The company, TFCBP, hired a forty-seven-year-old person, AL, for a warehouse position who was subject to a thirty-day prohibition period. The work performance was evaluated at the end of thirty days period by TFCBP and it decided not to retain AL. The person AL filed a case against the company TFCBP, alleging them of discrimination on the basis of age and race. The company TFCBP filed a summary of judgment motion. The performance of AL was presented as evidence to the court. The motion was granted. The appeal was filed by AL. To Find: The decision of the court in the absence of evidence presented to defend the case.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 3, Problem 3CT

Summary Introduction

Case summary:The company, TFCBP, hired a forty-seven-year-old person, AL, for a warehouse position who was subject to a thirty-day prohibition period. The work performance was evaluated at the end of thirty days period by TFCBP and it decided not to retain AL. The person AL filed a case against the company TFCBP, alleging them of discrimination on the basis of age and race. The company TFCBP filed a summary of judgment motion. The performance of AL was presented as evidence to the court. The motion was granted. The appeal was filed by AL.

To Find:The decision of the court in the absence of evidence presented to defend the case.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Annalise suffers from a mental illness but is nonetheless capable of working for the Office of Child Support in Wayne County. She was fired from her job when it was learned that she had misappropriated approximately $2,000 in state funds. Annalise filed a complaint with her union, claiming the DNR violated a state law against discriminating against someone because they suffer from a mental illness. The case went to arbitration, and the arbitrator concluded that Annalise had been dismissed without "just cause," because her acts were caused by her mental illness and were not “within her capacity to control." The county appealed the decision to a court. How should the court rule? a. The Court should reverse the arbitrator’s decision because the County’s dismissal of Annalise was not to discriminate against the mentally ill but because she knowingly misappropriated County money. b. The Court should void the arbitration agreement (meaning that the agreement is not…

Case6 Therien, an independent contractor, operated a trucking business. He drove one truck and hired drivers to operate the others. Therien was engaged in the business for several years and has been doing business with City Construction Company. Teamsters is a trade union within the definition of that expression in the Labour Relations Act. The City Construction Company entered into a collective agreement with the Teamsters’ Union requiring, as one of its terms, that all employees be union members. Therien agreed then to hire only union members for the operation of his truck. However, he declined to join the union personally because he wished to maintain his relation as an independent contractor in dealing with City Construction. He further claimed that, in the capacity of an employer in his own right, he was forbidden by the Labour Relation Code from participating in union activities. The union opposed his view, and because of the union’s threat to picket the City Construction, the…

Immar Medrano was employed as a journeyman electrician by Marshall Electrical Contracting, Inc. (MEC), in Marshall, Missouri. Medrano attended an electrician apprenticeship night class at a community college in Sedalia, Missouri. MEC paid Medrano’s tuition and book fees. Attendance at the course required Medrano to drive 70 miles round-trip. One night, when Medrano was driving home from the class, a drunk driver crossed the center line of U.S. Highway 65 and collided head-on with Medrano’s automobile. Medrano died in the accident. His wife and two children filed a workers’ compensation claim for death benefits against MEC. Are Medrano’s actions at the time of the automobile accident within the course and scope of his employment, thus entitling him to workers’ compensation benefits? Explain your answer.