Running head: EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE

Employment-At-Will Doctrine Name LEG 500 Date Professor

EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE Employment-At-Will Doctrine Employment-At-Will Doctrine is the common law rule that holds that whenever an employment relationship is of an indefinite duration, either party may terminate the relationship a anytime (Halbert, 2010). The new hired Chief Operating Officer (COO) needs to understand this law in order to prepare for an IPO (Initial Public Offering). Sadly the midsize company where the COO was hired has some issues that must be addressed before addressing the public. Here are the eight scenarios that the company and new COO currently face.

First scenario, John posted a rant on Facebook page in which he criticized the companys most important customer. Nowadays when working for a company, employees should know that there is no privacy when it comes to what you as individuals do or express on a social media, there is always somebody that will get the message and pass the information to a superior. In this case, John not only put the credibility of the company in jeopardy, but also his job and the trust of the client. Now the company not only has to do some damage control repair but also needs to review the policy regarding social media and let know the employees the consequences of posting negative comments about the companys client on personal blogs or social media. The company should implement something similar to what hospitals use to protect patient confidentiality called HIPAA that stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Word of mouth can make or break a business or company, since it does not look like the company has a policy that address this issue, John should be sanction or suspended. Employees must attend a new training on what information not to disclose outside of the company at the end of the training each employee has to sign the acknowledgment of information received and understand the possible results from non-compliance with this policy.

EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE Second scenario, Jim sent an email to other salesperson protesting a change in commission schedules and bonuses and suggesting everyone boycott the next sales meeting.

Another example of the lack of policies in the company, people have to understand their position in the workplace. Many times there are situations in which we disagree, either the pay is incorrect or the bonus is not what it was expected to be obtained by the assigned work, but unfortunately this problem should not lead to an email communication with a coworker, is not the best solution. In some companies there are steps that employees should abide. If Jim has a problem his duty is to solve it with a superior and not to discuss it with another employee. The boycott issue can be taken as a thread to the company, because that can bring bad publicity with current and future clients. This is another situation to be added and discuss in the new policy rules of the company. Third scenario, Ellen started a blog to protest the CEOs bonus, noting that no one below director has gotten a raise in two years and portraying her bosses as know-nothings and outof-touch. In this case is safe to say that not everybody is satisfied with the salary they receive for their jobs, Ellen is no different. Unfortunately when throwing an angry outburst to the public, the employee is responsible and must accept the consequences that such rage might bring. Depending on the severity of the vocabulary use to protest the CEO, Ellen should be either suspended and re-trained or fired for unruliness towards a superior. Fourth scenario, Bill has been using his company-issued BlackBerry to run his own business on the side. When a company property has been given to an employee for company usage, most companies indicate that and also warn the employees private use of such property is not allowed. By evaluating the pattern of this company it is unsure if that was the case here for Bill. If company specified the way of handling company property, then Bill can be subject to a

EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE suspension and/or may have to make payments of expenses incurred with the Black-Berry, now if company failed to give proper instructions regarding the use of company property, then they can give a warning and give the necessary instructions so the issue is not repeated.

Fifth scenario, the secretaries in the accounting department decided to dress in black-andwhite stripes to protest a memo announcing that the company has installed key logger software on all company computers. When the key logger was approved to be installed in the company is assumed that the company had a meeting to report what was going to happen. Also in that meeting was due to explain the reason why the software was being installed and the consequences for those who would not accept the new modality. So after gathering secretaries who are boycotting and explain that they have to accept the new rules or the company will be forced to give them a written reprimand and/or dispose of them for insubordination. Sixth scenario, after being disciplined for criticizing a customer in an email (sent from his personal email account on a company computer) Joe threatens to sue the company for invasion of privacy. This situation is similar to Bills issue with the company Black Berry, the only difference is that in this case a company client was indirectly attack by an employee. Joe needs to understand his obligations with company property, and even when he used his personal email, he still criticized a client using companys computer. Seventh scenario, one of the department supervisors requests your approval to fire his secretary for insubordination. Since the secretary has always received glowing reviews, you call her into your office and determine that she has refused to prepare false expense reports for her boss. This is a case of harassment at work, the supervisor is using his power to either get what he needs or get her fired. If the secretary has received glowing reviews she should be a candidate to be promoted, not as a pay to keep her mouth shut, but to recognize her loyalty to the company.

EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE

On the other hand the supervisor should be demoted, since he is not a trusted person to have in a managerial position. The supervisor must face week suspension with no pay and a mandatory training of companys policies when he comes back. Eighth scenario, Annas boss refused to sign her leave request for jury duty and now wants to fire he for being absent without permission. State laws require employers to give employees time off to serve on a jury (Nolo.com, 2013). Employers cannot refuse to allow and employee to assist to their civic duty. Employees are protected by law in most states and the company or Annas boss can get in trouble like it happened in Texas, where an employer was arrested for firing an employee that went to jury duty (Nolo.com, 2013). After reviewing all the scenarios is clear that this company have to implement some new policies and let know all the employees by meetings, trainings and on written form where the staff returns a signed copy. A suggestion to implement a Whistleblower Policy that according to Halbert, says that an employee can call out another employee for unethical or illegal act (2013). Whistleblower policies should have three basic components: An anticipation that employees inform inside and in good faith suspected legal/ethical disobedience concerning the organizations operational and substantive company practices; A report of the progression for private and anonymous reporting; and A guarantee of security for the employee against retaliations, oppression or retribution by the business, to support and allow this process. Is believe that if this is applied to the company there will be a good outcome for this company.

EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL DOCTRINE References Ferrell, O.C. & Linda (2010). Business Ethics. Cengage Learning: Mason. OH. Halbert, T. & Ingulli, E. (2010). Law and Ethics in the Business Environment. Cengage Learning: Mason, OH. Nolo for the Law. (2013). Taking time off for Jury Duty. Retrieved from: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/taking-time-off-jury-duty.html