Legal Encounters Exercise
Encounters p. 2
Legal Encounter 1
The relationship between Newcorp and Pat Grey began when Mr. Grey was hired by Newcorp to oversee a managerial position three months ago. Mr. Grey’s time on the job had not proven fruitful for Newcorp and termination was the choice Newcorp made, even under an employee at will contract (Jennings p. 727) and was given thirty days severance pay. However, Newcorp failed to exercise a clause that would insinuate that there was an implied contract (Jennings p. 727) between Mr. Grey and Newcorp. It is stated in the employee manual: “If the job performance of an employee is unsatisfactory, the employee will be notified of the deficiency and placed on a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). If the employee performance does not improve to a satisfactory level within the specified period of time, termination will follow.” (Course Syllabus). Due to this clause, Mr. Grey could seek litigation because he was not afforded the opportunity of having a Corrective Action Plan and was let go with pay. Offering Mr. Grey his current unemployed status or offering reinstatement under a Corrective Action Plan while rescinding his severance pay unless Mr. Grey fails again is the correct course of action.
Legal Encounter 2
Newcorp must be careful how it handles this situation and make sure that Sam did not break any laws pertaining to Title VII (Jennings p. 799) in regards to gender discrimination. Sam stated that the reason he rejected Paula’s request was due to her
being a young fertile female who could get pregnant, working in a section of Newcorp that had chemicals known to cause defects in an early fetus, and that Newcorp could possibly be held liable if Paula gets pregnant. Under the unrevised version of Title VII, Sam theoretically was in the right to block the transfer regardless how he felt about Paula. However, the EEOC revised Title VII to block instances of...