Mgt 3320 Human Resourcesmodule 5 Case Study You Cant Fire Me Check ✓ Solved

MGT 3320: Human Resources Module 5 Case Study: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy Guidelines and Rubric Overview: Following established company policy is very important. When discussing an issue or problem with an employee, a supervisor cannot "assume" that the employee understands the severity of the circumstances. When terminating an employee's employment, it is important to make sure that everything is connected and that appropriate warnings have been issued. Terminating someone for something that is not related can be questionable, unless a policy that has been clearly communicated to the employees has been violated.

There may be times, however, when it is acceptable to make exceptions to the rules, but this must be carefully managed as it can become a serious legal issue. Case Study 2: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy, in Chapter 13 of your text presents a story about an individual who had been a good employee but suddenly developed disciplinary issues. She developed an absentee problem and additionally refused to work on an overtime assignment. Prompt: To complete this assignment, you will review this case and evaluate the circumstances that led up to the termination.

You will examine her past record, her gradual increase of absences, and weigh that against the fact that she had a verified illness. You will evaluate the actual reason for the termination and determine whether these things should be taken into consideration as you decide what would be the “fair†thing would be to do, remembering that whatever accomodations are made for Hattie, should be extended to all employees. Specifically, be sure to address the following: · Identify the circumstances contributing to the termination. · Hattie was “genuinely†and “verifiably†ill. Determine whether this should make a difference compared to those who were not genuinely and verifiably ill and explain why or why not. · Assess whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to†about her absence problem.

Explain why this distinction is important. · Analyze why Hattie was actually terminated. Was the reason Hattie was terminated the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her? Why is this important? · Evaluate whether the termination was for a valid reason. · Determine whether a past record of being a “model†employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination and explain why or why not. · Evaluate whether policy was actually followed. Explain why this is important. · Argue whether or not you think Hattie should be reinstated. Support your position with references from the textbook or other resources.

Guidelines for Submission: ​ Your written analysis must be submitted as a Microsoft Word document, 2-5 pages in length, with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and any resources used must be cited in APA format. Instructor Feedback: ​ This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. Rubric Criteria Exemplary (100%) Needs Improvement (75%) Not Evident (0%) Value Contributing Circumstances Identifies the circumstances contributing to the termination. Identifies the circumstances contributing to the termination, but may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.

Does not identify the circumstances contributing to the termination. 15 Legitimacy of Absenteeism Determines whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill; and explains why or why not. Determines whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill, but may not explain why or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies. Does not determine whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill. 10 Communication Assesses whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to†about her absence problem, and explains why the distinction is important.

Assesses whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to†about her absence problem, but may not explain why the distinction is important, or may lack in Does not assess whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to†about her absence problem. 10 detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies. Reason for Termination Analyzes why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her; and explains why that is important. Analyzes why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her, but may not explain why that is important, or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.

Does not analyze why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her. 10 Validity of Reason for Termination Evaluates whether the termination was for a valid reason. Evaluates whether the termination was for a valid reason, but may lack in detail or clarity. Does not evaluate whether the termination was for a valid reason. 15 Past Record Determines whether a past record of being a “model†employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination and explains why or why not.

Determines whether a past record of being a “model†employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination, but may not explain why, or may lack in detail or clarity. Does not determine whether a past record of being a “model†employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination. 10 Following Policy Evaluates whether policy was actually followed, and explains why this is important. Evaluates whether policy was actually followed, but may not explain why that is important, or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies. Does not evaluate whether policy was actually followed.

10 MGT 3320: Human Resources Reinstatement Argues whether or not Hattie should be reinstated, supporting position with references. Argues whether or not Hattie should be reinstated, but may not support position with references or may lack in detail or clarity. Does not argue whether or not Hattie should be reinstated. 10 Mechanics No grammar or spelling errors that distract the reader from the content. All sources used are cited using APA Style, 6th ed.

Minor errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. All sources used are cited using APA Style, 6th ed. Major errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or errors made in citing sources using APA Style, 6th ed. 10 Total 100%

Paper for above instructions

MGT 3320: Human Resources Case Study Analysis: You Can’t Fire Me!
Introduction
In today's dynamic organizational environment, human resources management finds itself at the intersection of adhering to policy, legal frameworks, and ethical considerations. A specific case that exemplifies these complexities is the case of Hattie, an employee whose termination raises several pertinent issues. Hattie's case revolves around increasing absenteeism and her refusal to work overtime, leading to her dismissal. However, underlying factors such as her verified illness and past performance record warrant deeper scrutiny. This paper evaluates the circumstances surrounding Hattie's termination, assessing her health, prior work record, and the policies in place to determine the appropriateness of her dismissal.
Circumstances Contributing to Termination
Hattie's termination resulted primarily from her increased absenteeism and her refusal to accept overtime assignments. She had previously maintained a good attendance record, emerging as a reliable employee (Dewettinck & van Dijk, 2013). However, the change in her behavior could be traced back to her health issues, which later became verifiably acknowledged. While absenteeism can disrupt workplace productivity, it is crucial to understand the reasons behind it, especially when they stem from genuine illness (Wheatley, 2019). Thus, the circumstances contributing to Hattie's termination were her absenteeism and the context of her health issues.
Legitimacy of Absenteeism
Addressing whether Hattie's verified illness should be considered against employees who are not genuinely ill is critical. The Equality Act 2010 asserts that employees with disabilities should be provided with accommodations to ensure they can perform their jobs adequately (Lindsay et al., 2018). Hattie’s attendance issues arose from a legitimate medical concern, which differentiates her case from employees who might misuse sick leave or avoid work without cause.
In this context, the legitimacy of absenteeism becomes vital. It forms the foundation for evaluating whether terminations are fair or discriminatory (Bourke & Dillon, 2016). Although everyone must follow company policies, the uniqueness of Hattie's health issues necessitates a consideration for accommodations that ensure fair treatment.
Communication and Warnings Regarding Absenteeism
Understanding if Hattie was legitimately warned about her absenteeism is significant to this case. If she merely received informal discussions without documented warnings, it contrasts with the employer's responsibility to provide adequate forewarning before termination (Schmidt, 2016). In Hattie's case, formal written warnings, if they did not exist, might have left her unaware of the gravity of her absenteeism issues. This distinction is crucial because clear communication about performance expectations and warnings are fundamental to fair employment practices (Sullivan, 2018). Without documented warnings, terminating an employee can expose the company to legal ramifications.
Reason for Termination
Analyzing the reasons for Hattie's termination leads to a critical question: Was she discharged for her absenteeism, or was the communication surrounding it indicative of broader organizational problems? The actual termination may not have aligned directly with her stated performance issues (Robinson et al., 2020). Hattie's dismissal appears to relate more to her refusal of overtime work rather than the absenteeism issue alone. Misalignment between the reason for termination and the issues Hattie faced suggests a potential breach of fair practices (Pulakos et al., 2019) that could facilitate wrongful termination claims.
Validity of the Reason for Termination
Determining if Hattie's termination falls within valid disciplinary action carries heavy implications. For incidents of absenteeism tied to legitimate medical conditions, adequate policy provisions must be in place (McMahon & Bickerstaff, 2019). Given Hattie’s medical situation, it becomes necessary to assess whether she was given opportunities to remedy her performance issues rather than relying solely on strict attendance regulations.
Based on the information provided, it appears that the termination may not be considered valid. The lack of documented warnings and the genuine health circumstances surrounding Hattie's absenteeism suggest that the firm may have acted prematurely.
Past Record Consideration
Hattie’s history as a "model" employee called for consideration in the termination decision-making process. Employees with a strong performance track record differ significantly from those who have consistently underperformed (McShane & Von Glinow, 2018). When confronted with a sudden change in behavior or performance, management should weigh an employee's history against the issues leading to disciplinary action, reinforcing the concept of progressive discipline.
Policy Adherence
Assessing whether company policy was actually followed becomes essential in looking at this case. Policies related to absenteeism should not only exist in writing but also be communicated, enforced fairly, and enforced across the board (Noe et al., 2016). If Hattie was not made aware of the severity of her absences through formal warnings or if those policies were not consistently applied, this leads to unfair treatment and potential legal complications for the employer.
Reinstatement Argument
Debating whether Hattie should be reinstated hinges on the evidence of clear communication, past performance, and the context of her health challenges. From an ethical standpoint and based on the principles of effective human resource management, reinstatement seems justified. The adverse effects of wrongful termination extend beyond the employee to affect morale and trust within the organizational context (Tracey & Taneja, 2016). If reinstatement could result in bringing back a previously productive employee who fell into difficulties due to genuine pressing circumstances, it reflects values of compassion and fairness in workplace relationships.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Hattie’s case illustrates the necessity of adhering to policy, understanding employee circumstances, and the ethical obligation of organizations to accommodate health-related issues. A comprehensive assessment indicates that there were numerous flaws in her termination process, highlighting failure in communication, policy adherence, and fair treatment considerations. Reinstating Hattie appears to be the most humane and equitable course of action, fostering a positive organizational culture and aligning with best practices of human resource management.
References
1. Bourke, J., & Dillon, B. (2016). The diversity and inclusion revolution: Eight powerful truths. Deloitte Insights.
2. Dewettinck, K., & van Dijk, H. (2013). The HRM-performance relationship: Evidence from the public sector. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(3), 436-453.
3. Lindsay, S., Stinson, J., & McKeever, P. (2018). Perceived barriers to employment for youth with disabilities: A qualitative study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 40(16), 1885-1893.
4. McMahon, E., & Bickerstaff, T. (2019). A fair chance: Promoting fair treatment and promoting best practice in employment. Employee Relations, 41(5), 1077-1092.
5. McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2018). Organizational Behavior (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
6. Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2016). Fundamentals of Human Resource Management (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
7. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovick, M., & Schmidt, N. (2019). Development of a science-based performance appraisal system. Personnel Psychology, 52(2), 407-431.
8. Robinson, D., Judge, T. A., & Griffith, J. (2020). Employee turnover and retention. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 7(1), 423-474.
9. Schmidt, F. L. (2016). The future of personnel selection: The role of sample size and the manipulation of independent variables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(11), 1489-1499.
10. Sullivan, J. (2018). 10 steps to better business communication. Strategic Human Resource Leadership, 15(2), 219-242.