Recommendations recommendations for action in the

This preview shows page 8 - 10 out of 10 pages.

RecommendationsRecommendations for action in the case include efforts to address the problem with Mr. Piper and more transparent rules and policies regarding employment decisions made by managers in the organization. First course of action would be to address the situation with Mark and offer himanother position within the organization. The company may not honor the promise of a 50 percent raise. Colossal could increase Mark's salary and benefits by giving him some promotion. Mark has worked for the company for several years and may provide a valuable resource for building another aspect of the organization's operations. Offering Mark another position may reduce his desire to bring litigation against the company. He would represent the ethical choice of the company to maintain its psychological contract with all employees.The second course of action in the case is to ensure that the problem does not reoccur. It is possible that Mr. Griffin was within his rights to offer Mark a new employment contract. The organization may need to change how to approve these decisions. For instance, managers may need to seek approval for promotion decision making before offering it to the employee. By taking these steps, Colossal Corporation may prevent this problem to occur in the future. Colossal will also avoid similar legal issues resulting from a breach of contract.
TURNIP PLAZA HOTEL9ReferencesBurns, J. J. (2011). Respondeat superioras an affirmative defense: How employers immunize themselves from direct negligence claims. Michigan Law Review, 109, 657-681.Finkin, M. W., Velde, L. V., Corbett, W., & Befort, S. F. (2009). The proposed restatement of employment: Employment contracts: Termination. Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 13, 93-142.Gan, O. (2015). The justice element of promissory estoppel. St. John’s Law Review, 89(1), 55-100.Macpherson, D. A., & Stephenson, S. P. (2016). Assessing economic damages in wrongful termination cases. Journal of Legal Economics, 23(1), 31-48. Micheli, C. (2017). California must be specified in venue and choice of law employment contractprovisions. The University of the Pacific Law Review, 48, 937-947.Nield, D. (2013). Vicarious liability and the employment rationale. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 44(3/4), 707-723. doi: Rasmuben, A. (2014). The influence of face-to-face communication: a principal-agent experiment. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 22(1), 73-88. doi: 10.1007/s10100-012-0270-7Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Jones, K. S., Liao, H. (2014). The utility of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative rules, moral accountability, bandwidth-fidelity, and social exchange. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 159-185. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.10.011
TURNIP PLAZA HOTEL10Tomlinson, E. C., & Bockanic. W. N. (2009). Avoiding liability for wrongful termination: “Ready, aim,…fire!” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 21(2), 77-87. doi: 10.1007/s10672-008-9068-0Voyiakis, E. (2012). Rights, social justice, and responsibility in the law of tort. University of NewSouth Wales Law Review, 35(2), 449-469.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture