MGT 434T Wk 3 – Apply: Assignment

In this scenario, Kari makes light of the Employee Handbook. Kari should not do this, because under federal employment law, a company’s Employee Handbook ______________.

• Can be an implied contract to which the employer and the employee are bound
• Is always interpreted in favor of the employee over the employer
• Provides triple damages in age discrimination cases
• Protects workers over 40 years of age under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

Susan tries to explain to Kari that her job duties were unclear. If Susan sues for discrimination under the ADEA, this fact __________.

• May help Susan if employees under 40 years old were given express instructions about job duties and she was not
• Provides a defense for Kari and her company
• Is irrelevant to the case
• Will not help her, because it was Susan’s duty to ask about her job performance

Kari tells Susan that she is being fired because she is not getting the work done, talking too much about relatives, and not pulling her weight on her team. According to the ADEA, which of the following statements pertains to these facts?

• They establish the prima facie case of age discrimination.
• They are sufficient defenses to Susan’s claim of age discrimination.
• They are immaterial to Susan’s case.
• They are mixed-motive defenses.

If Susan sues but fails to make her case for age discrimination, she might still make a case for _____________.

• Gender orientation discrimination due to her recent leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act
• Restitution due to her need to support her daughter
• Breach of the warranty of good faith
• Retaliation due to her recent leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act

A good defense for Kari against any lawsuit by Susan for age discrimination is the ________ defense.

• Same gender
• Same actor
• Same department
• Same company

IIf Susan’s claim of age discrimination does not prevail, she might win a case for ____________.

• Intentional interference with a contract
• Gender plus discrimination
• Breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing
• Wrongful discharge

It appears from this scenario that Kari had never formally evaluated Susan’s work performance. Performance reviews are not required by the law. What additional information would help Kari to defend herself in a lawsuit?

• The company mandates performance evaluations for all employees.
• Evaluations were given to every employee except Susan.
• No evaluations were given to any employees.
• Susan never asked for a performance evaluation.

Kari intended to write up a report of Susan’s poor performance after the fact, that is, after Susan had been fired. What would be the effect of this action in a subsequent lawsuit?

• A jury would put great credibility on a formal written performance appraisal written shortly after an employee was terminated.
• It would have no effect, because under the ADEA no performance appraisals are allowed to be submitted as evidence in a lawsuit.
• A judge would not allow a performance appraisal to be admitted under the “best evidence” rule.
• A jury would put no credibility on a formal written performance appraisal written shortly after an employee was terminated and prepared in anticipation of a lawsuit.

In this scenario, Susan could be determined to have engaged in __________.

• Bad faith
• Negligence
• Malingering
• Insubordination

In a lawsuit by Susan against Kari’s company, the fact that there are no employees over 40 within Kari’s department is most likely ____________.

• Material, as it could be used to show age discrimination—more facts are needed
• Material, because it directly shows age discrimination
• Immaterial, as Susan is being fired for legitimate performances issues—being slow, making mistakes and not pulling her weight
• Immaterial, because Susan is not old enough to make a case for age discrimination