Employee A has been with Company X for two years. Employee A's spouse gave birth prematurely to twins. He requested leave to be with his spouse, which was granted. Employee A has been on leave for 11 weeks, and has asked to return to work, and to be paid the withheld salary from his 11-week leave. The previous department manager left the company during Employee A's leave. The new manager has agreed to Employee A's return to the previous job, at the previous rate of pay. But the manager has denied the request for the 11 weeks of withheld salary.
- Background: Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 is law passed that protects employees that need to go one leave to take care of a personal, family illness, or birth/adoption of a child. The law states that companies with 50 or more employees must offer unpaid leave to workers that have at least clocked in 1,250 hours and has at least 12 months of employment ("The Family and," 2000).
- Evaluation: Our Company has over 75 employees and as a result we comply with the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. Factors that must be measured to fully examine this given Situation: In order to fully offer a valid and full evaluation of this situation first we must determine the exact numbers of hours Employee A has worked within his last 12 months with our company. For the purpose of this report it will be assumed has worked the required hours to meet the standards for the FMLA. After review of Employee A case it is clear that the employee was in fact entitled to take up to 12 weeks off of unpaid leave. He will be allowed to return to his previous job, at the previous rate of pay, but has been denied the request for the 11 weeks of withheld salary.
- Violation: No violation of FMLA has occurred. The law states clearly that we must allow up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for an employee who needs to care for a new child. As long as they have at least worked 12 months or 1,250 hours within the last 12 months that he has worked for us. Our only obligations are to allow him the leave and return him to the same position at the same rate of pay upon return to work. If the same position is unavailable, we would have to provide the worker with a position that is equal in pay, benefits, and responsibility. Being that he is returning to his same job and rate pay we have met the above requirement.
Get your grade
or your money back
using our Essay Writing Service!
Employee B is 68 years old and has been with Company X for 42 years. During the annual performance review last month, it was determined that Employee B was doing "above average" work in the department. Employee B was denied a promotion due to age. A co-worker given the promotion, who is 32 years old, received a performance review of "adequate."
- Background: the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) makes it unlawful for any business from refusing to employ, dismiss, or otherwise show prejudice against any person over the age of 40 ("Facts about the," 2008).
- Evaluation: Our Company has over 75 employees and as a result we comply with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and since Employee B is 68 years old he/she is coved under this law.
- Violation: In order to fully know if a violation has in fact happened the HR department would request a full job audit of the position because by law we can reject a person based on their age if we can prove that a unreasonable risk to the public or the worker. For example I have a cousin who wanted to become an airline pilot but because of his age he was told no. When he looked into it he found out that ADEA doesn't apply because public safety out ways the rights of the individual. For the sake of the report we will assume that this is not one of the factors and that the above information and that is the only relevant issues at hand. After careful review of the above report it has been deemed that our company has indeed violated ADEA. We have over 20 employees and the employee is over 40 years of age. This means that we most comply with the ADEA in the mater. Employee B has "above average" performance reviews and was denied the promotion due to here age. The promotion went to a young co-worker who has "adequate" performance reviews. This shows a clear bias. Had both employees been equal in performance this would not have been such an issue. The fact that the a young person has gotten the promotion who has not performed as well as Employee B leaves no room to doubt that this is a very serious situation. We must act immediately by correcting this situation. The first must try to offer Employee B with either the promotion or a job that is about the same as the one that she was passed over on. Is that fails we need to try and offer her a deal. Retirement incentives or a straight buy out would work if as long as she waves her right to sue. Then our company must issue retaining of all staff members in management positions on how to treat older staffers fair and equally.
Always on Time
Marked to Standard
Applicant C requires the use of a wheelchair to move about due to paralysis of both legs. The position Applicant C applied for requires movement about the entire company offices, including using the elevator to access any of the seven floors in the headquarters building. In order for Applicant C to make use of the elevators, the key pads in two of the four elevator cars would have to be lowered four inches to be accessible. Applicant C was denied employment, and was told the denial was because his/her employment would cause undue hardship on Company X.
- Background: The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission states that "Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the "ADA") requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodation to qualified individuals with disabilities who are employees or applicants for employment, unless to do so would cause undue hardship." Yet, it clearly states,"....modifications or adjustments to the work environment..." are "reasonable accommodations" ("Facts about the," 2008).
- Evaluation: Our Ccompany is required to under law to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Applicant C requires the use of a wheelchair, but must have use to the whole building that the company. Applicant C would have be able to have use two elevators that would need to have physical changes made to them so that Applicant C could use them. Applicant C was informed that did not get the job because the accommodations would cause undue hardship on our company.
- Violation: A key point that must be addresses before being able to fully tell if a violation did in fact happen is to look into if the applicant was "otherwise qualified" for the job that was at hand. In this case the HR department would request a copy of the applicant's relevant employment history and skill sets to review if that matched up with the job at hand. For the sake of this report we will assume that the applicant was in fact qualified for the job. After careful review of the above report it has been deemed that our company has indeed violated ADA but not providing Applicant C reasonable accommodation. The law is very clear with regards to adaptations or alterations to the occupational settings. On the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website they say, "making existing facilities accessible" as a "reasonable accommodation" ("Facts about the," 2008). This means that unless our company can prove that this would severely put an undue hardship on our company either monetarily or with the over all daily work force production we must in fact make changes to the elevators or provide the applicant with the means/tool to use the elevators. Also it would be wise to check and see if the job that was applied for was still available or taken. If the job is still available it would be wise to give an offer of employment if the applicant is still the most qualified for the job. If the job is already filled it would be vital to prove that the person who got the job was more qualified than Applicant C.
The Family and medical leave act, . (2000, July 6). Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/fmlaada.html
Facts about age discrimination. (2008, September 8). Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/age.html
Facts about age discrimination. (2008, September 08). Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/age.html