please use the following hypothetical scenario to answer the following 5 question. Each question is worth 20 points fogh she felt that she was eminently qualified for the position, she also was growing tired of a certain good old boy culture at the plant. For r a total of 100 points. When complete upload your document to the drdropbox below.
Scenario
Janet Johnson, an African american woman, has been working at the tennesse hydroelectric plant for 15 years. During that time, his performance reviews have been exemplary. She decided to apply for the new plant foreman position. Although she felt that she was eminently qualified for the position, she also was growing tired of a certain good old boy culture at the plant. For years, the plant has had a culture of highly lewd “jokes,” and many of the employees had also engaged in inappropriate touching of female employees. The plant had an anti-harassment policy on record, but Janet’s boss shrugged and said”boys will be boys” when she reported the harrassmenr to him.
Competition for the position was fierce. But ultimately. Jose Martinez, a Chilean man, received the position. Jose had 7 years of expeirence. Unbeknownst to the applicants the promotion board secretly ran a credit check on the applicants. Janet credit score came in as lower as average, and his factored into the board’s decision. Although he met the qualifications of the position, one of the hiring managers told Janet in confidence that Janet was the applied a racial latino manager at the plant even though Latino’s represented 35% of employees at the plant. Janet sues the plant for disparate treatment, disparate impact, and sexual harassment under Title VII.
Question
2. List the elements of disparate treatment and apply then to this case. Can Janet prove a prima facie case? How would the plant rebuff these charges? Who would ultimately prevail?
3.List the elements of a disoarate impact case and apply them to this case? Will Janet prevail on this charge?
4. List the elements of the sexual harrassment case and apply them to this case? Can the plant establish an affirmative defense?
5. If the plant argues that it applied a racial preferences to Jose to correct a manifiest imbalance at the plant of underutilization of certain minorities, will the plant prevail?Why or why not?
6. Was it legal to use the credit check as factor in the promotion decision the way that it was done here? Why or why not?
SECOND QUESTION
Fully answer the questions associated with each case below and upload your completed document in the dropbox below. There are 6 cases, with 10 questions spread among them. Each question is worth 10 point for a total of 100 points.
Secnariors: You are a paralegal with the Weyland-Yutani Corporation. Your boss attorney, Sharon Ripley, has asked you do answer some questions about some HR legal issues that have arisen.
CASE 1
the first case involves Joe Stromboli. Joe is a delivery driver for Weyland, and after an accident, Joe became 100% deaf in both ears. The docotrs were unable to restore any of Jore’s hearing. Joe’s manager, Stephanie, believes that communication with employees and the recipients of the deliveres is an essential function of the job. Additionally, Joe needs to be able to particiapte in the team meetings, Joe’s manager was unsure whether to proceed, so she referred the case to the Weyland-Wutani medical staff. The medical employee took one look at Joe and said no accommodation is possible. When asked why, the doctor said ” Joe’s deaf” Joe was terminated, and he has now filied a suit for failure to reasonably accommodate.
Thr job description for a Weyland-Yutani delivery driver states that the employee muat be able to maintain a commercial driver’s license. Additionally, delivery drivers are expected to take orders from various employees. This is ordinarily done via hand radio. However, Ice has a cell phone capable of receiving text messages and emails that could allow him to take orders. Furthermorw, Joe has offered to carry a pen and papet around so that communication could also be done this way. Joe’s deafness had no effect on maintaining his CDL, and the firm expects it would make these accommodations fairly cheaply.
1.Can Joe establish a chaim for failure to reasonably accmmodate disability? Be sure to list the elements of the claim and to show how you reached your conclusion.
2. What mistakes -if any-were mde? How can these be corrected in the future? the second case involves Johnson. Johnson is a flour supervisor in the plant. 55% of the time he is engaged with ordinary production. However, 45% of the time he is engaged with supervising his zone, preparing schedules, and dealing with supervising his zone, preparing schedules, and dealing with personnel disputes. If there is a problem, he is responsible for mobilizing his zone to resolve equitable. He also spends times meeting with his superiors in order to provide reports on efficiency of employees and on any other problems that have arisen. For this, he receives 10% more money than his subordinates. He had earlier been classified as an FSLA exempt employee. Now, he is challenging that designation. Although Weyland has a strict no-overtime policy, Johnson has been showing up to work early to drink a cup of cofee, smoke a cigarette, make sure schedules are prepared, doors are unlocked, and preparing workstations for the day ahead,.He typically arrives an hour early to perform these tasks. Weyland Knew that Johnson was coming in early, and working 45 hours a week.
3. Is Johnson an exempt employee? Be sure to list and discuss the applicable legal standards as well as some of the factors the court will consider
4.Was Johson’s pre-shift work preliminary?
5.Was Johnson’s work de minimis?
6. Does Weyland’s policy against overtime mean they don’t have to pay?
CASE 3
Weyland wishes to modify their pension plan. The current plan allows employees to either receive $500 a month or $100,000 upfront upon retirement. Both plans also offer a annual ticket to the company retreat cruise. Seeking to incentives people to accept $500 a month, Weyland wishes to the ticket to employees receiving $500 a month only to apply retroactively to $100,00 lump sum plan.
7. Does this violate ERISA? why or why not?
CASE 4
Weyland became aware that a union organizing campaign was underway in one of its plants. A union supporter was called in to a meeting with plant managers. At the end of the meeting, when the employee asked what he was suppossed to do if other wanted to talk with him about unionizing, he was told ‘[y]ou’re to just work and not talk about the Union.’ After union supporters posted material on company bulletin boards, the flyers were repeatedly taken down. The company then issued a policy requiring all employees to obtain approval before placing any material on the boards. Subsequently, the company’s practice was to refuse to post material of any kind from employees.
A few month later, several off-duty employees attempted to distribute prounion flyers in the company parking lot but were stopped by company officials. They were warned that they were in violation of company policy. Around the same time, employees passed out union buttons in the plant and left some of them near a time clock for other employes to pick up.
when company officials learned of this activity, they quickly called a meeting and warned one union advocate that ” i don’t want to catch you passing [buttons] out, Okay, I don’ want to see them laying around. You can pss them out when you’re outside, on your own time, but when you’re here working, you need to be working. “The official said that this action was taken to keep the plant free of clutter and trash.
CASE 5
at the end of her shift , a 19 year old salesperson at Weyland was questioned by two store security officers. She was questioned by two store security officers. She was questioned in a small room for three hours. One of the security officers sat behind her on the right side where she could not see him (she was blind in the right eye). She was asked to sign a document stating that she was voluntarily waivng her “rights,” including the right to remain silent. When she asked for further explanation of the document before she signed it, she was told that it ” doesn’t mean anything’ you’ve ‘done something wrong.” A security officwr threatened to call the police and have her jailed unless she signed a confession, She was told that the interrogation could last all night and that is she signed a confession she could probably keep her job. Under these circumstances she signed. She signed. She was fired two days later. Thw employee claims that she is agitated and finding it increasingly difficult to sleep.
Does the sale person have a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress?
a female crane operator was told it was Weyland policy that crane operators urinate over the side of their cranes rather than stop work to take bathroom breaks. Management justified the policy by saying that there was a shortage of staff and that it was necessary for the cranes to operate continuiusly in that area of the plant. Shifts for crane opetators were typically twelve hours. There was evidence that the same policy was applied to male crane operators and that they routinely urinated over the side or back of their cranes in leiu o bathroom breaks.
Does the female crane operator have a valid sex discrimination claim unde disparate impact? What about disparate claim under disparate impact/ What about disparate treatment?
