Using both of the scenarios listed below and explain the best solution
for each. Include comments related to any ethical issues that arise.
You should locate at least one scholarly source from our Library or
one case that has been decided or is currently pending to support your
answer.
Scenario 1 – Discrimination
Packages Delivered Quick (PDQ) is a business specializing in delivering
packages overnight. PDQ operates several hubs for aircraft and trucks
within the United States. Andy Earl, a devout member of the Connections
religion, was hired six weeks ago as an aviation mechanic at the
PDQ
hub in Miami, Florida. The mechanics who work for PDQ are represented
by the Teamsters Union. For the purpose of this question,
assume that
the Connections religion is legally recognized. Since Andy lacks
seniority and most of the planes arrive and depart at night he was
assigned to the night shift, which required him to work on Friday
nights. Andy’s religion prohibits him from working from dusk on Friday
until dusk on Saturday, but he did not mention this during his
interview. After Andy was absent on two consecutive Fridays, his
manager issued him a written warning. Andy explained that because he
was a member of Connections. PDQ was required to accommodate him, which
means
giving him the day off. PDQ looked into finding a replacement in
order to accommodate Andy, but previous experience showed that using
part time and temporary employees as mechanics resulted in additional
expenses, increased mistakes and lower efficiency. The manager informed
Andy that he must work on Friday nights. Andy was terminated after
missing work on three additional Friday evenings. Andy sued PDQ,
claiming religious discrimination. PDQ defended claiming that Andy was
fired for excessive absenteeism and not for religious discrimination.
1. Is this a case of unfair discrimination?
2. How does the union factor into the result?
3. Will Andy succeed in his discrimination suit?
Explain your answers and support them with relevant scholarly sources.
Scenario 2 – Agency
Pierce Packaging (Pierce) hired Billy Bryant as the Purchasing Manager.
Billy was authorized to enter into contracts to purchase materials for
Pierce Packaging. On many occasions, Billy contracted to purchase
pallets from Pallet One Industries. Because of a downturn in the
economy, Pierce Packaging terminated Billy’s employment on June 30. On
July 9, Luke contacted Pallet One to purchase materials on behalf of
Pierce;
however, Billy provided a new delivery address, accepted
delivery, wrongfully kept the pallets and resold them to a potential new
employer at a super low price. Pallet One was not aware that Pierce
terminated Billy. On July 15, Pierce provided written notice to
Pallet One Industries that
Billy had been terminated.
1. When was Billy’s express authority to act for Pierce effectively terminated?
2. Did Billy have authority to enter into the contract with Pallet One on July 9? If so, what type of authority did he have?
3. Is Pierce obligated to perform the July 9th contract?
4. What should Pierce have done differently?
Explain your answers and support them with relevant scholarly sources.
FYI:
TEXTBOOK
CHAPTERS ALONG WITH A CASE LINK AND CITATIONS FOR TEXTBOOK ARE UPLOADED PLEASE
REVEIW UPLOADS.
