Reduction In Force Case Study

HealthPartners employed Jennifer Bloom as a certified medical assistant at Coon Rapids Clinic from 2004 until 2012. Before her termination, she used FMLA leave twice for the birth of her two children.

Parties and their roles:. LaChance, director, Office of Personnel Management petitioner; Erickson et al Responded

In determining whether a genuine issue of the material fact whether a genuine issue of material fact occurs regarding the reasonableness of the requested accommodation, we first examine whether Turners facial presenting that her proposed accommodation is possible. If appellant has made out a prima facie showing, the load then shifts to prove a favorable defense, that the accommodations requested by Turner are unreasonable or would cause an undue hardship on the employer. In contrast, If Turner has satisfied her initial burden, Turners proposed accommodation seems practical. At this time, Hershey rotations policy is new one which had never been required of employees in Turners position. If Turner 's proposed accommodation would permit the new rotation program to endure, even though on a modified basis. Under Turners proposed accommodation, each inspector could continue to rotate on the hourly basis, with Turners, herself, rotating only between line 8 and 9. Hershey has not put up with that because this is not practical or

As you know I have been trying to meet with you to discuss your case with you since January of this year. Specifically, you had appointments scheduled for January 20, 2017, January 24, 2017, February 9, 2017, February 24, 2017 and, March 21, 2017. You failed to keep any of these appointments. The reason I wanted to meet with you was to explain why I was not interested in pursuing this case. I wanted to give you the respect of a face to face explanation of the issues I found in your medical records, which I believe will make it impossible to recover substantial compensation in this matter.

St. Mary's Honor Center VS. Hicks in 1993 presented issues pertaining to discriminating acts. St. Marys Honor Center is a halfway house in the state of Missouri. Melvin Hicks, the defendant, claimed that he was terminated for all the wrong reasons. The claim was made that when he was fired it was due to his race. In the case Hicks files a law suit for wrongful termination under Title VII for racial discrimination. Hicks track record with St. Mary's Honor Center before the events unfolded seen him as a contributing component of the organization. Prior to being fired, Hicks experienced issues with the new change in leadership. While employed with St. Mary's Honor Center the plaintiff

The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s disability claim. The appellant’s essential accommodation claim went to trial, but court excluded evidence regarding disability. The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual.

Mr. Bryce Zimpfer is a 53 years old employee of Palm Beach County, he has been with this employer for 16 years. Mr. Zimpfer is alleging that his employer is in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act 1967 (ADEA). The legal definition of discrimination is an employment decision making or working conditions that are unfairly advantageous (or disadvantageous) to a member or members of one protected group compared to members of another protected group.

The Reid v. Beard case appears to work for our client. The Reid v. Beard case is about prosecutorial misconduct and how the prosecutor made improper statements about the defendant (Reid v. Beard, 420 F. App'x 156 (3d Cir. 2011) (Westlaw).

In this case, Drake and Keeler could argue that they were wrongfully discharged because they are to be protected under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. Under the Section 7, it is described that employees, even non-union, are to be protected from termination in regards to concerted activity (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2012). When an action is taken by two or more employees to express a complaint or grievance relating to the conditions of employment under the employer's control (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2012). Drake and Keeler were acting in a concerted manner by walking off in protest the cold temperature at their workstations. The action they took was in order to bargain the issue in regards to their working conditions,

Facts of Case: Jarius Piphus was a freshman at a Chicago vocational high school. On January 23, 1974, during school, Piphus and other students were outdoors. The principal who went by unnoticed saw an irregular shaped cigarette being passed around between the students. The principal also believes that he smelled marijuana. He also noticed a pack of rolling papers being passed amongst the students. Once the students became aware of the principal they threw the cigarette in a nearby bush. The principal took the students to the assistant principal and ordered that they each be given a twenty-day suspension. The school principal kept Piphus out of the classroom for the remainder of the school day. During this time they tried to reach

In the case of Ferris v. Special School Dist. No. 1 (1973), the plaintiff, Barbara Ferris, a probationary teacher, brought action against Special School Dist. No. 1. Allegedly, the district denied Ferris due process regarding the termination of her employment. Barbara Ferris was not tenured; therefore, she was not guaranteed a renewal of her annual contract. The school may or may not renew the annual contract of a teacher at the board’s discretion, something the probationary teacher is aware of before accepting employment. In the case, it was stated any probationary school teacher will be reemployed for the next school year unless the school has provided the teacher

The reason the court concluded that the active coaching in the file didn’t render him unqualified for the qualification or thus not able to establish the prima facie case

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a government organization that shields representatives from different infractions, Sexual harassment is one of them in the working environment. As indicated by the EEOC inappropriate behavior is characterized as a type of sex separation that abuses Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is unlawful to victimize somebody premise of race, shading, religion, sex. Unwelcome lewd gestures, demands for sexual favors and other verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature constitute inappropriate behavior. While exploring claims of lewd behavior, EEOC takes a gander at the entire record. A determination

immediately responded by stating that “the nature of the emails does not dismiss the obvious violations of a prior court’s order”. The defense attorney tried to dismiss the claim and continued to questioned the witness.

The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered, the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.