Workplace Law scenario Analysis

Workplace Law scenario Analysis

Getting fired from your job can be a traumatic event. Not only do you lose your source of income but also your financial obligations, especially when faced with bills. It is, therefore, necessary for an employee to understand legal channels that may help them get compensated or get their job back. For employers, it is also essential to understand the laws in case an employee makes a lawsuit against you. The essay analyzes the laws that impact the employer and employee relationship and what channels that one party may use to gain legal support over the other.

First, it is essential to understand that an employee has all the legal jurisdiction to file a valid lawsuit against an employer. As the director of nursing, it is crucial to know that the lawsuit filed by Nurse Deb will put the hospital under the spotlight and will be of significant impact. As the director, i would start collecting evidence and claims that would help the hospital win the case. An employee’s attempt to sue the hospital does not necessarily mean that the court will rule in her favour. It is, therefore, vital to accumulate valid evidence and employees’ claims that would help in the case. The federal labour law of wrongful termination gives employees the power to report wrongful termination. However, for this to succeed, the employee must produce concrete evidence.

For Nurse Deb, it may not be much of a fight, but several pieces of evidence may work in her favour. First, the hospital knows and acknowledges that she does not support the idea of flu vaccination. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employee’s discrimination in workplaces.  Nurse Deb could argue out that she was discriminated against by her employer because of her personal believes and opinions. She may argue out that this was the driving force towards wrongful termination. Similarly, if the anti-vaccination movement is a registered legal movement, she may claim her liberty to making independent personal decisions without being criticized or discriminated. (Acharya et al.)

The law would support the hospital mandated procedure if she signed a contract with the hospital. If the hospital has an outlined policy of annual flu vaccination for its employees, then it is in legal favour. The hospital would claim that it fired Nurse Deb under breach of contract. The Labor Law on Breach of the contract states that if an employee signed an agreement stating certain aspects of the job, it might be considered a violation of the contract. Similarly, if the employees break the contact which they had signed with the employer, the manager has a legal jurisdiction to fire the employee. (Acharya et al.)

If the lawsuit is a success, the hospital should be prepared to meet all the directives given by the court of law. These may include offering Nurse Deb job back, paying compensation to her, or paying fines. The hospital should prepare itself to adjust policies with its employees to avoid the further filing of lawsuits from unsatisfied workers. The hospital could also adapt itself to appeal the court decision in case it rules in the nurse’s favour.

As the CEO of Premier Hospital, I would first write a letter to Joe Gomez acknowledging the unfair dismissal from work by the manager. I would then try to get him into settling the matter outside the court or legal proceedings by making offers like giving him his job back with better pay and working conditions. The next step would be to hold the manager accountable for negligence by jeopardizing the lives of other personnel and the dismissal of an employee under unfair and unclear claims. Finally, I would reach out to other employees to find out if there are other cases of exploitation or retaliation that have not been reported. (Acharya et al.)

The manager has broken various laws and should be brought to justice. First, the Employment Law under Workplace Safety clearly states that employees have the right to a workplace that is reasonably free of safety and hazards. The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sets and enforces national standards to ensure the safety and health of employees (Acharya et al.). The manager’s negligence of not wearing OSHA-approved filters jeopardized the life of other workers, which is a severe criminal offence.

Consequently, the managers move fire Joe after he had reported him was a grave violation of the law. The OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program protects the employees from retaliation for reporting violations of basic federal laws of safety, health, or security. It means that the manager broke two essential rules and may put the hospital in confrontation with the law. (Acharya et al.)

Even if Joe was a member of the local employment services union, it does not make the termination different. No employee irrespective of their membership to a union or not should be subjected to safety or health hazards in the workplace. Similarly, an employer cannot take adverse action against an employee, such as firing, demoting, denying promotion, or overtime for engaging in whistleblowing of an employer. According to the whistleblower laws of OSHA, an employee is free to report any cases of violations in workplaces and is decreed to federal whistleblower protection. It shows that the sacking of Joe was illegal. (Acharya et al.)

In conclusion, it is significant for both employees and employers to understand the primary Labor and Federal Rights laws that govern the employer-employee relationship. Both parties should be swift to report any cases of violation of law in a court of law.

References

Viral V. Acharya, Ramin P. Baghai, and Krishnamurthy V. Subramanian

The Journal of Law and Economics 2013 56:4, 997-1037