Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Business Law 8th Ed Chap002
Business Law 8th Ed Chap002
Business Law 8th Ed Chap002
2-3
Stare Decisis and Precedent (1)
Stare decisis (the thing decided)
Elements, role of Opinions (maj/concurrence/dissent)
Balances stability/predictability and evolution of law
Liberal v. Conservative as applied to judging
Federal court system
Reverse funnel: trials, appeal 1(right), appeal 2 (cert.)
100 district courts, 13 circuit courts of appeal, 1 Supreme
Court
Reasons to grant cert (certiorari)
2-4
Stare Decisis and Precedent (2)
State court system same template
Trial court intermediate court of appeals state
supreme court
Interplay between states and feds
Hierarchy: Constitution > statutes > common law
Bill of Rights + 14A
State decisions on state law final, unless US
Constitution violated
US Supreme Court decisions are final
2-5
Understanding the Case Parties
Key Terms Meaning
Plaintif One who brings a civil action in court
2-6
Understanding the Case: Information
2-7
Prima Facie Case (on the face of it)
Cause of action: Right provided by law for a
party to sue for remedies when that right is
violated
Prima facie case: Presentation of evidence that
fits each element of a cause of action
Demonstrates plaintiffs claim to a cause of action
Requires defendant to answer and defend claim(s).
2-8
Employment-at-Will Concepts (1)
At-will employment: Employment relationship
where there is no contractual obligation to
continue for an agreed time.
Agreement renews itself every second, until it doesnt
Either party may terminate, without liability to the
other
Other types of employment relationships include
government employment, terms of a collective
bargaining agreement, or individual contracts
that define terms and duration.
2-9
Employment-at-Will Concepts (2)
2-10
Exceptions to the At-Will Doctrine
Violation of employment law: e.g., race discrimination or
retaliation motivated the termination
Bad faith or malicious termination may violate public
policy (other law, legal right)
Breach of some other implied contract term (e.g.,
handbook terms that limit employer discretion)
Breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing (CA and a few other states)
Termination in violation of the doctrine of promissory
estoppel
2-11
Public Policy Exception
Public policy: Legal concept intended to ensure
that no person lawfully do that which may
injure the public or damage the public good
Whistle-blowing
Federal Whistleblower Statute
Whistleblowers Protection Act
State protection
2-12
Retaliatory Discharge
Terminations in response to an employee
exercising rights provided by law
E.g., filing a claim charging discrimination
Limited constitutional protections (recurring
theme)
State action no free speech in the private sector(!)
A government employer is prohibited from terminating
a worker or taking other adverse employment action
against a worker on the basis of the workers
engaging in constitutionally protected activities
2-13
Retaliatory Discharge: Prima Facie
Case
2-14
Implied Contract Exception
Implied contract: An unexpressed contract term
created by words or conduct of the parties
Employee Handbook statements may imply
termination only for just cause
Other provable conduct that suggests limitation on
employers at-will discretion.
Melott v. ACC Operations, Inc.
2-15
Implied Covenant of Good Faith and
Fair Dealing Exception
Implied contractual obligation to act in good faith
in the fulfillment of each partys reasonable
contractual expectations
The court examines the parties actions to
ascertain whether termination demonstrated bad
faith (e.g., termination to avoid paying bonus
earned, but due if employed at year-end).
Narrowly construed most risks do not qualify,
and only a few states recognize this claim
Case: Guz v Bechtel National, Inc.
2-16
Promissory Estoppel Exception: Prima
Facie Case; other statutes of note
2-17
Constructive Discharge
Constructive discharge: Occurs when
conditions so intolerable the employee has no
reasonable alternative but to end the
employment relationship
Employer may be seeking to make worker leave
voluntarily to avoid wrongful discharge claim
Courts require new burdens to be substantial
Paloni v. City of Albuquerque Police Department (no)
Nassar v. Univ. of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at
Dallas (yes)
2-18
Other Restrictions on At-Will Doctrine
The Worker Adjustment and Retraining
Notification Act (WARN)
Requires that employers with over 100 employees
must give 60 days advance notice of a plant closing
or mass layoff (as defined in statute) to affected
employees
Exceptions for faltering business seeking capital;
sudden, dramatic, unexpected business changes; or
certain natural calamities
Cos. sabotage fear may 60-days severance
2-19
Other Exceptions to At-Will Doctrine
Wrongful Discharge Based on Other Tort Liability
Tort of outrageous conduct
Tort claim for emotional distress
Tort action of defamation
Wrongful invasion of privacy
2-20
Employment Discrimination Concepts:
Disparate Treatment (1)
Concepts common to most discrimination
claims: analyses are similar. Protected
characteristics also have unique features or
issues (covered in specific future chapters)
Generally two types of discrimination claims:
Disparate treatment: Treating similarly-situated
employee or applicant differently because of a
characteristic covered by Title VII.
Intentional acts: e.g., Mexicans need not apply
2-21
Employment Discrimination Concepts,
Disparate Treatment: Prima Facie Case
2-22
Employment Discrimination Concepts,
Disparate Treatment: Defenses
Employers defense
Legitimate, Nondiscriminatory Reason Defense
Employees counter legitimate, nondiscriminatory
reason is a mere pretext for the employer to
discriminate.
The Bona Fide Occupational Qualification
Defense: Permissible discrimination if legally
necessary for employers particular business
Very limited application and Never in Race cases
Case: Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Company
2-23
Employment Discrimination Concepts,
Disparate Impact
Disparate impact: Discriminatory effect of a
facially neutral policy on a Title VII group
Facially neutral policy: specific workplace
policy that applies equally to all employees
Key distinction: neednt prove Intent to
discriminate; key consideration is differential
effect on protected group
Case: Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: built-in headwinds;
test results as servants, not masters
2-24
Employment Discrimination Concepts:
Disparate Impact
Screening device: Mechanism used to separate
applicants from the general pool of candidates
Four-fifths rule: Minority must do at least 80
percent (four-fifths) as well as majority on
screening device or presumption of disparate
impact arises (see business necessity defense,
next slide)
Subjective or objective criteria may qualify
2-25
Employment Discrimination Concepts:
Disparate Impact
Pre-employment interviews
Employment applications
The business necessity defense: Defense to a
disparate impact case based on the employers
need for the policy/device as a legitimate
requirement for the job
Test validation
Employee rejoinder: less discriminatory policy or
screening alternatives exist
2-26
Other Defenses to Employment
Discrimination Claims
The employees evidence is not true Plaintiff
burden of proof to establish > 50% probability
(No) The employers bottom line comes out
correctly
Statute aimed at individuals, not groups
Case: Connecticut v. Teal
2-27
Other Common Concepts
Reasonable Accommodation: employer duty in
Title VII religious discrimination claims, and
under Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
Upper limit: undue burden on employer
Extent of duty varies between religious and disability
accommodations
Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: must
complete EEOC administrative process before
seeking judicial review of agency decision
2-28
Exhibit 2.9 - Employment Discrimination
Remedies
2-29
Employment Discrimination Remedies
2-30
Employment Discrimination Remedies
2-31
Management Tips
Most employment relationships begin and end
without legal implications
But when they dont, its expen$ive
Prevention beats cure
Employers are always allowed to hire the best
person for a job
Claimants must always be qualified for the job
Employees must not face retaliation from their
employers
2-32