Legal Encounter1:
Newcorp a company in Vermont that deals with real estate employed Mr. Pat Grey as the manager of real property. His major duty was to maintain issues that pertain to letting of space/room. In the course of carryout, his duties he will be supervising 51 other employees and other supervisors that are below him. In addition, he will deal with tenants that give out commercial space. His new job caused him a little rearrangement. He has to move to the location and his wife has to apply for a new job in their new area.
After Pat had worked for three month, he was informed by his boss that things is not working in the right way and that he would be granted just 30 days partition pay. To his surprise, Pat thought that his employer should have informed him about any problem concerning his work before now. The company’s manual which guide its code of conduct, which was provided to Pat upon his acceptance of the work which observed the course of action for dealing with an unsatisfactory employee. It reads that if the work performance of an employee is disappointing, 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, termination will follow. Pat believed that given the situation on ground the company does not have the right to dismiss him at will. In addition, he observed that his boss was apparently aloof, after he has given his word in a local school board meeting.
In this case, the company has a right to fire any employee, because they are the owners of the company, but in a case where they have laid down rules then they do not have the right to dismiss Pat. Pat has a right has an employee too. I think that the legal principle here is the principal rights and responsibilities.
Legal Encounter 2:
Newcorp employed Mr. Sam as a supervisor of electrical manufacturing for auto wiring related harnessing. There are...