Summary Of Discriminatory Cases
1. The plaintiff was constructively discharged because the working environment was not favoring on her. She was constantly abused by both her supervisor, Brewer and an assistant store manager, Mais. She forwarded her case to different mangers but no investigation was done nor disciplinary action was taken against the victims. When the harassment she was undergoing exceeded beyond her level, she had no other option other than quitting the job.
2. The policy was just stated in the handbook but no one is following the way it was supposed to be. The policy clearly states that all sorts of discriminatory cases are intolerable and anyone found doing it will faced disciplinary action, depending the nature of his/her case. When the plaintiff submitted
several discriminatory case to different mangers, no one considered her problem and no investigation was done. Due to that the policy was physically indicated in the handbook but no one is there to implement it.
3. I think the punitive damage awarded by the jury is excessive and needs to be restated into a reasonable amount. It is clear that the store managers sexually harassed the plaintiff, and the top management level were reluctant to handle the case accordingly. Therefore, the jury could have awarded a reasonable amount that would be equivalent to the damage incurred by the plaintiff. Because the defendant did not committed a murder case to be charged with such a high amount, but only violated a policy thus the damage need to be restated.
4. I would have given both the managers and the employees training concerning about the store policy, and the disciplinary action one faces in case he/she violates it. Moreover. I would have informed the employees to call a certain phone number that deals with sexual harassment in case the mangers fail to solve the problem.
2. The policy was just stated in the handbook but no one is following the way it was supposed to be. The policy clearly states that all sorts of discriminatory cases are intolerable and anyone found doing it will faced disciplinary action, depending the nature of his/her case. When the plaintiff submitted
several discriminatory case to different mangers, no one considered her problem and no investigation was done. Due to that the policy was physically indicated in the handbook but no one is there to implement it.
3. I think the punitive damage awarded by the jury is excessive and needs to be restated into a reasonable amount. It is clear that the store managers sexually harassed the plaintiff, and the top management level were reluctant to handle the case accordingly. Therefore, the jury could have awarded a reasonable amount that would be equivalent to the damage incurred by the plaintiff. Because the defendant did not committed a murder case to be charged with such a high amount, but only violated a policy thus the damage need to be restated.
4. I would have given both the managers and the employees training concerning about the store policy, and the disciplinary action one faces in case he/she violates it. Moreover. I would have informed the employees to call a certain phone number that deals with sexual harassment in case the mangers fail to solve the problem.