...ordinary course of doing his or her job (Fleischer, 2004). Although the term “scope of employment” may have a broad definition, a reasonable third party would conclude that a service manger/auto mechanic would also check brakes, tires, etc., during a routine oil change. Therefore, performing these duties would fall within the ordinary course of doing his job, thus Jake’s actions are in scope of his employment. However, if Jake was at work, but not acting within the scope of his employment, his employer may be exempt from tort liability, and Jake would be unable to receive worker's compensation benefits if he is injured. Acting outside the scope of the job can include actions such as knowingly violating corporate policy. At other times, it can be less clear whether a person is acting within the scope of employment, and a judge or jury will be called upon to make the determination (Cushway, 2002). Explain whether or not Herman is responsible for Jake’s injury. Yes, Herman is responsible for Jake’s injury. An employer has a common law, duty to take reasonable care for the health and safety of his workforce. In addition to their common law duty of care, employers have a statutory duty, under section 2 of the Health & Safety at Work, etc Act 1974 (HASAWA), to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of their employees (Chandler, 2001). One could argue that the excess business created by the newly introduced free oil change offer...
Words: 904 - Pages: 4
...Employer’s Duty of Care Jamie Martinez Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance Professor Boneita Campbell August 7, 2011 Introduction As employees, we are held to the same standard to act in good faith in whatever position we hold. Employers also have that same duty to take care of the employees that perform the day to day tasks to make the company successful. Whether it is through extra time off, increase in pay, or better benefits employers have an obligation to their employees. Both the employer and employee have a common law duty of care to each other and to other employees. The relationship that employers have with their employee requires that duty of care is displayed by both parties. In addition the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 requires employers and employees to take reasonable care for the health and safety of everyone at work, including visitors and other non-employees who use the premises. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of his “scope of employment” Accepting a position in an organization means that you have signed an agreement to form a relationship with your employer. The employee is expected to be loyal, obedient, and carry out the duties that he has agreed to perform as stated a contract that would have been signed at the time of hiring. Employees are required to be honest to their employers and must work to the best of their abilities. The employee is supposed to be following all lawful and clearly given command of his employer...
Words: 1422 - Pages: 6
...Employer’s Duty of Care To what extent are employees required to perform their job with a duty of care? We all know that corporate officers have a duty of care to the corporation that they are employed by. They have an obligation to perform their duties with the care that a person in a like position would reasonably exercise under similar circumstances (Halbert & Ingulli, 2010, p 52). As a fellow employee down on the totem pole, we are held to the same standard to act in good faith in whatever position that we hold. Our employers also have that same duty to take care of the employees that perform the day to day tasks to make the company successful. Whether it is through extra time off, increase in pay, or better benefits employers have an obligation to their employees. The relationship that employers have with their employee requires that duty of care is displayed by both parties. 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment.” In the video Jake, the service manager, provided a basic inspection of the cars along with the oil change. While the promotion only required a free oil change the inspection was within his scope of employment. Scope of employment refers to anything a person does in the ordinary course of doing his or her job (“Scope of Employment”). Generally, an act will be considered part of an employee’s employment if it is committed while he or she is performing services for the company or incident to the provision...
Words: 1035 - Pages: 5
...Employer’s Duty of Care Course Title: Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance – LEG 500 November 9, 2011 Q1: Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment”. Jake’s actions to fully inspect vehicles were in his scope of employment, even though the main service requested was for an oil change. It is the responsibility of a certified mechanic to ensure a car is inspected for any major damages and preventative care maintenance. Just like when an individual goes to the doctor for a particular problem or illness. The nurses and doctors still perform the normal routine by checking an individual’s blood pressure, temperature, pulse count, heart beat, weight and height to confirm the basics are functioning properly and not contributing to the issue for which you are visiting the office and provide preventative care. The same concept can be applied to a routine oil change service and the need to check other basic functionality and mechanics of car to prevent any future major issues. Bureau Labor Statics, U.S. Department of Labor (2010) states the following: During routine service inspections, technicians test and lubricate engines and other major components. Sometimes, technicians repair or replace worn parts before they cause breakdowns or damage to vehicle. Technicians usually follow a checklist to ensure that they examine every critical part. Belts, hoses, plugs, brakes, fuel system and other potentially ...
Words: 1133 - Pages: 5
...Employer’s Duty of Care LaShawn A. Dunkins Professor Augustine Weekly LEG 500 – Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance February 7, 2012 In order for a business to be successful an employer and employee should have an understanding relationship. The relationship between the two is of the utmost importance. The employee is supposed to follow the laws of the company or that the employer has made known once they have decided to accept a position with the company. The employee is bound by rules and regulations in their place of work and is liable for a penalty or punishment in case of violation of any kind. The employer is bound to tolerate certain conditions or the workplace and interact with the employees. The employer should be very clear as to what action he wants to be taken and how they should be performed. In a business there should be a bond between the managerial skills of the employer and the perfect knowledge of the employee to better maintain the business and prosperity. Both the employer and employee should perform their part of the duty in the best interest of the business and attract more customers. The Scope of Employment is the actions taken by the employee to further the business of the employee. These actions sometimes pose the question as to whether or not an employer is liable for any damage or harm that occurs during working hours of the business. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment”. According to...
Words: 906 - Pages: 4
...Employer’s Duty of Care Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance – LEG 500 Wednesday February 16th 2011 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment.” Working ethically and being compatible with each other in a company is very fundamental in the development of the business. The managers and the employees have to develop a relationship where they agree on a form of understanding within their different levels of the organization and reason out what is needed to better the sales of the company. The employers are the head of the employees; therefore, their subordinates need to obey the instructions that are given to them to carry out their work. Employers should constantly give clear instructions to the employees of the duty that needs to be carried out and the time frame of which it should be done. The employees on the other hand, with the knowledge of what is ethical and what will be beneficial for the company, has the right to discuss with the managers what should be done. Therefore, both parties need to look at ways that will attract more customers on a longer basis. In this scenario, Jake went against the orders from his manager by not only doing the free oil change but by fixing other parts of the cars. His thought behind his actions was to draw more customers to the company because of the extra deals which surprisingly came with the promotion. Doing the job well and offering a bit more than expecting, makes the customers happy and will...
Words: 1304 - Pages: 6
...Employer’s Duty of Care Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance Strayer University Aug 6, 2011 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment.” 2. Explain whether or not Herman is responsible for Jake’s injury. 3. Explain whether or not Jake should be paid the overtime. 4. Explain the rights Jake and Herman have individually in this scenario Table of Content Jake’s scope of employment……………………………..........................Page 4 Is Herman responsible for Jake’s injury?………...................................Page 6 In or out of “his scope of employment…………………………………..Page 6 overtime…………………………………………………………………...Page 7 Overtime…………………………..………………………………………Page 8 References ………………………………………………………………...Page 9 Jake’s scope of employment The relationship between the employer and employees determines the success of a business to a great extent. The employee owes his loyalty and obedience to his employer. He has to be honest to his employer and must give his best in his work as he is bound by the contract he would have signed at the time of his appointment. The employee is supposed to be following all lawful and clearly given command of his employer and any deviation or dereliction of duty is punishable under law as well. So the employee is bound by rules and regulations at his work place and is liable for a penalty or punishment in case of violation of any kind. On the other hand the employer is also bound to abide by...
Words: 1609 - Pages: 7
...EMPLOYER’S DUTY OF CARE Strayer University LEG 500 – Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance February 20, 2011 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment” The actions of Jake’s work on the vehicles that include checking breaks, tires, and the transmissions is included within his scope of employment. The scope of employment includes any tasks that are included in the contract of the position that an individual is hired to complete (USLegal). This also includes any specific task that an employer asks an employee to perform. The purpose of documenting an individual’s scope of employment is for the employer to be responsible for a liability that may occur in case of an injury to that individual. The scope of employment can also be used to help benefit the employer as well. If an employee is not performing within their scope, the employer is not responsible for the actions of the employee. The position of Jake’s employment is that of Service Manager. Herman did give Jake specific instructions to change the oil no matter what is wrong with any of the vehicles. However, Jake is there to service vehicles. As long as he is performing duties that include servicing vehicles and furthering the business of the company then he is performing within his scope of employment. It is expected of a mechanic to perform other tasks of servicing a vehicle other than just changing the oil. Even if an employee is doing something that they are not directed to do by...
Words: 1592 - Pages: 7
...in Herman’s automobile dealership. When Herman decided to offer free oil changes to lure potential buyers onto the car lot, Jake was tasked with performing the oil changes. As manager of the automotive department, it is within his scope of employment to perform the oil changes. However, part of this issue was that Jake was performing more than the basic oil changes. He f elt responsible for performing more thorough inspections such as checking the tires, brakes, and transmissions because he is a certified auto mechanic. These duties are also within his scope of employment because he was performing tasks associated along with his job in good faith in an effort to benefit the employer as well as provide the duty of loyalty and care he owes to customers as a certified mechanic. Employer Responsibility for Injuries Because Jake was working within the scope of his employment and was injured by performing duties related to the job, Jake’s employer Herman is liable for his injury even though he was not directly responsible for it. Workers compensation was implemented in the United States between 1911-1925 (Halbert & Ingulli, 2010). It was designed to...
Words: 1038 - Pages: 5
...Running Header: Video Assignment Family Related Issues Strayer University Professor Whitney Davis, Esq. LEG 500 29 January 2012 Explain if it matters that a parent literally had nothing to do with a biological child in order for the child to take advantage of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for that parent. No, it does not matter if the parent was in the employee's life as long as it is the employee's parent then they are able to use FMLA. The type of relationship or lack thereof between a child and their biological parent has no bearing on whether an employee is eligible for FMLA. An employee can ask to use FMLA to care for a family member (whether they had nothing to do with them), for their own physical or mental health care and after the birth or adoption of a child. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provides an entitlement of up to 12 weeks of job protected and unpaid leave during any 12 month period to eligible covered employees and employers must grant eligible employees this right. Explain whether the size of the business can have any effect on whether Tony is eligible for Family Leave under the FMLA. Yes, but not in the way Herman describes. Herman is trying to use business necessity as a reason to keep Tony from taking a family leave to help his ill father. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) applies to a company if there are over 50 employees within 75 miles of the worksite, and at least 50 of the employees’ work...
Words: 1166 - Pages: 5
...Employer's Duty of Care and Issues of Compensation 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment Jakes actions are within the scope of his employment as manager servicing. Being a manager, Jake is responsible for the end to end and orderly running of his department, including meeting the outputs expected and he cannot take shelter under ‘being overworked’. He has to plan his departmental functioning in a manner to cause minimum disruptions for meeting the business objectives of Herman. It is possible he has been working overtime which might have resulted in fatigue, lower level of alertness and possibly leading to his injury. Holding a managerial position, his age cannot be an excuse for not being able to discharge his responsibilities, though it might have contributed to his injury from impediments to free movement due to arthritis. The ensuing constrained movement would have contributed to his injury. Jake cannot blame Herman for his predicament arising possibly out of his own lack of care. This is all the more so as he is in a managerial cadre and expected to mentor, manage and guide those under his control. His reaction to Herman’s call will only send out a wrong signal to Herman, and his own colleagues and juniors. Jake cannot ask for overtime being a manager and has to carry out his responsibilities coming under the purview of servicing (oil change) that is within his scope of responsibility. Jake can possibly engage with Herman...
Words: 1158 - Pages: 5
...Herman informed Jake that the way he was changing the oil was to prepare the cars for the Indy 500 and that he wanted him to do a lousy job. Herman also informed him that what he learned while receiving his auto mechanic certification is for aircraft mechanics and not car mechanics. In the video while they were having the conversation about the way Jake was performing his job, his thumb was bleeding. Herman seemed not to care about the fact that Jake was injured and just wanted him to continue to perform his job to make the company have more business. Jake became more irate because Herman seemed not to care about the fact that Jake’s thumb was bleeding Jake took it upon himself to decide to go to the doctor because Herman wanted him to keep changing the oil despite of the situation. Jake had every right to choose to go to the doctor instead of staying to change the oil on cars. It is not fair that Herman would hang Jake’s job over his head because he is not working as fast as Herman thinks that he should and he also has an injury that Herman does not seem to care about. Explain whether or not Herman is responsible for Jake’s injury. It is important that from the conversation that Herman had with Jake, Herman requires Jake to work long hours for the promotion that Rally Motors is running. Jake is not...
Words: 1244 - Pages: 5
...EMPLOYER'S DUTY OF CARE KATHRYN J. STAPLES DR. BONEITA CAMPBELL LAW, ETHICS, AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 7 AUGUST 2011 EMPLOYER'S DUTY OF CARE In the video, the employer's duty of care is called into question. But to analyze the video, employer's duty of care must first be defined. "An employer has a duty to ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that workers and others are not exposed to risks to health or safety arising from the conduct of the employer's business. An employer must carry out the general statutory duty of care by proceeding, in a systematic way, to: identify hazards; identify, and assess the seriousness of, risks resulting from the hazards; and determine appropriate risk management measures." (Legislation, 2008) With this is mind, does Herman have an employer’s duty of care in regards to Jake's injury and his overtime? Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment.” Jake's actions are within his scope of employment. Jake was hired and promoted as a certified automobile mechanic and even though Herman directs him to just change the oil, Jake owes it to his certifications to do the best possible job since he has standards to comply with based on certification requirements. These standards includes checking the brakes, tires and transmission. He is doing a thorough job and making sure the vehicle is safe to drive. By being so thorough, Jake is meeting the expectation of standards from a certified automobile mechanic...
Words: 1201 - Pages: 5
...Employer's Duty of Care and Issues of Compensation August 9, 2010 Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance LEG-500 Abstract For the purposes of this assignment we independently viewed a video entitled “Employer's Duty of Care and Issues of Compensation.” In the video, the car dealership is running a special promotion offering free oil changes in order to get existing customers back into the showroom. An employee notices a backlog of customers waiting in line for their oil changes and notifies the owner of the dealership, Herman. Herman calls his newly promoted service manage, Jake, to explain the backlog. Jake emerges from the service bay holding his bloody thumb in a rag. He explains as certified auto mechanic, he is doing a thorough job on each car en though he is working overtime without overtime pay. The manager tells him to do a quick, “lousy” job of the oil changes just to get them done. He doesn't care about Jake's mechanics standards. Jake retaliates by complaining he's hurt his thumb due to his long hours and threatens a worker’s compensation claim if he isn't compensated fairly for his work. The video give rise to a number of ethical questions. The purpose of this paper is to address these questions as detailed in the assignment using readings on employee and consumer privacy law, as well as business ethics and corporate policy. Answers to Assignment #3 Questions The questions (in bold type face) follow as detailed in our assignment. 1. Explain...
Words: 3068 - Pages: 13
...The first issue is to look at whether June is considered an employee of Westwood or an independent contractor. This can be determined using the five common law tests. Firstly, using control test in Yewens v Noakes (1880), it was held that ‘a servant is a person subject to the command of his master as to the manner in which he shall do his work’. Secondly, the integration/organisation test is an alternative test to determine if an employee is “part and parcel of the organization”. In Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (1986) 63 ALR 513, courts held that the timber worker, Gray was not an employee of Brodribb but rather independent contractor due to the control test, as the degree of control was minimal. Thirdly, the business/economic reality test checks if the worker has engaged him or herself to perform the services, performing them as a person in business on his or her own account. In Market Investigations Ltd v Minister of Social Security (1969) 2 WLR 1, the court found that the extent of control exercised by the company was so extensive as to be consistent with the interviewer being engaged under a contract of service. The fourth test is the ready mixed concrete test which is a different approach to identify employment. However, this test has not generally been accepted because of the third consistency which states “the other provisions of the contract are consistent with its being a contract of service” provides no insight. Lastly the multi-factor test, in the case...
Words: 1130 - Pages: 5
