Class Member Responses (200 Word Min) - 4 Responses Needed (Need by tomorrow)

Class Member Discussion Topic Responses

Grading Criteria

You are required to respond with depth, breadth and insight to the discussion question(s) as well as one of your class members. Your response to the discussion question(s) must be tied back to the chapter material and outside research is expected. When I ask you to support your answer, you are expected to combine opinion with, minimum 2, citations, insight from your experiences, observations of others experiences, analysis of the facts/information and a conclusion. PLEASE do not limit your citations to just the book! Find other supporting material outside of the class structure.  You are also required to answer the question posed by the instructor and class members’. (Please note: The guidance outlined above will contribute to you “meeting the expectations” for the discussion. Additional participation will contribute to a grade that will “exceed the expectations” for the discussion 

The combined original reply and two responses are worth up to 20 points per student. The criteria used to determine the point distribution will be:

Cite examples, textbook material, or your own supporting material to back up your opinion.

Action: Read the below peer discussion board posts and provide your classmate with feedback on your opinion of their position. Do you agree and why? Do you disagree and why? Replies to your class members’ are intended to move the discussion forward. Telling them that they simply did a good job is not acceptable. Statements like "I feel", "I believe" and/or "I think" are difficult to measure and, highly, subjective. Asking a question or two about the position they took will move the discussion forward. Replies are 200 word minimum

Peer Reply #1

Annis- Sleeping on the Job

by  Rianne Annis  - Thursday, November 21, 2019, 7:41 AM

Is the union’s argument that the grievant just ‘appeared to be sleeping’ credible in the absence of any testimony support by the backhoe driver, a fellow union member? Support your answer.

    The grievant had been warned on several occasions that this behavior was not permissible. Additionally, the Union Steward and the supervisor had met with the grievant after a similar incident and informed his that not only was his behavior not acceptable, the next incident would result in his termination (Carrell and Heavrin, 2012). As the first instance was not documented, but the second incident was in conjunction with a meeting and discussion of consequence, that should be deemed sufficient warning. Although the backhoe driver declined to testify, the appearance of sleeping on the job (especially with eyes closed, and mouth open – the physical indicators of sleeping), the evidence is sufficient to discharge the grievant with just cause.

    In a similar case regarding a phone operative who was found sleeping in the break-room during her lunch break, the court ruled against her. “The supervisor observed what he reasonably believed to be the employee sleeping; therefore the discharge was legitimate and non-discriminatory” (Skeabeck, 2018). Years ago, I worked as a lifeguard supervisor at an athletic club. Sleeping on the job or the appearance of sleeping on the job was grounds for termination. In my five years at that facility, two accounts of discharge due to sleeping occurred. In this case study, the grievant was given a warning prior to the incident and discharge.

Peer Reply #2

Case Study 11-2: Sleeping on the Job 

by  Rachael Noe  - Thursday, November 21, 2019, 8:23 AM

Case Study 11-2: Sleeping on the Job

Is the union’s argument that the grievant just ‘appeared to be sleeping’ credible in the absence of any testimony support by the backhoe driver, a fellow union member? Support your answer.

            I think, in this situation, the union’s argument that the grievant just “appeared to be sleeping” is credible. In most circumstances, it would not be, however since the union asserted that the truck was parked at “an odd angle… thus the downhill angle of the truck forced the grievant to appear to be lying back in a reclining position,” I believe their argument is valid (Carrell & Heavrin, 2012). If the truck had been parked in a normal loading position and the driver looked as if he was asleep, I think it would be appropriate for him to be discharged. The company had given him warnings and let him know to get a doctor’s note if necessary. In all honesty, the grievant probably was asleep even though the truck was parked at a strange angle, but they should give him the benefit of the doubt given the circumstances.

          It is also a valid point that if the act of sleeping while the truck was being loaded was such a big deal that it should not have been corrected with only the shaking of a finger by the supervisor on the first incident. This first occurrence was also not documented, which it should have been. The supervisor should have had a conversation with the employee instead of just shaking his finger at him. It is likely that the employee did not see it as a huge deal due to the way that the supervisor corrected him. The second warning was treated more seriously, and he was warned that if it happened again, he would be fired unless he was able to provide a doctor’s note documenting a medical condition. Because he was clearly warned the second time, the company has the right to fire him the next time he is caught sleeping on the job. They should, however, give him the benefit of the doubt for this occurrence because it is plausible that he just appeared to be asleep given the angle of the truck.

          While the company did explain that if the had a medical condition causing him to sleep on the job he should provide a doctor’s note, it would also be a good idea for them to ascertain the reason he is sleeping on the job, even if it is not related to a medical condition. Then they may be able to help him by “offer suggestions to help and remind the employee that sleeping on the job is unacceptable and what the consequences will be,” (Wilkie, 2014).