Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
INTERNAL MEMORAUNDUM
The following summarizes the results of the investigation into the implications of the grievances
for wrongful termination filed by Liz Bennet and Ralph Nicklebys grievances. Although
Delaware does not have laws governing family medical leaves, it follows the federal Family
Medical Leave Act (Jauffret, 2010). This is a legal ground for Liz Bennet to take her grievance
through the legal system, with a probability of success whether though arbitration or the court
system. However, Ralph Nicklebys grievance is unlikely to make it to court, and denied through
arbitration. His refusal to take a drug test can be grounds for dismissal, as Delaware does not
have any provisions on employers conducting drug testing of their employees. Further, it does
The timing of Liz Bennets release of employment and elimination of her position during her
maternity leave can be questionable and a violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Under the FMLA, employees are allowed twelve weeks of unpaid leave during a twelve-
month period upon giving birth to a new child; and further provided security to return to
their same position without any negative action from the employer (The Business
Professor, n.d.).
their work schedule, and more than twenty weeks (The Business Professor, n.d.). FMLA
worldwide. Further, Liz gained her position in 2014 and has been working each work day
Legitimacy of Grievance
The timing and reasoning can be perceived and construed as a negative action by Big
Brain against Liz Bennet. Her grounds under FLMA would give her justification to take
the case to court, with a probability of success. If her case was arbitrated, it may also be
official who is a subject matter expert (The Business Professor, n.d.). The arbitrator may
also find the timing and reasoning questionable and grant Bennets grievance request.
Ralph Nicklebys termination does not violate any applicable employment laws. His grievance
Delaware does not specifically speak to, nor limit, a private organization from conducting
pre- or post-employment drug testing (Jauffret, 2010). Although federal and state laws
exist against disability discrimination, it is not applicable with drug and alcohol use
(Jauffret, 2010; State of Delaware, 2017). Further, while privacy acts exist to protect
employees, it does not cover employment drug testing (The Business Professor, n.d.).
Legitimacy of Grievance
Nicklebys refusal to take a company-required drug test can be grounds for dismissal. It
does not violate any laws, but rather Nickleby may be in violation of his implied
testing. It is unlikely his case will go to the courts. It can be surmised he opted for an
arbitrator for the benefits it provides for an unsubstantiated claim. Arbitrations provide
benefits such cost effectiveness and protection of privacy (The Business Professor, n.d.).
If there are any questions or areas needing further clarification, please contact me. Thank you.
References
Jauffret, J. (2010). Labor and Employment Desk Book, USA Delaware. Lex Mundi
https://dia.delawareworks.com/discrimination/disability.php
https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/6aa8bfb8-7053-4fed-94f6-
2547e454c501/1/web/viewer.html?file=https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/77770023-
c894-4d67-87bd-f7ee381d0c16/1/AlternativeDisputeResolution.pdf
The Business Professor. (n.d.). Employment Laws. Business Law: An Introduction. Retrieved
https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/6aa8bfb8-7053-4fed-94f6-
2547e454c501/1/web/viewer.html?file=https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/77770023-
c894-4d67-87bd-f7ee381d0c16/1/AlternativeDisputeResolution.pdf