Prestige Motors
First and foremost, I would like to commend Prestige Motors for respecting the religious beliefs of its workers. In deed, its commitments in finding for a space for them to offer their daily petitions are a show of tolerance. However, I would like to advise it to consider the diverse opinions of both the Muslims and other workers. It is true that laborers need to get a humble time during lunch breaks. These should be peaceful times when they should engage in informal interactions. Meaning, Muslim presence interferes with them. Therefore, the management of this firm should consider shifting these Muslims from the premises of the cafeteria. Instead, a mosque should be constructed for them at a place agreed upon. This should be done after amicable agreement between the management, Muslims and no-Muslim staff. In other words, the management of Prestige Motors should use dialogue to solve this issue. Each of the wrangling groups should be consulted so as to reach an ultimate decision beneficial to all of them.
Hillsdale Savings Bank
The misfortune that has befallen Maria at the Hillsdale Savings Bank is quite unfortunate. Even if her action was in line with her Christian faith, it would not appeal to the non Christians associated with this bank. I believe that she was not supposed to be sacked because of insisting on displaying a small nativity scene at the bank’s premises. Despite the fact that this institution serves a diverse population, the manager was not supposed to terminate Maria. This is intolerance and contravention of the labor laws. Hence, I would like to advise her to file a case against the bank’s management for breaching their contract and laying her off for a petty offence. Further more, she was not given a chance to advocate for herself. This is quite unfair and should be settled in a court of law.
American Heartland Corporations
Of course, I agree with Jose for taking a step to sue the management of American Heartland Corporations. Failing to offer him a job mainly because he is not a Native American is discriminative and is contrary to the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on Equal Employment Opportunity. According to this law, every person is entitled to equal opportunity to get a job regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, religion or political affiliation. At the same time, Jose has privileges of getting any job because of being a green card holder (Moran, J.J., 2010).
In this regard, I would advise him to sue this firm for violating the above mentioned constitutional provisions. It is against US laws to discriminate on anyone because of their residential status. Therefore, the American Heartland Corporations acted unconstitutionally by openly refusing to consider Jose for the available vacancy. Even if he is not a full American citizen, holding the green card puts him in a better position to enjoy a lot of privileges mostly reserved for the citizens. For instance, in case of any job, he should be offers so long as he qualifies. He must therefore, sue this company.
Stephane Wilkens
I would like to advise Stephane to sue her employer for terminating her based on her demanding health condition. it is unlawful to lay off an employee because of their medical situation. This is showing that Gunther, Wadkins, and Farmer Law Firm is not appreciative and rewarding to its employees. Despite Stephane’s case being so complicated, there are so many ways through which she would have been assisted. This shows that this firm is not concerned about the welfare of workforce. Instead of sacking her, she would be delegated another role. Although there was no similar job at any organization, the firm could have promoted her to a supervisory level. Since she served this organization for six years, she must be competent and deserves a promotion. So, she should file a court case against this firm for violating her rights because this act is a sign of discrimination which is of course unconstitutional and is against any labor law whatsoever (Moran, J.J., 2010).
Better Beef Inc
The termination of Harvey’s contract at the Better Beef Inc may be discriminatory and contravention of the Age Discrimination Employment Act of 1967. However, I would like to suggest that he should not file a court case against the management of this company because of the complications in this scenario. Whereas the average retirement age in USA is 62, Harvey might have lost his productivity (Moran, J.J., 2010). However, this would depend on the nature of his job (which is not illustrated in this case study). Besides, Tammy, his successor is also covered by the same ADEA.
This implies that he should not sue his employer for laying him off. After all, Tammy is just 45 years old and still active to do a lot strenuous duties in this organization. Otherwise, I would advise him to take it easy and allow his successor to resume his duties without any problem. He should not bother filing a court case because it would not help him much. He should give a chance to Tammy to empower himself as well. After all, I believe he has made some savings well enough to sustain him for the rest of his life.
References
Moran, J.J. (2010) Employment law: new challenges in the business environment. 5th Edition.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall Publishers.
