hrm 6603 individual case law-HRM_Case_Law

Chuong Q Nguyen- HRM 6603 Individual Case 1

TROY UNIVERSITY

Human Resource Management

(HRM 6603)

Rodger Morrison

Assignment: Individual Case (3rd case option)

Student: Chuong Quang Nguyen

ID : 1314316


Table of Contents

MEMORANDUM 2

THE PROBLEM 2

THE SUPERVISOR 3

THE DECEASED 5

HRM AND THE MANAGEMENT 7

THE OTHER PARTY 9

THE COURSE OF ACTION 10

INTERNAL INFLUENCES 10

MOTIVATE EMPLOYEES 11

IMPROVE COMMUNICATION 11

EXTERNAL INFLUENCES 11

THE POSSIBLE COURT RULING 12

REFERENCES 13


MemorandumTO: Mr. Rodger Morrison, CEO

FROM: Jaden Nguyen, Human Resource Manager

DATE: September 18th , 2015

SUBJECT: The Role of the Company in Mr. Dean’s Death

The ProblemThe case provided in the scenario that had just occurred recently represents a complicated case

because of the failure of stakeholders and the victim too that led death. The company, ABC, is

not liable for the death of Mr. Dean because his supervisor failed on several occasions to inform

other about the deceased. Sean, the supervisor, played a fundamental role in the complication of

the “homicide” for his failure to cooperate with the authorities on how best we would have

handled the deceased. Various approaches need to be undertaken in finding the mystery of that

befell Dean. It is important to analyze the contribution of each of the parties in the case and the

role they played in providing an enabling environment for the problem. The key stakeholders are

the supervisor, the deceased, the management, and the other complaining party that was involved

in the accident that led to the loss of two lives. The supervisor not only withheld information but

also failed to adhere to the regulation of the time that is allowable for paid lunch. On the other

hand, the deceased also had a role in his death because he should never have gone to drink when

he was aware that he needed to go back to work. Moreover, his inability to share his possible

frustrations with anyone could have led to his decision of going to drink during the day. In the

blame, we, the top board of management also failed. All frustration that the deceased could have

had is largely due to poor management. The inability to create an enabling environment for

effective communication is the greatest mistake the C.E.O, and the HRM committed. In the


attempt of finding the mystery around Dean’s death, it is also important to make an analysis of

the complaints from the other side that was involved in the accident and its threatening to sue the

company.

The SupervisorSean disappointed the company of various ways of which involving to cause death. First, he

decides to withhold vital information that could have been crucial in the decision-making process

before allowing the Dean to go for the paid lunch. It was important to inform about Dean and

state his main weaknesses because Sean was aware of the drinking problem Dean had but

refused to communicate. For instance, he knew of the probability that Dean could have problems

in case he got drank but never considered sharing this information. This misconduct has caused

the questioning of ABC’s role in the non-intentional act. While it could be previously be

analyzed as a case of the company, the law today would take such as issue at an individual level

(Society for Human Resource Management, 2013). This is because even though the company is

solely to blame for the unplanned arrangement, Sean knew it all. ABC is thus not liable for the

death because there is a likelihood that the deceased also pushed for the extension of the paid

lunch period. We still do not have adequate proof of this claim, though. In this scenario,

therefore, the court would have to consider the intent of the misconduct by the supervisor

because if the company is to be held liable for the death of Dean, then the court would have to

determine whether the employees was within the scope of employment (Society for Human

Resource Management, 2013). From the analysis, it is clear that the supervisor misused his

powers in office and would thus be sued for negligent behavior for failing to inform, the

company of the deceased’s weaknesses.


Sean also made the mistake of giving Dean an extra 30 minutes for picking up stuffs over the

time allowed for the paid lunch break. While this is not directly linked to Mr. Dean’s death, it is

possible that the idea created the chain of events that caused the accident. Without his agreement,

Sean could have caused Dean to be angry at having him performed a role that he ought not to be

doing at the wrong time. This anger is however not reported anywhere, so we are still not sure if

it played a role because it probably did based on the report from the local authorities that stated

that the deceased was drunk . The act is classified under the concept of vicarious liability where

the decision that is in question is made between two people but eventually involves the company

as the party acts for the superior (Society for Human Resource Management, 2013). Usually, the

mistake arises when the two parties involved are trying to settle out an issue that targets to

benefit the company in the end as indicated by the realization that Dean was asked to pick

material for the work center. By giving Dean the extra 30 minutes, Sean did not intent to cause

any harm to the deceased. This forms the principle of vicarious liability because even though

vicarious liability is used when the problem is minor this particular case results in death (Society

for Human Resource Management, 2013). Therefore, when analyzing this issue in court, it is

possible that the supervisor will be questioned at a personal level rather than as a representative

of the company because the decision made to extend the time for lunch was principally between

the two subjects.

The supervisor also fails to realize the requirements and limits of the paid lunch break and ends

up overworking the employee. According to the U.S. Department of Labor (2009), bona-fide

meal period are not paid for by the employee and last about 30 minutes. In this case, it is

recommended that the employee gets relieved from duty completely for the full 30 minutes.

However, Sean despised this requirement and made the deceased to incur more costs and thus


end up in overtime, which is a contradiction to the workforce requirement. Again, this does not

cause death directly but it is possible that if Sean had adhered to this rule, there is less chance

that the deceased could have been involved in the accident. In this scenario, the court would have

it easy in implicating Sean for his crimes that led to the death of one of the employees of ABC.

This is because the law clearly outlines in the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations

“Regulations 29 CFR 785.19” that the employee should be exempted from duties during the

period which Sean requested Dean to pick the work schedule material from the Office Depot

(U.S Government Publishing Office, 2015). In fact, the law categorically disproves any attempt

to engage in what Sean and Dean decided to do as it is stated that “it is not necessary that an

employee be permitted to leave the premises if he is otherwise completely freed from duties

during the meal period” (U.S Government Publishing Office, 2015). This implies that Sean

would have to face the problem individually for failing to adhere to the law regulations.

The DeceasedDean’s position in what happened to him also needs a critical analysis for one to understand the

role he played in the tragedy. By taking into consideration that he is just a junior employee, Dean

had to follow orders from his supervisor. It is unlikely that the deceased agreed to go the Office

Depot willingly considering that it was over the time allowable for the lunch break. Dean’s

acceptance could have been because of getting orders from Sean. According to the Minnesota

Department of Labor and Industry (2015), employees sometimes have to follow orders because

of the fear of getting sacked by the employer due to disobedience. In fact, it is stated that the

employer, who, in this case, is the supervisor, has no limits on the amount of overtime they

might decide to schedule for the employees. As a result, the employee is subjected to the

command of flexibility depending on the employer’s requirements. Despite the allowable time


for the lunch break being counted as hours worked, Dean finds himself in the trap of having to

meet Sean’s excess requirements. According to the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry

(2015), failure in adherence would have possibly led to the employee getting fired. This reality

could have dawned to the deceased and possibly angered him and made him go to drink out of

frustrations.

However, while Dean undertook the challenge of meeting his supervisor’s needs, it is also

possible that it was a mutual agreement. This hypothesis is possible because until now, we have

not yet determined the deceased’s stand on the issue of picking the material for the Office Depot.

If this is the case, then the concept of vicarious liability becomes evident. The Society for Human

Resource Management (2013) uphold that the principle of vicarious liability is from the fact that

in his bid to serve the company, Dean incurred an accident that cost him his life even though

Sean did not intend it to happen as it turned out. This is a classic form of an accident that none of

the three parties including, Dead, Sean or ABC should be blamed. As such, the claim by the

other party’s family that was also involved in the accident is null and does not apply legally.

Based on the principle of vicarious liability, the blames from the other party by involving

lawyers so sue ABC lacks direction because the incidence was purely accidental even though it

was meant to benefit the company in the end.

Despite his deceased state, Dean is also to blame for his tragedy as a result of his carelessness. It

is evident that the supervisor was aware of Dean’s inability to drive after drinking but could not

share this information with anyone. The biggest problem, however, is that Dean failed to

communicate to the Human Resource Management about this concept even though the HR could

have found a way of helping out. According to Erven (2012), communication is paramount for

the success of any company or business enterprise. It is clear that Dean was only open to his


supervisor about his personal issues. Even though there is no law that advises on the need for

employees to communicate effectively with the management, is evident that the lack of

interpersonal skills by the deceased led to his death. In this perspective, therefore, the other party

that is making the attempt to go to court have a pointless claim because they fail to realize that

the accident was as a result of the Dean’s compromised judgement as result of his drinking rather

than the company’s fault. According to Erven (2012), communication with the human resource

management is the key to risk management in all angles accidents inclusive.

HRM and the ManagementAs the leaders, we have a role to play in the tragedy. Somehow to say, lacking of well

management in the executive has resulted in the loss of life. The most evident weakness is the

lack of interpersonal and reliable communication strategies in the company. It is clear that in the

whole industry, the deceased only trusted one party, who also played a role in his death. Dean

could only entrust Sean with vital information about his weaknesses. Have the management

encouraged a freer interaction within the business. It is likely that the deceased’s state could

have reached the leadership who could have prevented the death. One way would probably be by

giving Dean a personal driver to escort him during lunch breaks. In fact, this weakness by the

management is what put the company towards being judged in the court. The complaining party

could file a case where it could accuse the company of not giving attention to the employees’

needs and as a result, lead to poor communication networks that led to the loss of a life.

However, the company could easily defend this accusation by the accuser’s lack of proof.

Following the outcome of this, it is clear that the lack of communication network and an

adequate link between the management and the employee is proving a huge problem to the

company.


The management has also displayed a lack of motivation towards its employees. According to

Erven (2012), a motivated employee network can help the organization accomplish its goals and

assist in enabling them realize their fill potential and goals. However, ABC fails in this duty as

Dean was not motivated to perform his roles effectively. Instead, the employees seem to be

overworked rather than feel motivated. Based on the investigation where the deceased is caught

up in an accident after having his lunch break because of drinking, it shows that the workers are

somehow overwhelmed (Carbery & Cross, 2013, p. 187; Nekzada & Tekeste, 2013). In such a

setting, it is highly unlikely that the employees are satisfied with the management because there

is also a possibility that Dean was only acting in response to getting orders from Sean. In fact,

there will question about why Dean would go drinking during the day, and more so, having not

only one but several mixed drinks even though he was mature enough to aware that he was

needed to drive back to work. Such incidences may occur when one is stressed and from the look

of the matter, Dean must have been unhappy that he was working overtime (Carbery & Cross,

2013, p. 187; Nekzada & Tekeste, 2013). To support this hypothesis, Erven (2012) asserts that

the management ought to satisfy the needs of the employees and offer adequate remuneration to

ensure that they are not frustrated at work. However, the company fails in meeting employee

needs, making them upset, went for a drink during day and leading to the death of one of the

employees.

A company’s success is driven by an efficient HRM (Machado, 2013, p. 377). However, in

ABC, there is a huge problem of a failure in the implementation of policies in the company.

While there are many varieties of policies that the HRM is tasked within an organization, the

most concern in this case is overtime compliance. The company is, however, trying to implement

this to ensure that the employees’ need for adherence to be given breaks is maintained. However,


the members’ needs for overtime are not equally recognized. It is even unfortunate that the

company’s weakness in manifested this way because the failure eventually leads to loss of life.

According Schaefer & Mousa (2014 p. 2), it is important that the HRM ensure a combined

implementation of minimum wage and overtime compliance as stipulated by the Fair Labor and

Standards Act. Sean, however, does not realize this and bothers a frustrated Dean to go and pick

work materials. If the company finds itself in court, it will probably have to tackle this side of the

issue with more attention because the accuser could claim that the company does not have

competent road users and as shown by Dean’ state that led to the accident.

The Other PartyDespite being an accident, it is clear that the accusing side seem to be more in pain than the

company is because from the report by the local law enforcement agency, it is clear that Dean

was the one who caused the accident. The complicated aspect of this issue is that Dean is an

employee of ABC, and when an accident involves his car, a link is directed towards his

company. The company could feel that it is not connected with the accident because there was no

notable use of company premises in the accident, but then Sean’s statement could prove

otherwise. Despite the fact that Dean was not using the company’s car at the time of the accident,

it is clear that the reason he was involved in the fate was that he was picking material for the

industry. According to Buckley & Okrent (2004, p. 74), in the concept of vicarious liability, the

other party does not need to be compensated because the accident was caused by Dean, as he was

working for the company. This concept only applies when the principal-agent relationship

between Sean and Dean is taken into consideration. In fact, this should be another troubling

aspect for the company because Sean is a direct link the company management. However, the

company lawyer would probably have to consider that the accident classification is outside the


scope of employment. Based on Buckley & Okrent (2004, p. 74) analysis, if a driver crashes into

another vehicle in the process of making a company delivery, the company is exempted from the

trouble of taking the liability for the loss of a life on the other side.

The Course of ActionThe case is a difficult one. The complexity is because there is an intermingling of factors through

both internal and external influences that define the course of action by the company. It is thus

critical to make an emphasis on the direction the company will take by analyzing both sides of

the scale because the company would want to solve the problem equally and ensure that there is

no other similar case in future.

Internal InfluencesThe management will need to streamline several key aspects of its line of duty. The most

significant direction that the management ought to consider is the criticality of having a reliable

an efficient communication network within the system. It is evident that Dean shared his possible

frustrations with other employee, he would have found a better way of addressing his challenges

than go drinking during the day before driving back to work. Moreover, communication would

be critical in enabling the top board of management understands the employees better because it

seems the deceased was only free with one person.

Motivate EmployeesABC should give the employees’ interests priority in all aspect of running the company. Instead

of overworking them, it would be practical to employ more workers who could act as messengers

for the company rather than use the workers to engage in strenuous and possibly annoying


activities. Had the company considered this prospect, it would be realistic to run the

organization, as the employees would be happier.

Improve CommunicationThis area needs urgent concern. The lack of reliable communication is evident from the top

management to the juniors. By taking the example of Sean’s idea to withhold the information

about Dean, it is clear that the leadership is not spared of this weakness. The seriousness of the

matter is coupled by the realization that the Dean considered the communication so poor that he

could only be free with Sean, his supervisor. This is a major weakness in management that ought

to be changed if the company has to tackle the occurrence of such incidences n future.

External InfluencesThis should be the most troubling factor that that the company should consider because it is the

immediate problem facing it. Despite the magnitude of the problem, the firm has nothing to

worry. The main threat posed by the other party involved in the accident is manageable. The

company only needs to get its lawyer and prepare him for the trail because it seems the other

party is determined to file a complaint in court. Because the company had no direct involvement

in the accident, it is likely that nothing will be found as a feasible evidence to implicate the

company for murder.

The Possible Court RulingBased on the evidence gathered about the role each party played in the case, the company lawyer

is likely to have an easy job. The judge will possibly make a ruling in favor of the company

because the corporation will not be found guilty is the homicide the complainant claims justice.

This is because the vehicle used in the accident was personal, and the only link that the company


had to Dean is the material he was requested to pick from the Office Depot. Whatever it could

have been, it is less likely to be used as evidence for implicating the company because it is still

unclear the document that Dean was sent to pick. Moreover, provided the vehicle used was not of

the company, there is nothing for ABC Company to worry because the lawyer will effectively

handle the issue based on the evidence provided to him.

Please communicate within the nearest time possible to see how we can effectively handle this

problem without compromising on the company’s image.


References

Buckley, W. R., & Okrent, C. J. (2004). Torts and Personal Injury Law. Cengage Learning.

Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=nuatCuF1vygC&pgis=1

Carbery, R., & Cross, C. (2013). Human Resource Management: A Concise Introduction.

Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?

id=Rd4cBQAAQBAJ&pgis=1

Erven, B. L. (2012). The Role of Human Resource Management in Risk Management -

eXtension. Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics.

Retrieved from http://www.extension.org/pages/15506/the-role-of-human-resource-

management-in-risk-management#.Vg9ixitwJ_k

Machado, C. (2013). Effective Human Resources Management in Small and Medium

Enterprises: Global Perspectives: Global Perspectives (Vol. 30). IGI Global. Retrieved

from https://books.google.com/books?id=HiBHAgAAQBAJ&pgis=1

Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. (2015). Labor Standards; Frequently asked

questions about hours. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from

http://www.dli.mn.gov/LS/FaqHours.asp

Nekzada, N., & Tekeste, S. F. (2013). Stress Causes and its Management at the Workplace-A

Qualitative Study on th Causes of Stress and Management Mechanisms at Volvo Trucks AB,


Umea. Umea. Retrieved from

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:693132/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Schaefer, J., & Mousa, R. (2014). Internal Control and Human Resource Management : Closing

the Loop. Journal of Legal Issues and Cases in Business, 12(13). Retrieved from

http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/121314.pdf

Society for Human Resource Management. (2013). Accidents & Injuries: Can a company be held

liable if an employee has a car accident due to drunk driving while on business travel?

Retrieved October 3, 2015, from

http://www.shrm.org/templatestools/hrqa/pages/canacompanybeheldliableifanemployeedrun

kdrivingwhileonbusinesstravel.aspx

U.S Government Publishing Office. (2015). eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations. Retrieved

October 3, 2015, from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?

SID=8c390f36447b9d3f94467ad24d28c49f&mc=true&node=se29.3.785_119&rgn=div8

U.S. Department of Labor. (2009). Fact Sheet - Wage and Hour Division (WHD). Retrieved

October 3, 2015, from http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs53.htm

Documents

hrm 6603 individual case law-HRM_Case_Law