Human Resource Management in the Knowledge Economy - Case Study Example

CASE STUDY In contemporary society, many women are still suffering from escalating level of discriminations that seem illegal when they are pregnant and more often than not lose their jobs altogether when they are on maternity leave. Figures in many polls such as ones conducted by Research Company One Poll in a recent past indicate that some of these women jobs are changed by the time they return to work. Other get cut in work hours, demotion or just replaced by the person who was covering for them (Sims et al., 102). As a fact, it is unlawful to send packing or otherwise disadvantage a worker for a reason related to their pregnancy or maternity leave. Despite these challenges many women fail to understand or are ignorant that the law provides them with rights. The case study on Paul Bryant Group management handling of Camilla provides a clear insight into the plight many women go through in our society particularly at workstations during and after maternity leave. The big issue in most cases is that women are seen as being less committed to their bosses or employer since they are now mothers. Many companies today are settling out of court since they dont want to be viewed by their stakeholders to be treating pregnant women or new mothers as such. In the case study for instance, Camilla’s position as a front desk clerk was unlawfully given to another individual despite her notification and officially being out for maternity leave. The case study is based on various aspects of human resource management that one may encounter in any working station in today’s business world and interesting lessons for future managers. Camilla has the ground for a lawsuit against the Paul Bryant Group. The basis for her lawsuit is rooted in the protection of rights she enjoys and too from the un-procedural dismissal from her previous duty by the supervisor. Firstly, the law protects Camilla against being unfairly selected for redundancy due to her pregnancy or taking maternity leave. Sadly, this is the exact scenario that happened. This should not however have been the case. If her job was genuinely redundant while she was absent, then she was entitled to being offered a suitable alternative vacancy (if one was in the company). Ideally, on terms and conditions not considerably less favorable than those of her old job. As per the case study, this did not happen with Camilla at Good Night Inn. These rights are set out in Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations amended in 1999 (Lengnick-Hall et al., 55). Furthermore, the case don’t mention whether Camilla received anything in writing and also if the alternative job provided by at Good Night Inn is “suitable” i.e. that the terms and conditions should not be considerably less favorable than your existing job. It is stated that prior to her return she even notified the company (four weeks notification), this step further provided basis for her lawsuit. Generally, the rules regarding the return to work following maternity leave were clearly set out in Regulation no.18 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations in 1999, as amended (Miller et al., 27). Camilla only had the right to return to the same job position of front desk clerk she was in, working the same hours she was employed to do before she took maternity leave if Camilla return to work within Ordinary Maternity Leave ( always within the first 56 weeks) (Kimmel et al., 67). In fact, hers was even shorter as she was planning to return just after 12 weeks. However, there are steps that could have been taken by the employer who is Good Night Inn to avoid these scenarios. In a genuine redundancy situation, Good Night Inn employer needs to show fairness in operating a dismissal procedure which sadly never happened. Through a competent Human Resource top level management, Camilla would have been aware of the environment to expect by the time she was beginning her maternity leave and adjusted or be provided with an option of seeking employment elsewhere when she returned. Moreover, Good Night Inn to have avoided such a scenario, needed to have shown a fair process in handling Camilla’s case. One was by demonstrating that it has in advance warned Camilla that she is at risk of losing her position. Secondly, it ought to be the duty of the Good Night Inn human resource supervisor to explain the redundancy process, ideally selected for redundancy by applying objective selection criteria. Thirdly, Consulted with the” at risk” employer which in this case is Camilla to prevent their roles from being redundant. Normally, there are special consultation steps if employees in a company are to be made redundant in a time of ninety days or less; and considered and given available alternative employment better than the previous position in many cases. These specific steps were not taken by the human resource to avoid the situation they found themselves in of a lawsuit. Employee’s terminations like the case of Camilla by Paul Bryant Group have certain rights. These rights are the basis of overcoming the challenge and so generating motion in an ideal direction. One dilemma that Paul Bryant Group finds themselves in is the fact that Camilla already knows her rights and has filed a lawsuit. It is evident that the company failed to put mechanisms in place to avoid the lawsuit. One amicable approach that Paul Bryant Group can use to overcoming the challenge and generate motion in an ideal direction would be out of court settlement. However, should Camilla and her lawyer be in agreement that she seeks an alternative workplace; the company will have to accept her right. For instance, Camilla has the right to obtain a final paycheck, the option of proceeding with health insurance coverage, unemployment compensation benefits and she could be eligible for severance pay for a stated period (Sastry et al., 33). In my view after analysis of the case study out of court, settlement is the best alternative. One benefit would be that the infringed rights of Camilla would have been taken care of by the Human Resource department. On the other hand, Paul Bryant Group as a company would have protected their reputation. There are a lot of dangers that the lawsuit presents the company and overcoming the challenge and generate motion in an ideal direction would go a long way in safeguarding the company’s image hence profitability. The case studies are based on various aspects of human resource management. One major issue of concern that the case presents is the issue of human resource malpractice. Scandals involving public officials have often captured world attention. This case study presents a scandal that is as a result of the deteriorating ethical behaviors of supervisor who has indulged himself in all sorts of malpractices in Paul Bryant Group’s Human Resource department. Despite the knowledge of rights that employees possess during and after the maternity leave the management reluctantly refused through the supervisor to accept Camilla back to her previous position. This presents the highest level of breach of contract and human resource malpractice that is a major issue in contemporary workplaces. Another minor issue that the case studypresents through analysis and critical thinking is a misuse of power by senior employees of the company. The supervisor used his position to demote Camilla from her position as a front desk clerk. This was clearly unlawfully given that her position was given to another individual despite her notification to return to work and officially to be out for maternity leave. The supervisor further demoted Camilla to position of washing dishes. This challenge misuse of power provided by the case study present a concern that many human resource departments struggle to eradicate in their companies. Through analysis of the case study another issue, that can be raised, is laxity in supervision by the top management and through this negligence and lack of supervision, many of their top employees may make decisions that are contrary to the company policies (Marzollo, 94). A conclusion can be drawn from the facts presented in the case study that there are possibilities that the top most management was not aware of the breach performed to one of their junior employees until the lawsuit was presented. This has been an issue for many companies. One way of addressing the problem of malpractice within the Paul Bryant Group’s Human resource would be to impose disciplinary measures on the supervisors in the case of Camilla and any other top employee who had a hand in the scandal. Immediate termination might be necessary since the misuse of power included person in the position of power, who is the supervisor, uses his authority to do something illegal. In this case, Camilla was unlawfully dismissed from her position of front desk clerk. The level of discipline should depend on the impact the abuse of authority has on the individual and the company. In this case, the impact was huge and could tarnish company’s image. Regardless of the disciplinary measure taken, Paul Bryant Group policy should include consequences like verbal and written warnings to individual junior managers, suspension, termination and even legal prosecution in the future for such cases. More mild solution in the near future, to address issues in the case, would be to frequent the leadership training. Leadership training as a long term solution ensures that supervisors are motivated and through the trainings various employees’ policies and regulations are explained to them. For instance, when subordinates consistently do not perform satisfactorily, it many times reflect poorly on the company’s image. Offering leadership training to Paul Bryant Group human resource supervisors and junior managers, help them develop the professional skills necessary to star the company to greater heights as they will be acquitted with various employment policies (Chalofsky et al., 111). The case study offers interesting facts that can assist one in making a good manager. First human resource malpractices can be highlighted through the plight of Camilla. Through this issue, a lesson can be learned that as a manager it is important to adhere to the regulations that govern human resource department particularly labor laws. It is also important to understand that despite facing difficult economic times in the company as a manager and, when employees go off on maternity leave, it is not prudent to absorb the work amongst existing staff rather than paying for additional cover. These are the scenarios that might eventually lead to the plight that Camilla went through with Paul Bryant Group’s Human Resource department. Finally as a senior most manager the case study advices for the need to supervise and keep in touch with the occurrences at the company to avoid situation where other junior supervisors make decisions contrary to the company ethics and policies. Work cited Chalofsky, Neal, Tonette S. Rocco, and Michael L. Morris. Handbook of Human Resource Development. , 2014. Print. Chandler, Peter, and Christopher Waud. Wauds Employment Law: The Practical Guide for Human Resource Managers, Trade Union Officials, Employers, Employees and Lawyers. London: Kogan Page, 2003. Print. Kimmel, Jean, and Emily P. Hoffman. The Economics of Work and Family. Kalamazoo, Mich: W.E. Upjohn Inst. for Employment Research, 2002. Print. Lengnick-Hall, Mark L, and Cynthia A. Lengnick-Hall. Human Resource Management in the Knowledge Economy: New Challenges, New Roles, New Capabilities. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2003. Print. Marzollo, Jean. Your Maternity Leave. , n.d.. Print. Maternity and Work. Geneva: International Labour Office, 1994. Print Maternity Protection at Work: Revision of the Maternity Protection Convention (revised), 1952 (no. 103), and Recommendation, 1952 (no. 95). Geneva: International Labour Office, 2000. Print. Miller, Vernon D, and Michael E. Gordon. Meeting the Challenge of Human Resource Management: A Communication Perspective. , 2014. Print. Sastry, Nalini, and Subrata Pandey. Women Employees and Human Resource Management. Hyderabad, India (A.P.: Universities Press (India, 2000. Print. Sims, Ronald R. Human Resource Management: Contemporary Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities. Charlotte, N.C: Information Age Pub, 2007. Print. Read More