Legal Encounter

Legal Encounter 1:
This case has to do with “implied contracts”. While Newcorp observes employment at will with respect to employment and discharge, I feel that Pat was wrongfully terminated.
It clearly states in the Newcorp’s Personnel Manual that if the job performance of an employee is unsatisfactory, the employee will be notified of the deficiency and placed on Corrective Action Plan (CAP). If the employee performance does not improve to a satisfactory level within the specified period of time, termination will follow”.
According to the case, Pat was never put on a Corrective Action Plan before his termination. If there was not a prominently placed disclaimer at the beginning of the manual informing the employee that the manual does not constitute a contract of employment, then Pat might have a case against NewCorp.   If Newcorp wants to reduce the risks involved in a wrongful termination suit, then they will have to first place Pat on a corrective action plan. At the end of the CAP, if his performance is not satisfactory then he can be terminated.


Legal Encounter 2:
Sexual harassment is the form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment. Sam clearly crossed the line with Paula. Paula continuously told Sam to stop, but Sam just suggested that her work might be suffering from her lack of interest. The fact the Sam stated that Paula’s work may be suffering, creates a stronger sexual harassment case for Paula. In the definition of sexual harassment it states that, the situation would unreasonably interfere with an individual's work performance.
As manager of the electrical manufacturing division at NewCorp, it is my belief that Sam has violated sexual harassment laws outlined in our company policy that reflect the principles of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.   If these... [continues]

Read full essay