Question HRM593 Week 1 Discussion 1 & 2 Latest 2018 May dq 1

HRM593 Week 1 Discussion 1 & 2 Latest 2018 May

dq 1

WEEK 1: EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL EXCEPTIONS AND LIABILITY

6868 unread replies.109109 replies.

Review the 10 cases presented for consideration in Question 2 (letters a – j) of the Chapter-End Questions in Chapter 2 (pp. 80-81 of the eBook).

For your first post, prepare a detailed response for one of the ten scenarios, explaining your conclusion regarding whether the scenario constitutes a violation of public policy or a breach of a covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Support your conclusion with legal analysis and reasoning. Explain whether any of the scenarios give rise to potential employer liability and what steps should have been taken to avoid the exposure. Then, comment and expand on the posts of the other class members.

dq 2

WEEK 1: CONTRACT AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES

8989 unread replies.114114 replies.

Over the past 20 years, employers began relying on part-time, temporary, and contract employees to reduce costs, increase flexibility and reduce benefit costs. Employees feel it is discriminatory for employers to exploit the labor market by using part-time workers and temps to keep labor costs down for one segment of the work while paying full value for another segment. In the past few years, numerous laws and tax changes have been proposed to try to regulate this area of the industry better.

Please review the “YouDecide” content which is located under the Week 1. We will begin our discussion by debating whether Karen is an independent contractor, or a full-time employee. Your first post should answer these two questions:

1. Do you feel that Karen is an independent contractor or an employee?
2. What is your rationale for this decision?

HRM593 Week 2 Discussion 1 & 2 Latest 2018 May

dq 1

WEEK 2: RECRUITMENT OF EMPLOYEES

5858 unread replies.121121 replies.

Let’s begin our discussion on recruitment by using a fact pattern from a litigated case. Cone Mills Corporation had several recruiting procedures that gave preferential treatment to applicants who either had family members or friends working for the company. One of these procedures was to give priority to applicants who had family members employed by the company. The other procedure entailed having an unwritten policy that walk-in applicants had to have renewed every two weeks. This created a situation where only those walk-in applicants who had friends or family in the company would renew their applications because they would be the only ones informed of the informal rule, which was not presented in any manual or policy. These recruiting procedures were challenged as being discriminatory towards blacks in general, especially black women, because the informal network responsible for recruiting new employees was unavailable to them. The company claimed that the procedures were not designated to be discriminatory, but rather, to create a loyal family atmosphere within the plant (Lea v. Cone Mills Corp., 3001 F. Supp. 97).

Should employers be able to recruit through employee referrals and word-of-mouth? Does the law allow for such a recruitment technique? What specific restrictions does Title VII place on an employer’s ability to recruit and hire? As part of this discussion, refer to the cases of EEOC v. Chicago Miniature Lamp Works and EEOC v. Consolidated Service System in Chapter 4.

dq 2

WEEK 2: AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.