Legal Issues in Reduction of Workforce Simulation

Running head: LEGAL ISSUES IN REDUCTION OF WORKFORCE SIMULATION

Legal Issues in Reduction of Workforce Simulation

Scott

University of Phoenix

Introduction

Fast Serve, Incorporated is a $25 million company whose main product is direct marketing of branded sports apparel. They have recently decided to end their online retail outlet. Because of this draw down, they must also reduce their workforce. For this simulation, they must decide to layoff 3 employees out of the 5 employees in the simulation. Beside work productivity, reliability, skill sets, educational background and their employment status, Fast Serve Inc. must also make their decision based on current employment laws. (University of Phoenix, 2008)

The first employee under consideration is Carl Haimes. He's a hard-working productive employee, with few on the job employees. He has been complaining of sexual harassment at work by the accounts manager. His sexual orientation is homosexual and he has complained of harassment from a colleague, Ben an accounts manager. Current federal law does not protect individuals from discrimination due to sexual orientation. “Sexual Orientation Discrimination the courts have not interpreted Title VII to prohibit discrimination against employees based on their sexual orientation, or whether they are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or heterosexual.” (Reed, Shedd, Morehead & Corley, 2005) However, current federal law does protect individuals from working in a hostile work environment. “Another type of sexual harassment is the hostile work environment, one in which coworkers make offensive sexual comments or propositions, engage in suggestive touching, show nude pictures, or draw sexual graffiti.” (Reed, Shedd, Morehead & Corley, 2005)

The next employee under consideration for termination is Brian Carter. Brian is an average employee who was responsible for the unique design of their now defunct website. Brian was recently diagnosed with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and as a result has been increased absenteeism. The American Disabilities Act protects employees with disabilities from being terminated solely for their disability. “Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.” (EEOC, 2008) However the laws do not protect an employee from termination if their skill sets are no longer required. “The ADA does not require employers to hire the unqualified disabled, but they must make reasonable accommodation so disabled employees can succeed in the workplace.” (Reed, Shedd, Morehead & Corley, 2005)

Sarah Boyd has been a loyal employee of Fast Server for the past 15 years. Employment law that may protect her is the laws against age discrimination. “The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age.” (EEOC, 2008) Fast Serve no longer requires Sarah Boyd's skills and therefore can terminate her employment based on no longer having a need. “It prohibits employment discrimination against employees ages 40 and older, and it prohibits the mandatory retirement of these employees.” (Reed, Shedd, Morehead & Corley, 2005)

Nora Manson is an overall good employee with a good performance record. However, recently her production has decreases as she has counseled other employees on their discrimination issues with Fast Serve. As an African American employee, Nora is protected by the Anti-discrimination act. “Title VII prohibits race and color discrimination in every aspect of employment, including recruitment, hiring, promotion, wages, benefits, work assignments, performance evaluations, training, transfer, leave, discipline, layoffs, discharge, and any other term, condition, or privilege of employment. Title VII prohibits not only intentional discrimination, but also practices that appear to be neutral, but that limit employment opportunities for some racial groups and are not based on business need.” (EEOC, 2008) Although her work productivity has slipped slightly lately, she has proved her value to the company lately by saving two accounts. (University of Phoenix, 2008)

The final employee under consideration for a layoff is Jenny Mills, a contract employee who recently became