'Off-the-Job Behavior\r'

'Textbook Case Study Off-the-Job government agency 1. Do you believe tank driver’s employee rights were violated? Explain your position. Peter Oiler’s termination from his job by the Winn-Dixie Corporation was an obvious violation of his employee rights. though balancing employee rights with proper discipline is a constant ch aloneenge for HR professionals. only when in this suit of clothes of Oiler, the work dapple behavior of the employer had non changed and there is no problem, with the co-employers as well as. in addition in the own time, the go with beat no rights about the way he dress. thereof there is too no such ch onlyenge for the Winn-Dixie that it has to terminate Oiler. Hence I would consider that Winn-Dixie has violated the employee rights of Oiler. withal his social security has been compromised. When we consider the stead here is more normal than a similar case in 2005, which happened in Georgia. According to that, the motor hotels conside r this as intimate discrimination under 42 U. S. C. Sec. 1983 and relate Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.And the discipline of trans-gender transitions has a real concern and the laws shoot the claims of discrimination under employer’s categorizing of genders. hence Oiler’s claim is bankable and Winn-Dixie has to oblige to the claims of Oiler. Here Oiler’s bum be taken as an example of opposition of trans-genders in the customary public. Though the laws are guarding them, the manipulation of conceit caused by these cases is more than the actual violation. Since the court ruled out as non a violation, it testament be a wrong guideline as the closing can be referenced in conse put outive references. . What do you see as the consequences of agreements that punish employees for certain off-the-job behaviors? Explain. In the case of punishment of the employees, the people contrive united against this unrightfully serve at l aw. Also it had created an uneasy environment among the workers. virtu all toldy organizations which do the punishment of workers for off-job behaviors as they find out as their right, run the risk of cosmos breastd with numerous lawsuits and allegations of partiality and sexist traffic patterns.Hence these organizations end up with a openhanded reputation and a question cicatrix for credibility. Which in turn costs, they also face losing customers, business partners and stockholders. There will be a greater number of individuals who do not agree with these abrupt decisivenesss than who go it. Hence they will decide to cut their ties with organizations who favor such practices. It would be true(p) to assume that mevery businesses that were previously a part of the Winn-Dixie organizations like financial institutions, suppliers and so forth ade the decision to no drawn-out be associated with a company that would practice such unethical and immoral standards of business. Th is will in turn destroy the past achievement and the support it had earned and also future trades with other organization is also threatened. Hence it completely obliterates the potential advantage of any business or organization. any business organization must have rules and regulations which must be followed to and by all employees. Additionally, businesses must have particular methods in place to discipline individuals who do not follow the rules. 3.Would you consider Winn-Dixie an organization that exhibits characteristics of modern discipline or the hot fit out approach? Defend your position. According to me, Winn-Dixie is an organization which exhibits hot cooking stove characteristics. This can be made on seeing the action taken by Winn-Dixie. Oiler has a clean organizational behavior and has a perfect work record. His career underwrite record is also proper and he is considered as an asset by all the workers. When we consider about the harshness of the disciplinal ac tion, terminating the employee is considered as a most voiceless disciplinary action.And the Winn-Dixie had done this, hence it is a Hot stove characteristic. The hot-stove approach punishes all unacceptable behaviors with identical disciplinary actions whereas the industrial approach, warns individuals depending on the harshness and/or the reoccurrence of actions and behaviors which they have previously been warned against. The severe disciplinary action can be taken for an abhorrence is so serious that immediate sac is appropriate such as theft, informal harassment, violence, plagiarism etc.And since the person involved has not done anything, hence he should not be taken severe discipline. Also before taking a decision of terminating the employee, the company neither talked to Oiler for an chronicle nor it has given Oiler a verbal warning so that he can be more careful in future. Thus it had taken the action at once and without giving time to Oiler for confirmative his posi tion or giving any explanation. Hence Winn-Dixie is following hot stove procedure in disciplinary actions.\r\n'