Trial in a Court of Law to Enable the Establishment of Justice - Research Paper Example

Law Research Paper Legal Research The research paper involves an analysis of three legal research cases: the case of Ali v Rogers, EEOC v Peabody Western Coal Co and Zeinali v Raytheon Co, Zeinali. According to the United States Ninth Circuit Court the case between Ali v. Rogers, 13- 15145, plaintiff Seamen developed suit against the defendant who was the human resource director. The human resource manager asked the captain of the ship to fire him since he was from Yemeni Origin. Additionally, the human resource manager complained that his religion and Yemeni national origin violated his unions’ collective bargain and constitutional rights. However, the case was dismissed since Ali sued the human resource director rather than United States; therefore, the complaint was dismissed based on the deficiency of jurisdiction. Comparing the case of Ali v Rogers and Jack’s case both cases base complications on nationality issues. However, Jacks case base more ideas on employees rather than states. The case between Ali v Rogers base legal ideas on public vessels Act and Admiralty Act should have developed a case against United States rather than the human resource director. Therefore, both cases are dismissed because of insufficient jurisdictions in the two cases (Ali v. Rogers, 2015). Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued Peabody 2001, alleging Peabody implementation of tribal hiring was illegal (EEOC v. Peabody, 2010). It was alleged that Peabody violated Title VII of Civil rights Act 1964. Additionally, Peabody had violated Title VII of record keeping requirements. In jack’s case, Jack was accused of violating the company’s records on laws touching policies of the Grocery just as EEOC case v Peabody. According to Zeinali v Raytheon business case, the court of appeal reversed the district court judgment (The Recorder, 2011). The court maintained federal precedent in excluding judicial evaluation of security authorization verdicts had no interest on employees’ and, therefore, discriminating against a private employer. Comparing, the case with Jacks, security issues have been addressed in Zeinali case by developing critical security issues for employees while Jacks case, security of employees is not taken into consideration. Fact Situation: Employment Law Issue In July 2011, a black employee from South Africa called Jack secured recruitment as a chief security officer in a California grocery store. In the second week of work at the store, Jack spotted a white female customer robbing items from the store. Jack alerted Chris to assist her in stopping the theft at the store. Besides, the suspected shoplifter was in a company of another male. On the other hand, Jack was in constant loggerhead with the store manager and other employees made accusations against him of stealing a job meant for the natives of United States. Jack got hold of the shoplifter and asked her to accompany him in the security area for questioning whom the male friend was yelling accompanied and swearing at the employees as Jack consistently told the companion to keep quiet. On their way to the security office, Jack instructed the shoplifters companion to remain outside the security office. However, the partner forced his way into the room by yelling, swearing and pointing the finger at Jack face an insulting him as a "Niger”. Jack reacted to this allegation by hitting the customer in his stomach. The situation forced Chris to call the police, and both customers were apprehended. Based on the Grocery policies on the use of force, workplace forbids violence and threatening conducts. Moreover, it forbids physical fights engagements at the workplace. Hence, Jack went through training that enabled him develop perfect understanding of the companies policy focused on workplace violence. After several considerations, Jack as fired because of violation based on workplace non-violence policy by slapping the abusive customer. Furthermore, Jack was sued for unfair dismissal of his nationality. Consequently, from the case above, the relationship between employees, customers, and employers compromises. In this case, solving legal issues of employment context requires the analysis of stare decisis to develop a solution to the employment law issues. Legal Issues in the Employment Context The arguments I would make if I were representing an aggrieved employee would be (1) the customer has no legal authority to abuse an employee, (2) the manager has no legal authority to sack an employee who was defending himself from insults and finally, (3) customer has no legal obligations to abuse any employee. In representing management, I would defend it from exploitation of customers and employees, implementing the policies of a company or organization and finally, the management has the authority to create rules and regulations that protect the organizations functionality (Cuen, 2011). Legal and Practical Analysis The potential legal liability of the employee depends on the court verdict and the weight of jurisdiction. The employee just as in the case of Ali v Rogers, the importance of authority in Jacks case, depends on the employer decision. Jacks employer made decisions that reflected Jacks’ personality in a negative aspect depending on his nationality and power issues. The legal liability of employees based on Jacks case was compensation and assistance. An employee of the grocery has a legal mandate to assist employees who undergo severe abusive treatment. In addition, employees potential legal liability based on Jacks case entail deterrence. The employees need subjection to punitive measures according to their actions. The threat of punishment as in Jacks case had deterrent effects and encouraged incorporation of preventive measures in discouraging bullying behavior (Cihon, Castagnera & Cihon, 2010). The case needs trial in a court of law to enable the establishment of justice. According to the cases developed, the employee will be charged based on compensation and assistance to the employee. Moreover, the employee will be charged depending on deterrence and ignorance of workers welfare subjecting the employee to punishable measures in a court of law. The management practices in improving the situation in future need to include implementation of relevant policies and laws that protect employees from harassment by customers and employers. Focusing on the case of Ali v Rogers, the case would have been favorable if proper policies would have been put that protect foreign employees from harassment (Cihon, Castagnera & Cihon, 2010). References Ali v. Rogers, 13-15145. (2015).United States Ninth Circuit, find law for legal professionals, retrieved on May 5 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/summary/opinion/us-9th-circuit/2015/03/19/273075.html Cihon, P. J., Castagnera, J., & Cihon, P. J. (2010). Employment and labor law. Cincinnati, Ohio: West Educational Pub. Cuen, R. M. (2011). Teachers rights and the law: 101 legal questions and answers to the most relevant legal problems facing California public school teachers. S.I: s.n.. EEOC v. Peabody Western Coal Co., 610 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2010). Retrieved on May 5 Fromhttps://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5053610949230830239&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 The Recorder. (2011). Zeinali V. Raytheon Company. The Recorder. Retrieved On May 5 from http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202489047044/Zeinali-v-Raytheon-Company?slreturn=20150404140213 Read More