Unfair Employee Discharge - Case Study Example

Unfair Employee Discharge Unfair Employee Discharge Critically assessing the facts of the case, the son was a representative of his mother, a 49% common stockholder at the company. Generally, employees do not attend annual general meetings. Therefore, the son was present in the meeting not as an employee of the company, but as a representative of the mother, a crucial shareholder. As such, he had the right to raise any concern on areas of management competencies and policies. The purpose of holding annual general meetings is to inform shareholders of a company about the current state of affairs and answer to their concerns about the company.

The management is responsible for taking care of the interest of shareholders and should be in a position to answers questions of shareholders at the annual general meeting. The son made criticism in the position of her mother as a shareholder and not in his position as an employee of the company. He was simply doing what his mother or would have done if she was present in the meeting. Perhaps, he was speaking under the instruction of her ill mother. Of what essence would it be for the son to attend the meeting passively when he had issues of concern?

As such, the son’s dismissal was clearly unwarranted victimization by the management that merits reversal because he was acting as a shareholder rather than an employee at the meeting.