Case Study: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy

Fenil

mgt3320_mod5_assign_rubric.docx

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Case Study: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy

MGT 3320: Human Resources

Module 5 Case Study: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy

Guidelines and Rubric

Overview:

Following established company policy is very important. When discussing an issue or problem with an employee, a supervisor cannot "assume" that the employee understands the severity of the circumstances. When terminating an employee's employment, it is important to make sure that everything is connected and that appropriate warnings have been issued. Terminating someone for something that is not related can be questionable, unless a policy that has been clearly communicated to the employees has been violated. There may be times, however, when it is acceptable to make exceptions to the rules, but this must be carefully managed as it can become a serious legal issue.

Case Study 2: You Can’t Fire Me! Check Your Policy, in Chapter 13 of your text presents a story about an individual who had been a good employee but suddenly developed disciplinary issues. She developed an absentee problem and additionally refused to work on an overtime assignment.

Prompt:

To complete this assignment, you will review this case and evaluate the circumstances that led up to the termination. You will examine her past record, her gradual increase of absences, and weigh that against the fact that she had a verified illness. You will evaluate the actual reason for the termination and determine whether these things should be taken into consideration as you decide what would be the “fair” thing would be to do, remembering that whatever accomodations are made for Hattie, should be extended to all employees.

Specifically, be sure to address the following:

· Identify the circumstances contributing to the termination.

· Hattie was “genuinely” and “verifiably” ill. Determine whether this should make a difference compared to those who were not genuinely and verifiably ill and explain why or why not.

· Assess whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to” about her absence problem. Explain why this distinction is important.

· Analyze why Hattie was actually terminated. Was the reason Hattie was terminated the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her? Why is this important?

· Evaluate whether the termination was for a valid reason.

· Determine whether a past record of being a “model” employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination and explain why or why not.

· Evaluate whether policy was actually followed. Explain why this is important.

· Argue whether or not you think Hattie should be reinstated. Support your position with references from the textbook or other resources.

Guidelines for Submission: Your written analysis must be submitted as a Microsoft Word document, 2-5 pages in length, with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and any resources used must be cited in APA format.

Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center.

Rubric

Criteria	Exemplary (100%)	Needs Improvement (75%)	Not Evident (0%)	Value
Contributing Circumstances	Identifies the circumstances contributing to the termination.	Identifies the circumstances contributing to the termination, but may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.	Does not identify the circumstances contributing to the termination.	15
Legitimacy of Absenteeism	Determines whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill; and explains why or why not.	Determines whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill, but may not explain why or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.	Does not determine whether being verifiably ill should make a difference compared to those who are not genuinely and verifiably ill.	10
Communication	Assesses whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to” about her absence problem, and explains why the distinction is important.	Assesses whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to” about her absence problem, but may not explain why the distinction is important, or may lack in	Does not assess whether Hattie was actually warned about her absence problem, or was just “talked to” about her absence problem.	10

		detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.
Reason for Termination	Analyzes why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her; and explains why that is important.	Analyzes why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her, but may not explain why that is important, or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.	Does not analyze why Hattie was actually terminated and whether the reason was the same as the stated problem her supervisor discussed with her.	10
Validity of Reason for Termination	Evaluates whether the termination was for a valid reason.	Evaluates whether the termination was for a valid reason, but may lack in detail or clarity.	Does not evaluate whether the termination was for a valid reason.	15
Past Record	Determines whether a past record of being a “model” employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination and explains why or why not.	Determines whether a past record of being a “model” employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination, but may not explain why, or may lack in detail or clarity.	Does not determine whether a past record of being a “model” employee should be taken into consideration when concerning termination.	10
Following Policy	Evaluates whether policy was actually followed, and explains why this is important.	Evaluates whether policy was actually followed, but may not explain why that is important, or may lack in detail or clarity or contain inaccuracies.	Does not evaluate whether policy was actually followed.	10

MGT 3320: Human Resources

Reinstatement	Argues whether or not Hattie should be reinstated, supporting position with references.	Argues whether or not Hattie should be reinstated, but may not support position with references or may lack in detail or clarity.	Does not argue whether or not Hattie should be reinstated.	10
Mechanics	No grammar or spelling errors that distract the reader from the content. All sources used are cited using APA Style, 6th ed.	Minor errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. All sources used are cited using APA Style, 6th ed.	Major errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or errors made in citing sources using APA Style, 6th ed.	10
			Total	100%