Employment At Will Doctrine Summary
Employment-at-Will Doctrine
Assignment 2
Ebony Hill
Course Name: LEG500
Date: February 9, 2015
Executive Summary As a recently-hired Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) in a midsize company preparing for an Initial Public Offering (“IPO”), I quickly discovered multiple personnel problems that require immediate attention. I have provided some recommendations on how to resolve these problems, in light of the employment-at-will doctrine and the current state of whistleblower laws.
The Employment-at-Will Doctrine & the Company’s Personnel Challenges
Employment-at-will The text discusses the employment-at-will doctrine as many states still perceive the doctrine, which in my opinion is summarized by Harlin’s quote within the chapter, “the right …show more content…
In analyzing the three exceptions that could be made to the employment-at-will doctrine, it is clear that John’s actions are not protected by any of the exceptions to the doctrine. When John decided to post his opinions on Facebook, it became public information (Halbert, 2012) thus he does not have an expectation of privacy that he can claim and the company can use it as a cause for termination. As COO it is important to protect all relationships and act in the manner that is best for the overall good of the company. In weighing the actions and potential consequences of the incident, losing the company’s most important customer would be more detrimental than making the decision to firing John. While a company would want employees to feel as though they can express themselves without fear of consequences, it is also important for employees of a company to understand that personal feelings and thoughts should not jeopardize relationships between staff, customers, clients, etc. The firing of John would be supported by the deontology ethical theory. The premise of the deontology theory is that “each person has the right to be treated with respect as the equal of every other, and that each person has the corresponding duty to treat everyone else with respect as an equal” (Halbert, 2012, p.18). In this scenario, John does not treat the customer with any respect; evidenced by his carelessness to post his criticizing thoughts on such a public site as Facebook. Following the deontology ethical theory supports the decision to fire him. Additionally, even though no cause would be needed according to the employment-at-will doctrine, I do believe it would be beneficial for the company in the future to establish online posting policies within some type of employee guide that would prevent any questioning of consequences in the
Assignment 2
Ebony Hill
Course Name: LEG500
Date: February 9, 2015
Executive Summary As a recently-hired Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) in a midsize company preparing for an Initial Public Offering (“IPO”), I quickly discovered multiple personnel problems that require immediate attention. I have provided some recommendations on how to resolve these problems, in light of the employment-at-will doctrine and the current state of whistleblower laws.
The Employment-at-Will Doctrine & the Company’s Personnel Challenges
Employment-at-will The text discusses the employment-at-will doctrine as many states still perceive the doctrine, which in my opinion is summarized by Harlin’s quote within the chapter, “the right …show more content…
In analyzing the three exceptions that could be made to the employment-at-will doctrine, it is clear that John’s actions are not protected by any of the exceptions to the doctrine. When John decided to post his opinions on Facebook, it became public information (Halbert, 2012) thus he does not have an expectation of privacy that he can claim and the company can use it as a cause for termination. As COO it is important to protect all relationships and act in the manner that is best for the overall good of the company. In weighing the actions and potential consequences of the incident, losing the company’s most important customer would be more detrimental than making the decision to firing John. While a company would want employees to feel as though they can express themselves without fear of consequences, it is also important for employees of a company to understand that personal feelings and thoughts should not jeopardize relationships between staff, customers, clients, etc. The firing of John would be supported by the deontology ethical theory. The premise of the deontology theory is that “each person has the right to be treated with respect as the equal of every other, and that each person has the corresponding duty to treat everyone else with respect as an equal” (Halbert, 2012, p.18). In this scenario, John does not treat the customer with any respect; evidenced by his carelessness to post his criticizing thoughts on such a public site as Facebook. Following the deontology ethical theory supports the decision to fire him. Additionally, even though no cause would be needed according to the employment-at-will doctrine, I do believe it would be beneficial for the company in the future to establish online posting policies within some type of employee guide that would prevent any questioning of consequences in the