Question Description
I’m working on a business Case Study and need support to help me study.
Use for sources:
Employment Law for Human Resource Practice, 6th Edition
| Title | Employment Law for Human Resource Practice, 6th Edition |
|---|---|
| ISBN | 9781337555326 |
| Publisher | Cengage |
| Type | |
| Required |
CHAPTER 15
Estrada v. Wal-Mart Stores, U.S. 140089U.S. (2016)
Estrada sued her former employer, Wal-Mart alleging that the Asset Protection Manager, Durham, wrongfully accused her of embezzling $4,000, false imprisoned her during a related interrogation, and fraudulently induced her to sign a form acknowledging that she owed Wal-Mart $900. After she signed the form, and allegedly because she signed it, Wal-Mart fired her for “Gross Misconduct – Integrity Issue.” Estrada brought claims for false imprisonment, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation.
1.) What were the legal issues in this case? What did the court decide?
2.) What things need to be shown by plaintiffs in false imprisonment claims? Why does the court allow the false imprisonment claim in this case to go forward? Given what we know about the facts of this case, do you think that the plaintiff was falsely imprisoned? Why or why not?
3.) The plaintiff also brought fraud and infliction of emotional distress claims. What are the elements of each of these claims? Why does the court allow the plaintiff’s fraud and infliction of emotional distress claims to go forward?
4.) What is the theory of “compelled self-publication”? Why does the plaintiff’s defamation claim fail?
5.) From a practical standpoint, what are some things that this employer should have done differently in handling this situation?
CHAPTER 17
Barnett v. PA Consulting Group, 715 F.3d 354 (D.C. Cir.2013)
The plaintiff, a 57 year old female, was terminated from her position as a management consultant during a restructuring of the firm, allegedly because her expertise was not a good “fit” for the firm’s new business focus.
1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the appeals court decide?
2. If, as the court says, the consulting firm “was entitled to restructure the Transportation Group to return it to profitability and fire people to do so,” why are they in legal trouble for firing Barnett?
3. Evidence on the relative performance of employees is central to this decision. What was the evidence regarding the performance of Barnett compared to the younger male employee who was retained (Gao)? Does that evidence support Barnett’s claim that the firm’s stated reason for her termination is pretext? Why or why not?
4. Overall, does it appear that Barnett’s termination was discriminatory? Why or why not?
5. Are there things that this employer might have done to better handle this situation? What things should this employer have done to better handle this situation?
Please explain Thoroughly
- Should employers operating under employment at will use probationary periods for newly hired employees? Why or why not?
- Think of an international company that has completed a merger or acquisition with an organization from a different country. What were the challenges to making the deal successful? Ultimately, was the deal a success or would you consider it a failure? Why?
- Several states have limited public-sector union power. What are some reasons for lawmakers taking this stand? What are the advantages and disadvantages of workers in the public sector belonging to labor unions? How does this impact taxpayers?
