ASSIGNMENT 2- Matthew Gyimadu

1. Did Karen do the right thing? What else might she have done?
Yes, Karen did the right thing by bring up the issue with the HR director. It was also excellent of
her to keep a detailed record of all the incidents that occurred to use as evidence. Another thing
that she could have done is talk to Joe, and make him aware that his behaviour towards her was
unwelcome (Filsinger 2020, 184). While she may have been afraid to do so because of his
position in the company, it would give her additional support for any complaints she lodged in
the future. Additionally, she could have made Joe’s supervisor aware of the issue, or even her
colleagues as a means of stopping the behaviour or having individuals that could testify at a
later point.

2. What should you do upon receipt of the letter?

Upon receipt of the letter the Directors should investigate the issue in a timely manner to help
preserve the effectiveness of the inquiry. Key to an effective investigation is making sure that it
is fair to all parties and done as confidentially as possible. I should ensure that anyone involved
in the investigation is unbiased and properly trained to handle the matter. It is important to also
hear both the accused and accuser’s side of the story and to interview witnesses (Filsinger 2020,
190). Given Joe’s position and influence with the company it may also be a good idea to place
him on a leave of absence with pay, until the investigation is complete.

3. What should your longer-term strategy be?

My longer-term strategy would be to establish policies and programs, and to create a culture of
safety in the workplace. The establishment of polices and programs is important as it is a
requirement for all workplaces under the OHSA. It is also important as it demonstrates the
company’s commitment to addressing allegations of harassment and to deterring such events
from happening at the workplace. I would also create procedures and an environment that
encourages workers to report workplace harassment without fear of repercussions or retaliation
(Filsinger 2020, 186). I would also make sure that all managers are familiar with the OHSA and
that the established policies are reviewed and updated periodically.

4. What are the arguments for and against dismissing Joe Bloom for cause?
There can be a number of arguments for dismissing Joe with cause. One, is that even though
there was a lack of progressive discipline, the severity of his conduct and his position as a
supervisor can warrant a dismissal for cause (Filsinger 2020, 183). There is also the consideration
of whether he can be rehabilitated, given his connections/position in the company and the
severity/length of his actions. Another argument for dismissing him for cause is that the
company wouldn’t want and underwhelming response to his actions to be viewed as
condonation, which could hinder the morale and workplace environment. Also, should Karen
not see appropriate action shoe could sue which would not only be costly to the company but
would tarnish its image
 There are also arguments against dismissing Joe for cause. One being that there was no
policies/process in place to address sexual harassment in the workplace. If Joe were to sue that
fact would come to light and would not only hinder our position, but could also have the
company penalized. There is also the issue of his personal relation with the owners and his
legacy in the company. Depending on the view of the owners of the situation Joe could very well
keep his position within the company (after attempting to have him dismissed) which could
potentially lead to other issues such as a toxic work environment or attempts at “revenge”
through means such as constructive dismissal.

5. What would a judge award in a wrongful dismissal case? Why?

Under a wrongful dismissal case a judge could use a number of remedies. Basic entitlement that
would be received are the salary/commissions/bonuses, benefits, insurance, pension, and stock
options for the period in which they were owed notice. The judge may also award punitive and
aggravated damages depending on the nature of the dismissal. Given that there was not harassment
policy in place, the dismissal could be see as “vengeful” in nature, and the pervasive negative views
that still exist around women that speak up against sexual harassment, these damage could be
significant.