Executive Summary
This report explains the concept of employment at will Doctrine. The theoretical framework is used to analyze this issue by taking into consideration the state policies as well. This report also has the examples of this concept. The given issues have been analyzed as well. The report involves a midsize company as example
Introduction
Employment at will doctrine states that every employee is free to maintain the relationship with the firm. Either employee or the employers can never be bound to work against their will through any forced contractual arrangement. The relationship between the employer and the employee is never of conclusive period (Ferrell & Linda, 2010)
The employment at will approach has been verified by the law and by the actions of different apex courts as well. However, due to the unequal negotiations in the employment process, the process of employment at will always favors the management of the firm. It is the result of unequal bartering that labor union and other pressure groups regarding employee rights are formed with in the organization. This doctrine of free will increases the costs of the management as well. The employees are offered the necessary job security by the companies and the company has always a slight more power over the employees. The employees can be withdrawn from their job even if they don’t want to quit.
I have been appointed as the Chief Operating Officer at the firm and one of my tasks is to setup an initial public offering. The organization is facing some issues and these issues need to be resolved before any public announcements. The issues faced by the organization are discussed below
First Issue
An employee working with the organization posted on his Facebook page in which he criticized the major client of the organization and used offensive words. It is law that any person holding any representation to labor unions can never be terminated on this act. The clients are an asset for the company as they bring in the business. Similar is the case with the major client of the company and the company always deals the clients in a nice way. The action of John can be criticized as he has not spoken at any necessary platform either in a formal meeting or client negotiations. He has criticized the client over the internet. Therefore, in a good faith of the organization and to maintain healthy relationship with the clients, John can be terminated from his current capacity. This choice is also backed by the Ethics of care. The organizations that do not value their clients turn to be awful examples.
Second Issue
The manager of Anna first declined her leave request from jury and now wants to fire her due to her action of absence. I will never suggest firing her as it is against her basic rights. The state law protects the interest of the employees in this regard. If a company does not grant leave from the jury, it can be fined and the employee can sue it in court. The right to sue is given by few states. The situations like these can lead to the whistleblowing within the organization. I will decide to keep Anna working with the organization and this decision will be backed by Ethics of Deontology. It is illegal to fire her as the administration of jury is responsibility of all and anyone can willingly withdraw. The laws of state also give the right of taking time off from the jury service (Nolo, 2013)
Third Issue
A supervisor at the office wants my help to fire her secretary by putting the charges of insubordination. I called her in my office. Her past career was sparkling and she has performed audits. Her boss has forced her to prepare false expense reports. The decision of firing her is illegal. Sarbanes Oxley Act protects her interest and her act of whistleblowing. She has not helped her supervisor in an illegal activity and the Ethics of Deontology supports her staying with the organization.
Whistleblower Policy
The recommendations made to the CEO will also include guidelines on the following whistleblowing arrangements:
- The necessary steps should be taken to ensure the moral education of the employee to the moral concerns.
- It should be ensured that employees will be supported in performing their moral duties
- The employees should have channels to report the pressures they feel that pull them in immoral acts.
The main focus of the whistleblowing recommendations is that there should be internal channels to report the compelling to the wrong doings. Such instances should then be analyzed and controlled with the collaboration of the whistleblower with an analyst.
Policy of the State
The forty two states of US and the Columbia District follow the federal rule for the employment at will doctrine as of 2000. However there are certain exceptions discussed below
- Different companies don’t have a written contractual arrangement, but the approaches are communicated to the employees in an informal way or orally. These approaches are regarding the code of conduct and the actions that lead to the withdrawal from the employment positions. These contracts are implied contracts and are valued by 38 states throughout the country.
- There are 11 states that have another exception of covenant of good faith. The courts in these states require a valid cause to terminate the employees. It protects the interest of the employees and lead to their motivation as well. The employees are never terminated just to avoid their retirement benefits.
Real World Example
Ed B. was an employee with M&H Aluminum and was performing the role of sales delegate. The workers handbook at the company mentioned a trial of 90 days before permanent employment. Ed passed the probationary period and was selected as a permanent employee at the firm. The firm fired Ed after two months of the probationary period. Ed utilized the employment at will laws and sued the organization. He used workers handbook as a proof. This document had the policies of his former employer. Ed proved that his termination was against the law and won the case. The counselor of Ed proved in the trial that M&H has not stick to the guideline in their handbook of workers. They did not utilize employment at will principles in the termination of Ed and it was unlawful. M&H failed to provide reasonable explanations and justifications.
The final verdict of the court was to pay $740,000 to Ed. This amount was anticipated by the regular wages of the employee from termination date to the retirement age along with the profits at savings. This penalty to M&H was in response to the breach of a contract.
Conclusion
The employees working with the organizations and recognized as freely employed then any terminations without the proper justifications lead to the penalties for the employers. The purpose is to serve the rights of the employees. It is evident from the above example as well. There is a federal law in place for the protection of the employee interest. The local courts of the states also have their mechanism to serve the purpose. All these laws disapprove firing of employees on lame grounds of sex, religion, ethnicity and race etc.
References:
Halbert , T., Ingulli, E. (2010). Law and Ethics in the Business Environment. Cengage Learning: Mason, OH.
Ferrell, O.C., Linda. (2010). Law and Ethics in the Business Environment. Cengage Learning: Mason, OH.
Nolo, (2013). Taking time off for Jury Duty. Retrieved on 27 October 2014 from: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/taking-time-off-jury-duty.html
