Constructive Discharge Essay Example
Constructive Discharge
Constructive discharge as a legal concept is relevant to the given scenario in that an employee has quit, alleging that he/she has been discriminated against due to a work schedule policy change. This work schedule policy change requires that employees work on a religious holy day. The employee is claiming to have been religiously discriminated against.
Constructive discharge is upheld in court if the work conditions were made to be so intolerable that a reasonable person would resign, and in some cases it must be proved that it was the employer’s intent that the employee would resign.
There are two ways in which constructive discharge is tested: The Reasonable Person Test and The Specific Intent test.
1.The Reasonable person Test best serves the purposes of the law. Under the majority view, an employee who has claimed to have been subjected to unlawful discrimination and resigns is said to have been constructively discharged only if a reasonable person would have found the conditions intolerable. The majority view suggests that the employer wanted the employee to quit the job.
2.Under the Specific Intent Test, or minority view, the plaintiff has to show proof that not only the working conditions were made intolerable, but also that the employer created the intolerable conditions with the specific intent of forcing the employee to resign. The minority view suggests that the employer did not wish for the employee to resign, rather stay and comply with the requests/new requirements.
If conditions are found to have been tolerable, the claim will fail under either test. In the given scenario, the work schedule policy change effects all production workers. Even if the change is determined to have made conditions intolerable for the employee in question, the change was not made with the intent to force any employee to resign. Therefore, it is not a constructive discharge.
Recommendation
In response to the employee’s charge of constructive
Constructive discharge as a legal concept is relevant to the given scenario in that an employee has quit, alleging that he/she has been discriminated against due to a work schedule policy change. This work schedule policy change requires that employees work on a religious holy day. The employee is claiming to have been religiously discriminated against.
Constructive discharge is upheld in court if the work conditions were made to be so intolerable that a reasonable person would resign, and in some cases it must be proved that it was the employer’s intent that the employee would resign.
There are two ways in which constructive discharge is tested: The Reasonable Person Test and The Specific Intent test.
1.The Reasonable person Test best serves the purposes of the law. Under the majority view, an employee who has claimed to have been subjected to unlawful discrimination and resigns is said to have been constructively discharged only if a reasonable person would have found the conditions intolerable. The majority view suggests that the employer wanted the employee to quit the job.
2.Under the Specific Intent Test, or minority view, the plaintiff has to show proof that not only the working conditions were made intolerable, but also that the employer created the intolerable conditions with the specific intent of forcing the employee to resign. The minority view suggests that the employer did not wish for the employee to resign, rather stay and comply with the requests/new requirements.
If conditions are found to have been tolerable, the claim will fail under either test. In the given scenario, the work schedule policy change effects all production workers. Even if the change is determined to have made conditions intolerable for the employee in question, the change was not made with the intent to force any employee to resign. Therefore, it is not a constructive discharge.
Recommendation
In response to the employee’s charge of constructive