1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment.”
Jake’s actions are considered in his scope of employment for his specific role as a mechanic for his employment at the auto dealership. Jake notes to his employer, Herman that he has been working overtime for two days during the free oil change deal at the auto dealership. Jake tells Herman that he believes if he is doing the extra work for the car dealership’s special, he should be fairly compensated. In accordance with the FLSA (Federal Labor Standards Act) the U.S. Department of Labor defines that employees that work more than forty hours per week must be paid one and a half times their regular pay. In compliance with the FLSA, it does indeed confirm that Jake has every right to demand overtime pay at time and a half for his contributions to the car dealership. The FLSA actually further defines the law for “blue collar workers” and is known as: Section 13(a)(1) The Blue-Collar Workers and the Part 541 Exemptions Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) summarizes that blue collar workers that do repetitive work with their hands are indeed entitled to overtime premium pay and minimum wage. Other non-management employees such as construction workers, craftsmen, electricians, and other similar occupations are also considered in the same category as mechanics and justify proper and appropriate overtime compensation. Furthermore, the law states they must be compensated no matter how high that pay might be.
2. Explain whether or not Herman is responsible for Jake’s injury.
Herman is indeed responsible to take into action workers’ compensation (if necessary) for Jake’s injury because of the fact the injury occurred on the job site. Jake has been working overtime and with working these extra hours he felt as if he couldn’t tell the difference between his thumb and a spark plug, thus resulting in an injury to his thumb. Workers’ compensation somewhat varies...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document