Employment-At-Will Doctrine

Assignment 1: Employment-At-Will DoctrineDue Week 4 and worth 150 points

Imagine you are a recently-hired Chief Operating Officer (COO) in a midsize company preparing for an Initial Public Offering (IPO). You quickly discover multiple personnel problems that require your immediate attention.

• John posted a rant on his Facebook page in which he criticized the company’s most important customer.
• Jim sent an email to other salespeople protesting a change in commission schedules and bonuses and suggesting everyone boycott the next sales meeting. 
• Ellen started a blog to protest the CEO’s bonus, noting that no one below director has gotten a raise in two (2) years and portraying her bosses as “know-nothings” and “out-of-touch”
• Bill has been using his company-issued BlackBerry to run his own business on the side.
• The secretaries in the accounting department decided to dress in black-and-white stripes to protest a memo announcing that the company has installed keylogger software on all company computers. 
• After being disciplined for criticizing a customer in an email (sent from his personal email account on a company computer), Joe threatens to sue the company for invasion of privacy.
• One of the department supervisors requests your approval to fire his secretary for insubordination. Since the secretary has always received glowing reviews, you call her into your office and determine that she has refused to prepare false expense reports for her boss.
• Anna’s boss refused to sign her leave request for jury duty and now wants to fire her for being absent without permission. 

As an astute manager, you will need to analyze the employment-at-will doctrine and determine what, if any, exceptions and liabilities exist before taking any action. As you proceed with your investigation, you discover the company has no whistleblower policy.

Write a four to five (4-5) page paper in which you:

• Summarize the employment-at-will doctrine and evaluate each of the eight (8) scenarios described by determining:
• Whether you can legally fire the employee; include an assessment of any pertinent exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine.What action you should take to limit liability and impact on operations; specify which ethical theory best supports your decision. 
• Take a position on whether or not you would recommend to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) that the company adopt a whistleblower policy. Support the position.
• Justify at least three (3) fundamental items that should be included in a whistleblower policy. Provide a rationale for your selection of each of the three (3) recommended items.
• Use at least three (3) quality resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia is not an acceptable reference and proprietary Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Attached is the original fpaper I submitted with  comments from the professor. Hope it helps;

Marshia Massey

Employment-At-Will Doctrine

Leg 500-Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance

Professor Shaun Koenig, Esq

07/25/2013

In today’s workforce, knowing your rights within an organization is are very important. Having familiarity of the employee handbook can help define your privileges and human rights within the organization, and finally knowing what’s relevant to you as an employee. Last week in our Leg 500 class, we discussed various topics, such as, the Employee-at-Will Doctrine (pros and cons), Wrongful Discharge, Value Work, Whistleblowing, i.e. All the above mentioned topics plays a vital role within an organization. “Employee policies are a legal necessity for all employers. Employee policies are also a way for employers to implement disciplinary action for employees who display inappropriate workplace behavior. As a condition of employment, employees must sign and attest that they have received and understand workplace policies. (Scott, Sherrie, 2013)

The scenarios provided below are example of day-to-day encounters that we face as employees. Furthermore, an evaluation will be used to determine which solution(s) can or should be used to resolve each matter.

John posted a rant on his Facebook page in which he criticized the company’s most important customer.

In this scenario, as an employer, I would not tolerate the use of the internet in the workplace; in addition, I will not tolerate disrespect toward colleagues nor customers. Whether the employee was using his personal phone, if it was within his tour of duty, it would not be acceptable. John’s rant did not only offend the customer, but depicted a picture of the organization that does not represent our code of conduct. I would allow John to explain his side of the story. Before making a determination, as the employer I must ensure that the organizations position on this kind of behavior is stated in the company policy stating that inappropriate behavior such as ranting on social media is not tolerated. The disciplinary action would be to give him a warning, and enforce a no tolerance for negative criticism to company customers.

Jim sent an email to other salespeople protesting a change in commission schedules and bonuses and suggesting everyone boycott the next sales meeting. 

In this scenario, protesting a change can be a disruption to the work environment. Jim sending an email to other salespeople requesting change is tolerable, but limited. There are designated employees who hold high positions that Jim should approach to get his point across to be heard. In addition, Jim must be mindful of the consequences of a boycott. If Jim went through the appropriate chain of command to express his concern, and as a result his demands are not meet; Jim has a right to express his opinion. If these actions cause any disruptions as an employer, under the Employment-at-will doctrine, I’m able to take disciplinary action or terminate Jim. Comment by skoenig: Don’t be afraid to take a position and defend that position.l

Ellen started a blog to protest the CEO’s bonus, noting that no one below director has gotten a raise in two (2) years and portraying her bosses as “know-nothings” and “out-of-touch”.

In this scenario, Ellen feels that her boss is incompetent, meaning he lacks in the knowledge, skills and abilities of the job and is “old school”. In addition, he is being compensated. For two years, no one has gotten a raise nor bonus for whatever reason. Under the Employee-at-Will Doctrine, Ellen has the right to address the situation, however, Ellen must pay attention to her choice of words to avoid slandering the CEO. Ellen must review her contract with the organization to make sure that she has a clear understanding about the compensation policy for employees; because Ellen may have signed an agreement that doesn’t entitle her to raises or bonuses. Comment by skoenig: Don’t add facts to the situation. Don’t be afraid to take a position, as set forth in the question.

Bill has been using his company-issued BlackBerry to run his own business on the side.

In this scenario Bill, is using the company’s blackberry to operate a side business. This issue is in fact grounds for termination. “Company assets are meant for business, and not personal use. We all have a responsibility to protect and safeguard company assets from loss, theft, misuse and waste. Company property should never be used for personal gain.” (www.prometric.com, Retrieved, 7/2013) Misuse of company assets is a violation to company policy and may be an act of fraud. In this case, I would terminate Bill on the ground that using company property for personal use is prohibited. Comment by skoenig: Excellent citation. Comment by skoenig: Excellent use of using facts to support your position.

The secretaries in the accounting department decided to dress in black-and-white stripes to protest a memo announcing that the company has installed key logger software on all company computers. 

In this scenario, the secretaries have a right to freedom of expression to protest. “Freedom of expression is the most fundamental right, but it can be limited under some conditions where the right of a self and those of other people should be guaranteed at the same time or public values need to be protected.” As an employer, the right to express concerns for probable cause is acceptable; as long it does not disrupt and cause chaos in the workplace. Comment by skoenig: You fail to take a position on this scenario, as set forth in the question.

After being disciplined for criticizing a customer in an email (sent from his personal email account on a company computer), Joe threatens to sue the company for invasion of privacy.

In this scenario, this is situation with Joe kind of relates to Joe’s situation regarding Facebook. Again, I must address that defamation is not tolerated. Yes the email was in his personal email, but it was used on company grounds, on company time, and on the company property (computer). Joe threaten to sue for invasion of privacy, however, I have a right to retrieve those email on the grounds of reasonable cause because it affects the place of business and the customer. Comment by skoenig: You fail to take a position on this scenario, as set forth in the question.

One of the department supervisors requests your approval to fire his secretary for insubordination. Since the secretary has always received glowing reviews, you call her into your office and determine that she has refused to prepare false expense reports for her boss.

In the scenario, as an employer, I feel that it’s my duty to report such activity. Accusing some one of wrong-doing when they are innocent is unacceptable. I would notify the proper authority to make them aware of the situation at hand. I believe it the right thing to do but as for the agency, the employer may terminate the relationship at any time without reason or cause. “To have someone fired in this instance; the employer must show proof that the termination is based on the business’s financial hardship, such as a poor economy, or else poor job performance.” (Jinbo.net, Retrieved, 7/2013)

Anna’s boss refused to sign her leave request for jury duty and now wants to fire her for being absent without permission. 

In this scenario, it is by law that Anna reports to jury duty. “Every individual has a legal duty to serve on a jury.  In fact, an individual who fails to appear for jury duty will be found in contempt of court and is subject to fines and jail time.” (Legalmatch.com. Retrieved. 7/2013)

If Anna boss is terminating her going to jury duty, it is unlawful to do so. Anna is protected by certain laws, which makes it a violation of the law. If Anna is fired for serving on a jury, she may be a victim of wrongful termination.  Comment by skoenig: What do you mean by “certain laws”? BE SPECIFIC.

After the evaluations of the scenarios given, it show that Employment-at-Will has it pros and cons. Knowing your rights as an employee and making the right decisions play an important role within your work environment and career. We also need to be mindful of our actions as well, and ensure that we are not in violation or our rights or hurting others.

Reference:

www.smallbusiness.chron.com. “Examples of Employee Policies”. Scott, Sherrie, Demand Media (Retrieved 7/2013).

www.prometric.com. “Protecting Company Assets and Resources.” (Retrieved 7/2013)

Jinbo.net. Guide for Human Rights and Information Security, “Freedom of Expression”. (Retrieved 7/2013)

Legalmatch.com. “Wrongful Termination for Jury Duty”, (Retrieved 7/2013)

GRADING RUBRIC

Course: LEG 500

Assignment: Assignment 1

Total Possible Points: 150

Total Points Achieved: 57.375

Student: M. Massey

In reading your paper, I looked for material dealing with the following criteria, all of which were part of the assignment (see my comments below)

Assignment 1: Employment-At-Will Doctrine

Criteria

Total Possible Points

Points Awarded

Comments

1a. Summarize the employment-at-will doctrine and evaluate each of the eight (8) scenarios described by determining whether you can legally fire the employee; include an assessment of any pertinent exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine.
Weight: 15%

22.5

19.125

Your paper provides a good overall discussion of the employment at will doctrine and discusses several of the scenarios. Don’t be afraid to take a position on whether or not to fire an individual, as set forth in the question.

1b. Summarized the employment-at-will doctrine and evaluate each of the eight (8) scenarios described by determining what action you should take to limit liability and impact on operations; specify which ethical theory best supports your decision.
Weight: 15%

22.5

15.75

Your paper provides a good overall discussion of the employment at will doctrine; however your paper fails to adequately address the ethical theory behind each decision, as set forth in the question.

2. Take a position on whether or not you would recommend to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) that the company adopt a whistleblower policy. Support the position.
Weight: 25%

37.5

0

Your paper fails to answer this question.

3. Justify at least three (3) fundamental items that should be included in a whistleblower policy. Provide a rationale for your selection of each of the three (3) recommended items.
Weight: 30%

45

0

Your paper fails to answer this question.

4. 3 references
Weight: 5%

7.5

7.5

Good use of citations.

5. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%

15

15

TOTAL

150

57.375