Case 1- Palmateer v. lnternational Harvester Company iffi 85 ilt.2d 124,421 N.E.Zd 576 (1951)
Case Questions-
1. Is there a difference between the court's protection of an employee who reports a rape by a co-worker or the theft of a car, and an employee who is conrtantly reporting the theft of the company's paper clips aud pens?
2. Should the latter cmployee in the above question be protected? Consider that the court in Palmateer remarked that "the magnitude of the crime is not the issue here" It was the Goneral ,A,ssembly who ilecided that the theft of a $2 screwdriver was a problem that should be resolved by resort to the criminal justice system."
3. What are other areas of public policy that might offer protection to terminat€d workers?
Case 2 -Herawi v. State of Alabama, Department of Forensic Sciences 311 F. Supp. 2d 1ii5 (M.D.Ala. 2004)
Case Questions-
1. Arc you perruaded by the state's evidence that it had an individual r:f a different national origin who was reated similarly to Herawi? If l{ard (or other managers) treated eyeryone equally poorly perhaps fhere is no national origin claim. What if lYard's defense is
simpty thather poor treatment of Herawi had nothing to do with natio*al origin, but that she just really did not like Hewari, specifically? SIould that be &r acceptable defense and could it have saved the state's case?
2. The court explains tlat pretext may be ba.sed on comments depending on "whether their subs&nce, contsxt, and timing could permit a finding that the comments are causally related to the adve,rs€ employrnent action at issue"" What elemen8 would you look to in order to find pretext, if you were on a jrny?
3. The court explains that timing, alone, would not be enough to satisfu the causality requirement of retaliatory discharge. Given the facts of this ease, if you were in eharge of the departrnent, aild if Hewari truly were tot performing at an acceptable le.r,el and you
wished to terminate her after all of these circumstances, how might you have better protected the deparmlent from a retaliatory discharge claim?