(Solved)1. Alex is an accountant working for Z-Corp. While at his

1. Alex is an accountant working for Z-Corp. While at his high school reunion, his best friend Bob mentions that ABC Company is looking for a good accountant and would be offering good benefits. Bob is actually the hiring manager for the position. When Alex expressed interest, they conducted an informal interview. Bob stated that the job would be Alex’s if he wanted it and that ABC Company had a very low turnover rate, usually keeping employees until retirement. The job required Alex to move his family to a new city which was 100 miles away in a different state. Alex accepted the position, and agreed to begin work on July 1, 2015. When he started, Alex went through orientation, which included reading and signing off on an employee handbook. The employee handbook contained a probationary period policy of 90 days and a progressive disciplinary action policy. As ABC Company’s operations grew, Alex’s department increased to include 5 other accountants. The department also gained more responsibility. In July of 2016, Alex’s daughter was diagnosed with a medical condition that required Alex to miss work to help care for her flare-ups and attend doctor appointments. He requested and was approved for Intermittent FMLA. While his daughter was settling into treatment, Alex has missed an average of one day of work each week. On September 5, 2016, Alex was called into the HR office and informed that his employment was being terminated effective immediately. Alex expressed surprise and asked for the reason of the termination. He was informed that he was an at-will employee and the Company was not required to disclose a reason for the termination.

Name 2 theories the employee might use to show that the termination was not valid because he was not an “at-will” employee. Explain why each of these 2 theories apply in this situation.


Alice works as a car salesperson. Her compensation is mainly based off commissions. Alice worked for her employer for 8 years. She had always worked 30 hours per week and worked the lucrative days of Wednesday through Saturday each week. There have been some changes in management at her company. Her employer suddenly changed her working arrangements such that she was only working 20 hours per week and her schedule was shifted to Sunday through Wednesday. They moved some of the newer hired men who had been with the company less than one year to the Wednesday through Saturday time slots. These changes resulted in a serious reduction in commissions and opportunities. Alice did not agree to the scheduling changes and brought this disagreement to her management. Management stated that changes were being made for all employees, and that the new employees needed to work on high volume days so they could get experience. Alice’s supervisor even stated that a lot of the new hires were men with families to support and they needed more hours. Alice was told that she should be more of a team player and accept the changes. Alice decided to use the vacation time she had accrued to take 2 weeks off to think about the situation before making a decision. Management approved the vacation time. The day Alice was to return, she informed management that she could not accept the scheduling changes, and they needed to change it back. The company treated this decision as a voluntary resignation and terminated Alice’s employment.

What are potential liability issues for the company based on these facts? Explain how each liability issue could apply in this situation.

Expert Answer

Answer to 1. Alex is an accountant working for Z-Corp. While at his. . .


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *