Inappropriate Behavior: Business Law and Corporate Ethics

Inappropriate Behavior: Business Law and Corporate Ethics

Student’s Name

Institution

Course

Instructor’s Name

Date

                                 Inappropriate Behavior: Business Law and Corporate Ethics

               This essay explores some of the business laws related to sexual harassment and their exploitation or execution at the workplace. The paper will also examine some of the existing regulations that are linked to civil rights as well as the related discrimination and their implementation within the court of law and the community.

                In this context, we examine Marwan, an employee who works at Studio Five Theme Park as a leading character actor demonstrating a swash-buckling pirate. Although Marwan has not been awarded an employment contract, he loves his work. This circumstance is attributed to his seniority within the firm, together with the whole attention which he receives from the guests within the park. He is anonymous to everyone, and his prosthetic leg lacks any noticeable effect on his triumph in this rank.

                  However, Marwan is known for being a successful flirt with all the attention that he receives and even now goes to the level of laying his hands on some of the company visitor’s (ladies) buts when posing for cameras. The ladies whom Marwan has encountered to this point have not filed any complaint or taken up the matter with the firm’s leaders, and it is assumed that they did not appear to mind Marwan’s conduct or they might have been taken by such astonished that they were uncertain how to react to the situation.

                 However, Marwan’s became a legal issue within the company when, one day, he grabbed one of the lady actors' breasts; the actor had just recently been appointed for the job. But when the lady threatened to take up the matter with the company leaders, Marwan informed her that she would be sacked if she denied going for dinner with him. The lady actor still reported the event, which led to Marwan’s termination of contract instantaneously; even Marwan opposed that he was fired due to his physical disability.

The Civil Rights Laws that Might Restrict Marwan’s Behavior against His Co-workers and the Manner in which These Laws Apply to His Behavior towards the Guests of Park

                Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act thoroughly covers Marwan’s conduct towards his co-workers. Title VII concerns “a decree which restricts any form of discrimination in the sacking, appointment or all other conditions and terms of employment on the basis of national origin, sex, religion, colour, race or ethnicity (Jordan, 2006). This rule applies to the entire staff, be it that they are national, state, or local (Jordan, 2006). Additionally, Title VII shields employers or companies employing fifteen or more workers and involves the businesses that impact on interstate trade (Jordan, 2006). With respect to this statute, the Commission of Equal Employment Opportunities was founded to safeguard citizens against any form of discernment and execute this decree together with all other applicable or relevant statutes (Jordan, 2006).

                 According to (Jordan, 2006, p. 621), discrimination refers to “any kind of condition or treatment of, or making the discrepancy against or in favour of an individual or something on the basis of category, class or group to which the thing or someone belongs in the expense of the person’s merit.”

                   Within the confines of the statute mentioned above, individuals applying for a job, as well as their employers or companies, are protected (Jordan, 2006). The decree prohibits employers or companies from making appointment decisions exclusively on the basis of national origin, sex, religious background, color, race, or ethnicity (Jordan, 2006). Besides, an employer or company is not permitted to terminate the contract or services of any staff on the basis of the dynamics mentioned above. Moreover, company or employers are prohibited from exhibiting of any favoritism for leave, plan of sequestration as well or paying perquisites on account of disability (Bowie, 2017). And most fundamentally, the company staff are not permitted to harass the employee or co-workers based on national origin, sexual orientation, religious background, color, race, or ethnicity (Bowie, 2017). The statute furthermore makes it illegitimate to categorize or isolate the staff or the potential staff by any means that is likely to impede their employment prospects (Bowie, 2017).

               The Civil Rights Law also applies to the visitors to the Studio Five Theme Park. Marwan made lewd gestures and remarks to some of his fellow workers, particularly ladies. As a result of his ill conduct, it is considered that Marwan violated the Civil Rights Law. He broke explicitly some portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act under Title VII. For instance, his co-workers alleged that Marwan was a discriminator who based his favouritism on the accounts of sexual orientation. Due to such behavior and actions, some of his female actors quit their jobs, an aspect that is covered under the Civil Rights Law since this impedes the ladies’ employment opportunities. Regrettably and even worse, Marwan is alleged to have committed sexual harassment of the female staff. The recent case is that of the female actor who accused him of touching her breast and forcing her to permit going on a date together, and she denied that she would make sure she was fired. The 1964 Civil Rights Act under Title VII places all the acts mentioned above within sexual harassment, which is punishable by the law.

                            Assessment if Marwan’s Committed Sexual Harassment

                  Schwartz (2002. pp, 1699) refers to sexual harassment as “the physical or verbal behaviour of sexual nature, request for sexual favours and unwelcome sexual progress that constructs an offensive, hostile or an intimidating atmosphere or implicitly or explicitly makes submission a condition or term of employment.”

                   To answer the question of whether Marwan has committed any sexual harassment in the case study, my response is a resounding yes. Marwan, indeed has been involved in the unethical conduct revealed above. State and National statutes bar employees or employers from undertaking such actions as the statute explicitly declares that an employer or company is prohibited from striking back in retaliation for any staff who has charged them under the Act or law (Schwartz, 2002).

                There exist two means by which Marwan has committed sexual harassment, as discussed below. To start with, Marwan's incident of committing sexual harassment transpired when he made incongruous contact by grabbing the breast and placing his hands on the buttocks of his female colleague employees. The second instance is when he often threatened the female and colleague staff to go on dates with him, and if they denied this request, he would have them sacked.

                  According to Schwartz ( 2001. pp, 248), the Supreme Court maintains that an employer or a company is inevitably vicariously responsible for a manager’s harassing conduct if that harassment encompasses or ends in a perceptible employment loss for the plaintiff.” Colloquially, such a category of bullying is usually defined as the sexual harassment of the quid pro quo where the manager makes some implied linkage or expression amid the worker’s submission to sexually aligned misconduct as well as the obvious employment result (Hoffman, Frederick & Schwartz, 2014).

                                  The Permissible Environment of Marwan's Occupation

                 From the legal perspective, although Marwan has been employed at Studio Five Theme Park for numerous years, he does not qualify as an official staff of Studio Five Theme Park. This is because Marwan has to possess an employment contract with Studio Five Theme Park for him to be regarded as the official staff. However, there exists no employment agreement at the current moment between either of the two parties.

                  An employment agreement refers to “a written or oral, implied or express consent that specifies the terms and conditions under which an individual agrees to undertake certain responsibilities as controlled and directed by the employer or company for an agreed upon salary or wage” (Leonard, 1987, p. 631). The labor acts will exclusively be applicable if there exists an employee-employer interaction amid Marwan and Studio Five Theme Park in the fashion of a documented employment agreement.

 The Steps and Directives that Studio Five requires to take Against Marwan

                 As the employer, Studio Five Theme Park possesses all the legitimate right to strike retaliation against Marwan. But first, the contentions reported by Marwan’s female co-worker have to be confirmed subsequently which Studio Five Theme Park can undertake proper measures against their employee (Marwan) for his unethical behavior and take mandated steps to mitigate these incidents from re-occurring.

Marwan is likely to encounter some or entirely the penalties mentioned below:

• Reprimand or warning
• Demotion or transfer
• Wage discount
• Termination or, contract, or suspension
• Counseling or Training
• Monitoring Supervision

                  Moreover, Studio Five Theme Park can sue their employee (Marwan) for being obliged to pay for the harm brought to them, together with all lawful charges entailed as a result of his unethical behavior. The company can further include the harm to their reputation or brand.

                  Given the Civil Rights Act, the staff is responsible for claiming disciplinary harm from the company or employer (Trevino & Nelson, 2016). The legitimate remedy applicable to the staff against discernment of the company or employer will get compensatory harm in addition to the retributive harms (Trevino & Nelson, 2016). Retributive damages are established for the scenarios in which the guilty are thoroughly punished (Trevino & Nelson, 2016). Contrary to the compensatory harm in which not only the remuneration but also the designation of the plaintiff is taken back to the initial position (meaning prior to the commitment of the crime), retributive harm does not provide such opportunities (Trevino & Nelson, 2016). They are considered simple laws or acts that are intended to punish the guilty (Trevino & Nelson, 2016).

Marwan’s Assertion that he is being victimized against by His Incapacity and the Response Studio Five Theme might have to do With that Accusation.

                   In my opinion, it was inappropriate to consider that Marwan was being victimized against because of his incapacity. First, Marwan has upheld a senior rank within Studio Five Theme Park for a long time, and indeed, it took him an extended period to attain this position. Therefore, for Marwan to claim that his job termination was due to his incapacity is unfair and unjust. To certify this case in a law court, it is fundamental to confirm that Studio Five Theme Park (Marwan’s employer) terminated his services of the other staff’s allegations of his conduct and who reported the case before the company. As illustrated in the case study, Studio Five was informed of these occurrences before terminating Marwan’s services, which gave them the basis to take such a necessary step and action against Marwan immediately and not for the reason that he was incapacitated.

Defenses that Studio Five Theme Park may exploit in case the Female staff sues them and if they are liable for Marwan’s Conduct

                   Studio Five Theme Park could organize a defense together, declaring that they were not aware of such incidents by their employee (Marwan) if the female personnel decided to sue them. Furthermore, Studio Five Theme Park can verify in the court of law, that the offender has stayed in the firm for an extended period in which he has always maintained to be a person of high moral principles. Additionally, it would be difficult to admit the accusations to Marwan’s physical boundaries. However, the company is easily responsible for the unethical conduct of Marwan despite claiming in defense that they were not aware of it. This is because all companies or employers are liable for their personnel’s deeds irrespective of whether they are aware or unaware of them (Hoffman et al., 2014).

Response Concerning if I Would Change My previous Answers in the event that Marwan was a Member of the Union that established a Collective Bargaining Agreement with Studio Five Theme Park

                  My answer is a resounding yes in such a circumstance since the union has the authority to protect its members, in this case, Marwan, of their senior rank within the firm. Collective bargaining is a platform that encompasses official negotiation among the chosen representatives of the personnel and the company or other employers (Grodin, 1990). Therefore, if there were a collective bargaining agreement, the company’s management, together with the Union, would have made several types of dialogues to measure the aspects such as benefits and salaries, among other conditions and terms of working (Grodin, 1990).

The Categories of Company Actions, Procedures, and Policies that Business must execute to Avoid Harassment of their Personnel

                                                               Approaches for Mitigation

            There exist numerous measures that companies can undertake to minimize the threat of the occurrence of sexual harassment (Grodin, 1990). Even though they might not be in a capacity to implement the entire measures illustrated below, the companies need to adopt as many steps as they can, which include:

• Implementing explicit policy concerning sexual harassment. Within the company’s personnel guidebook, there must be policies devoted to sexual harassment, and the policy needs to:
• Describe what the acts or behaviors that they consider as sexual harassment
• Declare under no circumstance that the firm can tolerate sexual provocation
• Declare that they will sack or take disciplinary measures against all offenders of sexual provocation
• Establish explicit processes to be followed for reporting or documenting sexual harassment cases
• Declare that the firm will examine entirely all forms of complaint that are reported or recorded and declare that the company can never tolerate retribution against any individual who reports complaints regarding sexual harassment.

• For a minimum of once per annum, the company needs to establish tutoring sessions for the personnel (Grodin, 1990). These periods must train the staff regarding what is considered sexual harassment, expound that the personnel owns the right to a place of work free of sexual provocation, assess the company’s complaint processes, and inspire the staff to exploit it (Grodin, 1990).
• Tutor managers and supervisors. Again, for a period of at least once per annum, the company needs to design sessions for managers and supervisors that are detached from the personnel periods (Palliam, 2018). The periods need to tutor supervisors and manage in relation to sexual provocation and elucidate the manner in which they can handle complaints (Palliam, 2018).

                                                      Sexual Provocation Tutoring Necessities

                 A few states necessitate particular employers to undertake training in sexual provocation. For instance, the California statute declares all employers that comprise at least fifty personnel to issue supervisors and managers with two hours of collaborative sexual provocation teaching every two years (Grodin, 1990). Maine and Connecticut furthermore necessitate sexual harassment drills (Grodin, 1990). Other states within the United States firmly emphasize the need to issue such teachings, irrespective of whether the decisions are not legally demanded. Therefore, regardless of whether or not the state does not necessitates or support training, I believe it is still the appropriate move since the company managers and supervisors will get to understand what the law states and acknowledge what steps to take whenever the personnel report complaints.

            Supervise the place of Work. Companies need to facilitate discussion forums with their personnel and converse issues surrounding workplace settings (Grodin, 1990). During the discussions, the company official needs to encourage their employees to express their views regarding the work environment and ask pertinent questions such as if there is any member of the staff who might have encountered offensive notes or posters (Leonard, 1987). Simply put, companies need to maintain an open line of communication with their staff members (Leonard, 1987).

            Consider the entire complaints concerning sexual provocation seriously. If any member of the staff documents or reports the allegation of sexual harassment, the company is required to take action instantaneously to examine the nature of the complaint (Bagley, 2015). If the complaint is established as binding or valid, the company’s reaction must be practical and rapid (Bagley, 2015).

                                                                        References

Bagley, C. E. (2015). Managers and the legal environment: Strategies for the 21st century. Cengage Learning.

Bowie, N. E. (2017). Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Cambridge University Press.

Grodin, J. (1990). Toward a wrongful termination statute for California. Hastings LJ, 42, 135.

Hoffman, W. M., Frederick, R. E., & Schwartz, M. S. (Eds.). (2014). Business ethics: Readings and cases in corporate morality. John Wiley & Sons.

Jordan, J. M. (2006). Little Red Reasonable Woman and the Big Bad Bully: Expansion of Title VII and the Larger Problem of Workplace Abuse. Wm. & Mary J. Women & L., 13, 621.

Leonard, A. S. (1987). A new common law of employment termination. NCL Rev., 66, 631.

Palliam, R. (2018). Legal and Ethical Issues In Business.

Schwartz, D. S. (2002). When Is Sex Because of Sex? The Causation Problem in Sexual Harassment Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150(6), 1697-1794.

Schwartz, M. (2001). The nature of the relationship between corporate codes of ethics and behaviour. Journal of business ethics, 32(3), 247-262.

Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2016). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right. John Wiley & Sons.