This meeting would cover Bassfield legally and the employees at Bassfield would appreciate the effort Wheatly made to keep Mary Alice and accommodate her condition. Store morale and public image of Bassfield would remain intact. Hey Jason I enjoyed your post on the dilemma at Bassfield. I agree with your stance on firing Mary Alice would be an act of discrimination. “In 2008, Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act, which overturned Supreme Court decisions that had reduced protections for certain people with disabilities such as diabetes, epilepsy, heart disease, autism, major depression, and cancer (Nickels, McHugh, & McHugh, 2019).” Bassfield faces legal issues either way they decide to handle Mary Alice’s employment. Firing Mary Alice without at least attempting to accommodate her could lead to a lawsuit. Allowing her to stay also creates a problem with past employees who were not hired due to failing a medical exam or becoming liable if she works and her condition becomes worse because of working at Bassfield. My overall suggestion was having Wheatly, Mary Alice, EEOC, and medical examiner sit down to discuss if she could work with her current condition in the Bassfield environment. They could also try to agree on ways to accommodate her or convince her that continue employment at Bassfield did not benefit her health. Overall Wheatly has a tough decision to make and needs to run every scenario in his mind before making a decision. He needs to weigh the possible outcomes to each possible decision and decide which one will disrupt business the least and continue Bassfield’s ability to serve their customers. References Nickels, W. G., McHugh, J. M., & McHugh, S. M. (2019). Understanding business. (12th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
- Fall '19
- Supreme Court of the United States, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Lists of United States Supreme Court cases, Mary Alice Ford