Legal and Ethical Issues in Workforce Dismissal in Fast Service Company - Research Paper Example

Legal and Ethical Issues in Workforce Dismissal Legal and Ethical Issues in Workforce dismissal This research paper is going to focus on the legal issues in reduction of workforce simulation. In order to address this research topic amicably, the paper is going to begin by describing briefly what the workplace policies and procedures mean. After describing the workplace procedures and policies, the paper is going to highlight on the example of a situation in which employees in a company are listed for dismissal in relation to the workplace policies and procedures. The violation of workplace procedures and policies placing these candidates for dismissal in the list is going to be highlighted so that ethical and legal considerations can be brought out. The paper will spot the key employment laws and concepts that have some effects on each of the candidate’s employment status. The paper is also going to explain whether there is any explanatory regulatory circumstance, which would influence the decision to end the employment of each of the candidates. Finally, the paper will make a decision on the way each of the candidates can be dealt with in a way that puts the interests of the company at the best grounds Introduction Workplace procedures and policies In any company doing business in today’s dynamic workplace, the importance of having effective workplace procedures and policies has continued to rise. The driving force for this rise has been the changes seen in the codes of practice, regulation, and legislation. For instance, the recent changes seen in the industrial relations legislation as well as the move by companies to a national system have led to the rise of workplace issues of unfair dismissals, workplace rights, and discrimination. These should be handled by effective policies. Business company law has been set to look into these policies to ensure that both the employer and the employee are protected from any form of workplace injustice. In this paper, we are going to concentrate on the employee protection in the workplace. This is because it is always likely to find employees being handled unfairly in the companies by the employers, and not the other way round. Fortunately, several laws have been enacted under company law to ensure that the employees are treated fairly in the workplace. Research Design This research paper is going to use five candidates listed for dismissal in Fast Service Company. These candidates are Carl Hairnes, Brian Carter, Sarah Boyd, Nora Manson, and Jenny Mills. These candidates were listed for dismissal due to different reasons. Carl Hairnes is accused of displaying acts of sexual harassment to fellow employees. He is also a gay. Brian Carter, is going to be dismissed because his disability to perform his duties well is slowing down the operation of the company. Sarah Boyd, on the other hand, is said to be too old to bring the energy needed by the company to achieve its objectives. By dismissing her therefore, the company thinks that it will be in the position of employing a more energetic person who can lift the performance of the company to a higher level. Nora Manson is in the list of the candidates to be dismissed because she has a different race and serves in the executive position. This makes most of the employees who come from the one race feel uncomfortable. These employees have therefore, raised their dissatisfaction to the management, and the management has listed Manson for dismissal. Jenny Mills has been accused of getting out of the workplace early. She is pregnant. She is confident that after finishing her day’s duties, she can go and relax. However, the rest of the employees are not happy with this. They have therefore, reported their complaints to the human resource department, which has listed Mills for dismissal. Discussion Legal aspects of the dismissal claims One of the five candidates identified for dismissal under the business regulation simulation discussed is Carl Haimes. This candidate is bound to dismissal considering the act of sexual harassment, which he committed. The business regulation simulation detests such acts as sexual harassment in the workplace. In this note, the Business regulation simulation outlines the forms of sexual harassment, which are bound to dismissal in order to ensure that the business environment is peaceful for all the workers irrespective of the gender inclination. Consequently, these forms include the sexual harassment that involves the existence of a hostile work environment. The hostile work environment of this kind is the one, which cannot bar the colleagues from making offensive sexual propositions or comments, engaging in suggestive touching, showing nude pictures, or drawing sexual graffiti (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). Another candidate bound for dismissal is Brian Carter. Concerning Brian Carter, it is good to note that Americans with Disabilities Act rule out the discrimination that employers give to the employees or job applicants based on three major factors. The first kind of discrimination is when an employer considers the factor of disability in deciding who to employ and who not to employ and who to favor in such issues as promotion. The second kind of discrimination is the one in which the employer considers whether the employee or the job applicant had a form of disability in the past. The last form of discrimination in this case is the one in which the employer considers whether the employee or the job applicant has been regarded to have a kind of disability. ADA goes ahead to define disability as any mental or physical impairment bringing together different types of disorders and illnesses. Among the disorders and illnesses that constitute the disability in this case are the learning disabilities, mental illness, mental retardation, psychological disorders, amputation that affects vital body systems, disfigurement, disease, and physical conditions or disorders. In this definition of disability, the major activities involve the ability that an individual has in performing manual tasks, working, caring for oneself, breathing, learning, speaking, hearing, seeing, and walking (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). The third candidate for dismissal is Sarah Boyd. Although both the Equal Employment Opportunity Act and the Civil Rights Act do not forbid the kind of discrimination in workplace that is based on age, this kind of discrimination is forbidden by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). According to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the employment discrimination, which is done against the workers who are aged forty years and older, is prohibited. At the same time, the mandatory retirement given to these employees by their employers is prohibited by this act. In this case, it is only high policy makers and bona fide employees of private companies who are not protected by this act when it comes to a situation of early retirement. In case there are labor contracts and retirement plans, which violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, it is the duty of ADE to invalidate these (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). The fourth candidate for dismissal is Nora Manson. In this case, the company is planning to lay off Nora Manson for the claims that she has a different race. In this same situation, Manson is also found engaging herself in efforts to file complaints against the Fast Service company for discriminating her and other colleagues for coming from a different race. However, considering the Statutory Restriction outlined to cover employment-at-will titled 42 U.S.C. § 1981, all the employees, including Manson are given the same right of making and enforcing contracts the same way the white citizens enjoy this privilege. Recently, Section 1981 has gained significance when it comes to the assertion of such claims as race discrimination seen in the workplace. Section 1981 is also a statute of the Civil Rights of Reconstruction-era, which is applicable for all employers (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). The statute gives no rights to the public employer to classify, segregate, terminate, or to refuse to hire workers based on any protected class. In addition, the statute bears a provision of an affirmative action through which the public employers are prevented from segregating, advancing, promoting, and hiring individuals based on whether they are members of a particular protected areas. Therefore, Manson who has filed claims concerning race discrimination is well protected by this statute. The last candidate for dismissal is Jenny Mills. This is also one of the employees of Fast Service Company. The accusations filed against her are that she is fond of leaving the workplace most frequently just because she is pregnant. Jenny’s case can be clarified under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). In this act, both the public and private employers with fifteen or more employees, employment agencies, and labor organizations, should comply with the requirements of this act. In this act, the employers are prevented from discriminating or discharging workers based on the issue of pregnancy. The requirement of this law is that the pregnant women should receive the same treatment as non-pregnant women or men whose inability or ability to work is because of a non-pregnancy related disability or illness. There is no provision however under the PDA act for the special treatment to be given to pregnant women (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 34). Considering the plan to lay off the different employees mentioned above, the claims that are outlined in most of the cases by the employer may not hold water if we consider the exceptions that have been made regarding the employment-at-will doctrine. In other words, the employer cannot just decide and terminate their employment just because of the authority given by the employment-at-will doctrine. This is because there are statutory restrictions that have been given to the employment-at-will doctrine. Consequently, the statutory restrictions, which can protect some of the abovementioned employees from being dismissed, are Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), Americans With Disabilities Act (the “ADA”), and Age Discrimination in Employment Act which will protect Norah Manson, Brian Carter, and Sarah Boyd respectively. Ethical aspects of the dismissal claims On ethical grounds, it is recommended that the company should operate ethically in order to be in the position of handling those issues amicable. The company can achieve this in several ways. The following is the description of these ways. In any business setting, the human resource sector contributes insurmountably to the success of the organization. This however, does not come out cheaply. Instead, when there is the human resource value ethics in the business environment, it will place the organization in the best position towards realizing success. Consequently, there are different ways in which businesses can ensure that the workers are operating in an ethical environment in today’s world. One of these ways is that of establishing an open business environment. This means that the workers should always feel safe and have the freedom of coming forward to bring out anything of importance or affecting the organization. When there is no restriction to this, trust that will be instilled will encourage open communications, which are critical in the business. The ethical environment can also be built by introucing the meaning of ethical conduct to every worker so that everyone knows where he or she is supposed to be standing as far as ethical matters are concerned. This will also help in negating the limitation of just assuming what ethical conduct is. If the managers make it clear and forthright to everyone that the vision and the mission of the organization are rooted on ethical behavior, misunderstandings and confusion will be issues of the past in the organization (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). In addition, an ethical environment can also arise when it comes to addressing issues. In this case, if the responsible management team takes it upon themselves that it is their duty to make unparalleled decisions while addressing business issues, they can instill the confidence to other workers, hence creating an ethical environment. The management team must investigate any problem seen in the organization, and take the appropriate action, for example, examining the kinds of behavior that may be the roots of the problem. One facet of an ethical environment in any organization is accountability. The business environment, which is characterized by openness, transparency, and exemplary leadership, favours the flourishing of ethical conduct. However, when secrecy and misinformation begin cropping in to an organization, unethical conduct is rapidly flourishing. Therefore, in order to cultivate the ethical conduct in the organization, the leadership should strive to build accountability in the process of decision-making. If the people at the top achieve the accountability, it is almost certain that it will descend down throughout the organization. Similarly, if the process of decision-making is done based on open code of conduct and ethical values, the workers will hardly fall victims of misconduct. Besides, blame game, when something is in a mess, will become an issue of the past. Rank or seniority may not stop the organization from holding anyone responsible for his or her actions. By therefore meeting these demands for ethical conduct, the workers and business partners will be in a position to appreciate that ethical behavior makes a lot of contribution towards the success of the business. With exemplary leadership, the rest of the workers will recognize the rewards given to ethical behavior and at the same time understand the level at which unethical behavior is discouraged. Operating ethically in today’s business world is a key step to make workers build their confidence and trust in the organization. By achieving this, the workers will end up contributing positive ideas, immensely in the organization. As a result, the business will inevitably realize success (Nijsen & Hudson, 2008, p 31). Conclusion With the above decision, the company will be in the position of streamlining its operation without any hindrance. For Carl Haimes, dismissal will be for the good of the company. This is evident because with proper moral values in the company, everyone will work peacefully. Brian Carter on the other hand, should not be dismissed, as outlined by the Americans with Disabilities Act simply because he may, despite his disability, have great ideas for the company. The case of Sarah Boyd is also important. She should not be dismissed on the grounds of age since she could be of great help to the company through the experience that she has gained over the years. Dismissing Manson on the grounds of being an African-American is also biased. Manson can make great contribution to the company despite coming from another race. Lastly, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act cannot protect Jenny since she is always given the recommended free time yet she still extents her breaks in the name of being pregnant. Her extensions are also causing worries among the colleagues. Performance is therefore, likely to drop if she is not dismissed. References Nijsen, A. & Hudson, J. (2008). Business regulation and public policy: the costs and benefits of compliance. New York, NY: Springer. Read More