before, and all of our employees worked with loosely defined job
descriptions that were not in writing most of the time. It worked okay, to tell you the truth.
So, now they are getting written job descriptions. This outfit the company paid all this
money to suggested this. Apparently, all these workers had a job description that
included something that said, they HAD to be able to work in a cubicle. Just a second, I
have it here in my phone. It says [reading], “the following are listed as essential duties,
(a) the ability to be a team player, (b), the ability to work in an office- and cubicle-based
environment; (c) the ability to lift 25 pounds, and (c), the ability to take directions and be
flexible.”
Louise Jones: Okay, so those are the essential duties, but how does that relate to their ability to
work from home?
Marcus Norris: That’s where Matt Hayes comes in. Anthony and Renae delegated the job of
figuring out which employees were essential and which were not to Matt Hayes, a
Director of Staffing. He’s at the Alabama plant, but he’s like me. He travels around and
generally helps out at the other plants too.
Louise Jones: So how did Matt Hayes determine who could work from home and who could
not?
Marcus Norris: Matt apparently figured that he had to go by the job descriptions, and any
employee hired in late 2019 until COVID-19 hit had a job description that said an
essential duty was the ability to work in a cubicle. Matt decided that meant they were
essential to work onsite.
Louise Jones: Does this make sense to you?
Marcus Norris: No, in retrospect, it does not. But I can see how it could happen. Before COVID19, most of us hadn’t even heard of the term essential worker. I think Matt thought he
had come up with a foolproof way of determining who was essential. Heck, the job
description even said, “essential” duties, so Matt just went with it.
Louise Jones: Do you know if Anthony and Renae knew he was doing this?
Marcus Norris: I’m not sure.
Louise Jones: What do you mean, you are not sure? To your knowledge, did they know about
this?
Marcus Norris: Well, I think so. I asked Matt about it after the fact, and he said that they knew.
He told them. They said, well, you’ve already started it this way. Just keep doing it.
10
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Louise Jones: What do you mean by after the fact you found out about it?
Marcus Norris: When the complaint letters started rolling in after a lot of people got sick and
some died, it came to light that some of these workers could have worked from home,
like Jesinta Andrews. She was a pregnant worker. She didn’t get COVID-19, and she’s
fine, but people were shocked to know that she was not offered to work from home. Our
General Counsel stepped in and changed things around. Matt is still with the company,
but he is no longer in charge of staffing employees. I think he is going to be put
somewhere else.
Louise Jones: Okay, Mr. Morris, I appreciate your attendance at this interview. It’s possible I
may need to interview you again. I will need you to come back for any follow-up
questions. Again, I want to remind you of the confidentiality of this interview.
Marcus Norris: No problem, my pleasure.
11
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Interview of Renee Martin, HR Director, Georgia plant
Louise Jones: Ms. Martin, thank you for attending this interview today. I wanted to take a
minute first to advise you of some preliminary matters before we begin your interview.
Renae Martin: Okay
Louise Jones: First, I want to tell you that I am recording this interview, and that this interview is
confidential. The company is asking you not to disclose any details about this
investigation with anyone unless authorized by CapraTek’s General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt. Do you agree to this, Ms. Martin?
Renae Martin: Yes, I do.
Louise Jones: Next, I want to ensure that you are aware that I am acting as an attorney on
behalf of CapraTek in this matter, and the purpose of the interview is for me to gather
facts surrounding the deaths of six (6) people at various manufacturing plants in
Alabama, Georgia, and Illinois. I am giving legal advice to CapraTek on how to handle
these complaints. My firm, Jones Investigations, is a Chicago law firm that focuses solely
on conducting workplace investigations and advising employers on how to defend
lawsuits. I will be interviewing various key CapraTek employees, including you. It’s very
important that you know I do not represent you individually, even though you are the
Director of Human Resources at the Georgia plant, correct?
Renae Martin: Yes, that is correct.
Louise Jones: My firm has been hired by CapraTek, through its General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt, to conduct independent investigations surrounding the deaths of six (6)
individuals in 2020 across these 3 plants. Are you aware of these complaints?
Renae Martin: Yes, I am.
Louise Jones: I want to focus on two things in my interview with you today. I want you to tell me
what you know about COVID-19 precautions taken by the company after February 2020
and about how workers were deemed essential for onsite work. I want to know how you
selected workers to work at home and who was deemed essential to come into work
every day.
Renae Martin: Okay.
Louise Jones: I understand an engineer by the name of Jesinta Andrews was pregnant with
some kind of condition to her pregnancy and was made to work onsite at the Alabama
plant. What do you know about that?
Renae Martin: She was. She was an engineer. Some of our engineers are essential workers
because they use the equipment onsite and they work in teams. Most of our engineers
want to work onsite. They say they can’t work from home because they work so closely
with each other. Plus the equipment and computers they work with can’t go home with
them.
12
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Louise Jones: Okay, fortunately, as I understand, Ms. Andrews delivered her baby, everything
was fine, and she did not contract COVID-19. I also understand that the General
Counsel got involved and assigned her to work from home prior to her maternity leave.
Renae Martin: Yes, and I agreed with that decision as well. Sometimes, for engineers, we leave
it up to the employee.
Louise Jones: Are you familiar with Matt Hayes, Director of Staffing?
Renae Martin: Yes, he works with Anthony too in the Alabama plant.
Louise Jones: Did you ever meet with him?
Renae Martin: Yes, we met when he came to the Georgia plant to look around the workspaces
and assign staff as essential for onsite work. He came several times, so we met off and
on during March and April.
Louise Jones: Did he tell you how he was determining which workers would continue onsite?
Renae Martin: He did not. He works under Anthony, and I trust Anthony’s professional
judgment and knowledge. I did not want to interfere with his work or with Anthony’s
direction of his work.
Louise Jones: Okay, I want to move on to the COVID-19 precautions taken at your plant. Were
you in charge of these efforts?
Renae Martin: Yes, I met with Nathaniel Matthews, our COO, and he gave us all the go-ahead
to review the OSHA standards for creating a safe and clean environment for our
workers. We made huge efforts to clean up the workspace and enforce face coverings,
social distancing, etc. It really was an epic change for us. The workers complained, and
they weren’t always compliant, but we did our best.
Louise Jones: Did you see workers breaking the social distancing or mask wearing rules?
Renae Martin: No, I did not personally see any of that, but Matt told me that employees were
complaining to him that they could not work with masks on and kept forgetting to keep 6
feet apart from others. I think there’s a learning curve, and I told Matt they are doing the
best they can.
Louise Jones: Have you seen the complaint letters sent to the company by workers who got sick
or died?
Renae Martin: Yes, it’s part of my job to review every complaint letter. Many of them were
written directly to me as the HR Director. But I have seen all 30 letters because that’s
what we do here at CapraTek. When there is any complaint letter, as officers of the
company. The HR Directors are notified. We want to learn from these complaints so that
we can do better and try to avoid future complaints.
Louise Jones: Are you aware of 2 wrongful death letters sent to you for deaths that occurred in
your plant?
Renae Martin: Yes, I am.
13
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Louise Jones: Okay, let’s look at them. There’s James Clarke, Sr., a Customer Service
Representative. He was age 42. Have you talked to his family? Or his attorney, Mr.
Meyers?
Renae Martin: No, I do not talk to anyone that files a complaint.
Louise Jones: Have they tried to contact you again?
Renae Martin: They may have, but I field any communications to the General Counsel’s office.
Louise Jones: Do you know if Mr. Clarke contracted COVID-19 at work?
Renae Martin: No, I do not know for sure, but I think it is likely. He died in September. In August,
there were a lot of employees getting sick with the virus. We sent them home. We made
anyone who was in contact quarantine. We did everything we could, but to no avail.
Louise Jones: Do you know if he worked in close contact with another worker or workers who
were sick with COVID-19?
Renae Martin: There were so many sick workers during that time, it’s nearly impossible to say
he was not in contact with them. He was in customer service. They work in phone banks.
They are in close contact with each other. They sometimes share phones. We sanitized
them, but like I said, the workers were not always careful.
Louise Jones: Could these workers have worked from home?
Renae Martin: In retrospect, perhaps they could. But I think their job is so much easier when
they work onsite. They often have to escalate calls to a supervisor. They do a lot of
consulting with each other. Could they work the phones remotely? Probably, but I doubt
if they would want to work that way. It would be much harder.
Louise Jones: Okay, let’s move on to …
Renae Martin [interrupting]: I’m sorry but all of this is supposed to be covered by Worker’s
Compensation anyway. I don’t know why everyone is making such a big deal about….
Sorry.
Louise Jones: Ms. Martin, as you may know, the law is in flux about that. The latest information
we have is that Georgia is not a state that has passed a law declaring that COVID-19 will
be covered by Workers’ Compensation. That leaves the company open to potential
liability.
Renae Martin: Yes, but I heard that they are going to have to. I heard that these insurance
companies are going to all have to cover it as a workplace illness, no matter what state
you are in.
Louise Jones: Well, if that happens, I’m sure the company would be quite relieved. As counsel
for CapraTek in this investigation, I want you to know that Workers’ Compensation, even
if it were to cover employee illnesses and deaths from COVID, does not protect the
company from the death of a non-employee who contracts the virus onsite. Are you
familiar with the case of Susan Harewood, a 25-year-old UPS driver whose parents say
she contracted the virus while delivering supplies to your site?
14
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Renae Martin: What? Workers’ Compensation doesn’t cover that? Why not? She is a worker.
She was doing her job when she made those deliveries. This was not a social visit. Her
company’s—UPS’s—workers’ comp insurance will cover her! I feel certain of that. You
can’t sue CapraTek when you get sick on your job, right?
Louise Jones: Ms. Martin, I’m afraid you may not be familiar with the law. When workers are
injured or die on the job, they cannot sue their employers for negligence. That’s the way
workers’ compensation works. For the most part, accidental work injuries and casualties
are not the subject of lawsuits against employers. But, perhaps, you did not know that a
worker hurt or injured on the job can almost always sue for negligence by someone
other than their employer for the injury. CapraTek was not Susan Harewood’s employer.
She can sue CapraTek for negligence that may have resulted in her death.
Renae Martin: Oh, I didn’t know that.
Louise Jones: Do you know anything about her or how she contracted the disease?
Renae Martin: I know they are saying she may have gotten it from Samantha Lopez, who
signed for the delivery, but Samantha did not have symptoms that day. I think it will be
very hard for them to prove that Samantha gave her COVID-19.
Louise Jones: Okay, obviously, any information you are able to find about that case will be of
great help to the company. If you are aware of anything people are saying from the
grapevine or outside of the company about contact she had with others who had the
virus, please bring it to my attention immediately.
Renae Martin: Oh, I will for sure. I’ll keep a close ear out for any information I can find.
Louise Jones: Thank you, and may I remind you of the confidentiality of this interview. It is very
important that you not share anything we talked about here today.
Renae Martin: Yes, I agree.
15
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Interview of Anthony Tsu, HR Director, Alabama Plant
Louise Jones: Mr. Tsu, thank you for attending this interview today. I wanted to take a minute
first to advise you of some preliminary matters before we begin your interview.
Anthony Tsu: Okay
Louise Jones: First, I want to tell you that I am recording this interview, and that this interview is
confidential. The company is asking you, as a condition of your employment, not to
disclose any details about this investigation with anyone unless authorized by
CapraTek’s General Counsel, Marjorie Schmidt. Do you agree to this, Mr.Tsu?
Anthony Tsu: Yes, I do.
Louise Jones: Next, I want to ensure that you are aware that I am acting as an attorney on
behalf of CapraTek in this matter, and the purpose of the interview is for me to gather
facts surrounding the deaths of six (6) people at various manufacturing plants in
Alabama, Georgia, and Illinois. I am giving legal advice to CapraTek on how to handle
these complaints. My firm, Jones Investigations, is a Chicago law firm that focuses solely
on conducting workplace investigations and advising employers on how to defend
lawsuits. I will be interviewing various key CapraTek employees, including you. It’s very
important that you know I do not represent you individually, even though you are the
Director of Human Resources at the Alabama plant, correct?
Anthony Tsu: Yes, that is correct.
Louise Jones: My firm has been hired by CapraTek, through its General Counsel, Marjorie
Schmidt, to conduct independent investigations surrounding the deaths of six (6)
individuals in 2020 across these 3 plants. Are you aware of these complaints?
Anthony Tsu: Yes, I am.
Louise Jones: I want to focus on two things in my interview with you today. I want you to tell me
what you know about COVID-19 precautions taken by the company after February 2020
and about how workers were deemed essential for onsite work. I want to know how you
selected workers to work at home.
Anthony Tsu: Certainly.
Louise Jones: Mr. Tsu, as you know, we lost 2 of your employees at the Alabama plant,
Bhashar Quan and Michael Haskill. I need you to tell me anything you know about these
deaths. Do you know anything beyond what we learned from their complaint letters sent
by their attorneys?
Anthony Tsu: I don’t think I know anything about them. Bhashar Quan kept to himself. He
worked in manufacturing. He was a good worker and grateful for his job. He had been
unemployed for several years before we hired him, but I don’t know why. Michael Haskill
worked in the distribution center. He was a strong, healthy man who worked harder than
anyone, a real physical specimen. I was so sad to hear he had succumbed to the
disease.
Louise Jones: Would you have classified these workers as essential for onsite work?
16
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Anthony Tsu: Yes, beyond a doubt. Both were, essentially, laborers. There isn’t any possibility
for them to have performed their jobs from home.
Louise Jones: What about other workers who got sick in your plant? Do you believe they were
all classified correctly as either work from home or onsite?
Anthony Tsu: I think, for the most part, yes. There may be some who fell through the cracks. As
far as we know, anyone who fell ill or died in the state of Illinois will be covered by
workers’ compensation. We heard that 17 or so states have passed laws requiring
workers’ compensation claims for COVID-19 to be covered. Now, I know Georgia and
Alabama have not yet done so, so there’s that uncertainty for us.
Louise Jones: I want to focus on those you feel may have fallen through the cracks. What
happened there?
Anthony Tsu: Oh, the job of designating anyone to work onsite was handed by me to our
Director of Staffing Matt Hayes. I wanted to outsource this job. I really felt it would be
best to let the experts do it, but Nathaniel Matthews, my boss, wouldn’t let us do it. It was
expensive, and the company had just made some major expenditures to invest in a
diversity hiring effort. That job was outsourced to a fancy high-priced company. Then, I
believe, but I can’t say for sure, but I believe the company went into debt to hire the
additional diverse employees. Created some new jobs for them. I think the company
may have borrowed money to pay their salaries. Nate would know. I don’t know for sure,
but he told me that money was scarce, and I had to find someone to do the job of
designating essential workers for onsite, so I used Matt to do the job.
Louise Jones: Are you familiar with the job Matt did?
Anthony Tsu: Yes, he reported to me. He told me how he was using job descriptions that
placed most of the newer employees onsite permanently. I went along with it, but later
our General Counsel found out, and intervened. Some of those employees were allowed
to work at home. But as far as these two wrongful deaths in my plant, I can assure you
that both were essential onsite.
Louise Jones: Okay, Mr. Tsu, that is all for now. I may want to interview you again. Obviously,
any information you are able to find about any of these cases will be of great help to the
company. If you are aware of anything people are saying from the grapevine or outside
of the company about the employees who became ill or died, please bring it to my
attention immediately.
Anthony Tsu: Oh, I will.
Louise Jones: Thank you, and may I remind you of the confidentiality of this interview. It is very
important that you not share anything we talked about here today with anyone.
Anthony Tsu: I agree.
17
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Interview with Matt Hayes, Staffing Director
Louise Jones: Matt, thank you for coming in. Before we start, I want to take care of some
preliminary matters. I am an attorney, and I represent CapraTek. My firm does
investigations of workplace incidents. It’s important that you know I do not represent you
personally. If any action were taken against you personally, I do not and could not
represent you. There could be a conflict of interest between you and CapraTek. Also, I
want to tell you that the company intends for this interview to be kept confidential. This is
a condition of your continued employment with CapraTek. Do you agree to this and to all
of these terms?
Matt Hayes: Yes
Louise Jones: Okay, let’s get started. I want to ask you about the 30 complaint letters the
company has received. Have you seen these letters?
Hayes: Yes, my boss Anthony Tsu showed them to me in his office. We met about these
complaints. He thought some of these problems could have been caused by me
designating workers as essential to work onsite when they could have done their work
from home.
Louise Jones: What was your reaction to him saying that?
Hayes: I was worried. I felt terrible, especially if people died. I made the decisions based on job
descriptions. I told him I was doing that. He never told me not to. He thought it was a
great way to do it. He said, that way, we could just point to the job descriptions and no
one could accuse us of discrimination or preferential treatment.
Louise Jones: Do you still believe that?
Hayes: More and more…no. It haunts me that my decision is now being questioned. Having it
questioned is making me question it. Now, I am thinking that maybe the job description
was not the way to go. Maybe the requirement that the new employees be able to work
in a cubicle was just assuming they would work onsite, and not thinking that someday
we would have to deal with COVID-19. Maybe we should have looked at factors that
were more relevant, like if the employee could do the job at home, or if they HAD to be
onsite.
Louise Jones: Okay, Matt, I appreciate your honesty. Hindsight is 20/20, especially in this case.
Can you think of anything else Mr. Tsu said to you about this decision?
Hayes: No, only that he wished he had hired an outsourcing firm we tried to use, but the
company wouldn’t spend the money.
Louise Jones: Anything else? Were you disciplined by anyone? Did anyone else talk to you
about this problem?
Hayes: Well, no, it’s still sort of a secret. I don’t think they want it getting out. I am not going to
lose my job. Mr. Tsu is going to be reassigning me to a different job, though. I haven’t
been told yet where I’ll be going.
18
CapraTek Key Employee Interviews
Louise Jones: Okay Matt, I appreciate your attendance at this interview today. It’s possible I
may need to interview you again. Please remember what I said about confidentiality.
Nothing we talked about today is to be shared with anyone. Thank you.
19