Assignment:
Part 1
Question 1. An employee was hired and began work on August 25, 2005. His fiancée unexpectedly went into labor on August 8, 2006. The employee notified his supervisor of the situation and requested to use several days of accrued paid leave. The request was granted. The employee returned to work on August 16, 2006. The child had been born several months premature and would remain in the neonatal intensive care unit for at least three months. The fiancée was using her own leave while their child was in the hospital. The employee informed the employer that he would need to take FMLA leave to care for the child when the child returned home in mid-November of 2006. The employee was promptly terminated. Did this termination violate the FMLA? Why or why not?
Question 2. A delivery truck driver was in the Army National Guard. He was required to report for drills one weekend per month and for at least two weeks in the summer. His requests for time off were routinely met with resistance by managers. He was told that he should get out of the National Guard and that it was placing a burden on others to cover his shifts. At his supervisor's insistence, the driver had his weekend obligations changed to Wednesdays, his usual day off. However, after 9/11, the National Guard no longer allowed this and he had to report on weekends. When the driver informed his employer that he would be taking time off to fulfill his two-week summer Guard duty, he was told again to "get out" of the Guard. He was given the time off only after the intervention of the HR department. While the driver was away on military duty, an incident was reported in which the driver had hugged an employee of a nursing home that was on his delivery route and left a bruise on her arm. Although the employee said that he was "just fooling around," the nursing home insisted that he not be allowed to deliver to them. The driver was informed on his return from summer drills that he had been terminated based on this incident. The driver sued. What should the court decide? Why?
Part 2
Question 1. In addition to their normal hours of work, electronic technicians at a power plant were required to remain on call from 4:30 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. on Monday through Friday and for twenty-four hours on the weekend. While on call, the technicians typically responded to three to five alarms per evening. Each alarm took, on average, about forty-five minutes of work. Technicians were expected to respond to alarms within fifteen minutes. Failure to respond was grounds for discipline. The technicians were given pagers, but these did not work properly, forcing the technicians to remain at or near home. The technicians were paid for the time they spent responding to problems, but not for the remainder of the on-call time. The technicians sued for unpaid overtime. What should the court decide? Why?
Question 2. A human resource manager earned an annual salary of $41,548. She was promoted to a different position paying $45,600. Her replacement, a male, was hired from outside the company at $62,500. The company explained that the higher pay was because the male was the most qualified candidate available for the job and he had demanded a higher salary. The woman sued for pay discrimination under the Equal Pay Act. What should the court decide? Why?
Part 3
Question 1. An employee got hurt on the job, was unable to work for a period of time, and received workers' compensation benefits. His employer did not deduct the employee's share of health insurance premiums from his worker's compensation payment or otherwise notify the employee as to how he should continue to make contributions toward his health insurance. The health insurance was maintained by the employer for six months. Thereafter, the employee was informed that his health insurance coverage had been terminated. The employer claimed that the reason for the termination was nonpayment of the employee's premiums and, thus, no COBRA notification was required. Did this employee experience a qualifying event? Were his COBRA rights violated?
Question 2. An employee's wife had a liver disease and eventually received a transplant. The employer is a relatively small company that has a self-insured health plan. The wife's numerous treatments caused the company to incur substantial costs. Managers attempted to convince the couple to accept some alternative arrangement for insuring the wife, but because no viable alternative existed, she remained under the plan. The employee was told at one point that the company's options were to fire him or make him an independent contractor without benefits, but nothing was done at the time. About a year later, the employee was fired and he sued. What should the court decide? Why?