Essay on Employment and Labor Laws

Employment law encompasses remedies that address employee grievances and discrimination that occur in the workplace environment. The foundation of this system is the United States Constitution, which provides two sources of laws and regulations. These two sources are individual state constitutions and the national constitution. Under this system of federalism, there is also the Bill of Rights, which provides the origins of the majority of employment law. The most widely known document is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e et.seq.) The judicial, executive, and legislative branches of the government of the United States create and enforce rules and regulations as promulgated by the constitution. Individuals

Mr. Wayne Beatty, the plaintiff brought a claim against his former employer Canadian Mill Services Association (CMSA), the defendant is suing for wrongful dismissal and contending he is eligible for increased damages due to the way the dismissal was handled. The damages include an additional 13 months’ notice and for the loss of a number of fringe benefits.

Separate Opinions: Judgment was affirmed by Judges Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ. , as they believed Allen was discharged for taking unauthorized breaks from her scheduled employment. Since Allen failed to present evidence of a discriminatory motive from Isotoner, or that reason for releasing her from employment was a ground for discrimination, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ. felt only the issues presented by the facts of Isotoner discharging Allen due to ‘unauthorized breaks’ should be decided on, while issues of the facts not directly placed on issue should only be responded to with advisory opinion.

In dealing with a person’s livelihood, and often, sense of self, it is of no surprise that ethical issues regarding employment practices are of great concern. The issues of employment at will and due process contracts in the workplace are among the most widely contentious in the realm of employment. Employment at will is the doctrine that employment may be ended, by either party, for good, bad or no cause at all.1 Due process, on the other hand, is the employment practice in which a person may appeal a decision as a means of receiving an explanation and the opportunity to argue against it.2 Employment at will is the standard in the majority of private corporations today and is argued for relentlessly by freedom of contract enthusiasts,

Walsh, D. J. (2013). Employment law for human resource practice (4th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage

1. What is the legal issue in this case? Linda Dillon appealed her case against her employer, Champion Jogbra, on the grounds of wrongful termination. The company’s progressive policy for disciplinary action was not applied. Therefore, Dillon makes her claim that her at will status was modified according to the employee handbook and practices. Employee’s handbook should be written clearly and reviewed by legal experts (Walsh, 2010). Champion Jogbra countered that Dillon was an at-will employee and she could be terminated at any time. Dillon also, argues against that the

In the case of Sherbert against Verner et al., members of South Carolina Employment Security Commission, et al. (1963), Sherbert’s employer denied her unemployment benefits because

In writing this case analysis, it will cover the impact of the McKennon V. Nashville Banner Publishing Co. Supreme Court of the United States decision in any legal dispute regulated by Age Discrimination In Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) and others by-law that covers the abolition of judgment in the place of work, the involvement to profit calculation technique in this type of legal suit, as well as impact in the workplace atmosphere. The Court detained that McKennon recognized that the establishment is responsible for its inequitable activities even where it consequently determines confirmation that would have led to the contrary action on legal and appropriate grounds. Not to mention, enclosed in this paper is a brief summary of the case from District Court through the Supreme Court ruling, comparing and contrasting the rulings issued by the U.S. Supreme Court and the District Court, and analyzing the reasoning used by the court to overturn the ruling issued by the district court. I will also, describe the pertinent variables of the analyses used by the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as state my recommendation as it refers to age discrimination.

In the case of Blanton v Newton Associates, Inc., Blanton’s was clearly harassed. In cases such as this, the employer (Newton) would find their best defense in the cases of Burlington Industustries, Inc. v Ellerth, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998), and Faragher v City of Boca Raton, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998).

1. DePeters, Co. is sued for sex discrimination on the grounds that too few women are hired because fewer women than men achieve passing scores on a required manual dexterity and physical strength test. DePeters, Co. offers in its defense that even though fewer women score high enough on the test, a greater percentage of the passing women are hired. The company maintains that, as a result, the percentage of women in the workforce mirrors the percentage of available women in the labor pool. A group of women who took the test and failed file suit. Explain the basis for the cause of action, and analyze the merits of the cause of action, employer defenses, and likely outcome. Support your response with applicable

The issue of retaliatory discharge is common in the labor law area. These claims are made by disgruntled former employees whom feel as if they were in justly terminated from their previous job. However, the power of authority is sometimes abuse by those in their position. If someone’s believes they have been wrongly terminated they must be able to defend their claim with the following minutes of pertinent meeting, any written reports, typed, or handwritten, personal file and other portent information which will defend their claim. Having fellow employees and supervisors and their departmental policies and procedures. An employment disclaimer does not give the employer the right to terminated at will. The California Supreme Court prohibits their

John Cuz gets Laid off- John was not wrongfully terminated. He was an at will employee and was fired because a downturn in workload. It wasn’t right to lay him off after so many years, but they did nothing wrong in letting him go. John sued Bechtel Corp for wrongful termination on grounds of an implied contract. This Implied contract was based on what California Courts called the Foley Criteria. California Supreme Court reviewed the case and decided John Guz did not have a case of wrongful termination because longevity and promotions do not constitute a guarantee of employment security. Also he wasn’t fired because of personal reasons he was fired because the company downsize and that doesn’t break the implied contract. Employers cannot fire

Depending on the status of the employee upon hiring or later, he or she may be granted at a will contract or a property interest contract in a continued employment (Varone, 2012). Because at a will employees cannot expect a continued employment, they can be terminated for any reason or without reason (Varone, 2012). For property interest employees, due process must be provided before job termination stated Varone (2012). Public employees such as municipal and district firefighters even under at a will contract cannot be terminated without just cause or in a violation of law affirmed Varone (2012). A fire chief who was fired due to an alleged incompetence filed a law suit against his employer. The facts, the issues, the ruling, the rationale, a perspective, and example in which the court’s decision might be cited are addressed in this paper.

This paper will discuss the United States Department of Labor laws. Americans are protected under these laws from injustices that may occur in the work place. There are over a hundred different laws that have been created by the government and that companies are mandated to adhere by.

This case is bout Erin McNamara who work for Recycling company for about 20years and was transfered to a different facility, where she was let go in under a year. McNamara had been spoken too many times about not wearing safety glasses and other violations she had done. McNamara was warned of the consequences of her actions on several occasions. She was disciplined after another offense with suspension. After returning to work she was in violation again and was then fired. This case is one that is hard to pick a side on. On one hand you have someone who has been on job for about 20 years. They have norms that they have become comfortable with. They company allowed her to do this job this way for the past 20 years and move her o a new facility