978-0078029165 Appendix B Part 12

Unlock access to all the studying documents.

View Full Document

Appendix B-221

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

PP: 11-14

 Should you use individual, group, or company level PFP? Depends on:

 extent outcome controlled at group or individual level

1. Significant involvement and support by management

2. Employee participation and understanding

3. Realistic employee and (if applicable) union expectations

4. Company size- Smaller number of employees (200 vs. 400) results in larger productivity

gains

PP: 11-23

 Review of Scanlon, Rucker, and IMPROSHARE:

4. What is measured using the PADS? What role (if any) should this score play in the PFP

system or training raters for the system?

Page 376- “Research has established that rater characteristics, including their personality traits, can

predict the average rating raters give across all people whom they rate. Rater “discomfort,” defined

Appendix B-222

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Performance Appraisal Discomfort Scale (PADS), has been shown to be correlated with the average

rating level given by the rater (i.e., higher discomfort is related to more lenient ratings). Also, a rater

with a low “Conscientiousness” score (from the Five– Factor Model discussed in Chapter 6) combined

with a high “Agreeableness” score will tend to inflate ratings. Recent research shows incremental

validity for the prediction of rater leniency using all three rater characteristics (low rater

Conscientiousness + high rater Agreeableness + high rater Discomfort = highest Leniency levels). The

good news is that raters can be trained to reduce their levels of discomfort, which does then reduce

leniency PADS could be used as a diagnostic but if we’re interested in identifying lenient raters, a

rater’s average rating level history across all ratees is the best measure of rater leniency.”

5. How would you address the high turnover rate? Could this problem be related to

compensation?

While there are many causes of turnover , compensation could certainly be a primary cause at Dee’s.

Exit interview data, a study of the competitive, external market compensation would be a good

Appendix B-223

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

CHAPTER 12 – CHAPTER EXERCISES

Chapter Exercise 12.1

An Approach to Downsizing

Objectives . The purpose of Exercise 12.1 is to evaluate the effectiveness of downsizing strategies

used by a phosphate company and a pharmaceutical company. After completion of the exercise,

students should have a better understanding of the different approaches to downsizing, and

knowledge of the potential problems that can develop with downsizing programs.

Description . This is a short exercise that requires students to consider personnel action in the

context of claims of discrimination. The staff meeting notes (Exhibit 12.1.1) are almost identical to

staff notes from a court case involving allegations of age discrimination. The Individual Analysis

should take the student no longer than 30 minutes of out–of-class preparation. The Group Analysis,

which requires consensus on Items 2 and 3 of Form 12.1.1, should only take 30 minutes as well. After

group presentations, discussion should focus on whether there was a violation of age discrimination

and whether the approach used by the phosphate company was the most effective method for

downsizing. Table 12.1.1 presents answers to Form 12.1.1.

Table 12.1.1

Answers to Form 12.1.1

1. How do you evaluate this approach to workforce reduction? What (if anything) did Abbott

do right and what did he do wrong? What additional information do you need about the

downsizing effort to fully understand the process?

Appendix B-224

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

3. Meeting should have been devoted to methodology for restructuring and

performance appraisal, not evaluation of particular people or jobs that could

go.

2. Three months after this meeting, Garcia (age 58) and Lopata (age 55) were discharged.

Based on the information, were Garcia and Lopata victims of age discrimination? Explain

your answer. If necessary, what specific, additional information do you require before you

can take a position? Provide a set of “if–then” propositions (e.g., if I know “X,” then “Y”

follows).

In order for there to be a clear finding of age discrimination, recall from Chapter 3 that the burden is

on the plaintiffs to show that age was the “determinative factor” in the personnel decisions. Such a

finding is more likely under the following conditions: (1) If the plaintiffs could show that all persons

placed on the list of those eligible for “early retirement” were ultimately terminated; (2) none of

3. Must the company adhere to the WARN Act? How do they meet this obligation?

4. How would you evaluate the fairness of this approach to downsizing? What are some

examples of possible difficulties with distributive and procedural justice?

Distributive justice deals with perceptions of equity in the downsizing. In other words, what

employees perceive as fair. For instance, if employees see that all the staff in the maintenance

Appendix B-225

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

a certain age category? What will happen to those employees who opt to not take the early

retirement package? Has everyone been handled the same using the same rules? Brooks will have to

deal with difficulties with both procedural justice and distributive justice since the company is not

consistent in its handling of employees, retaining diversity, and not laying off all departments in the

same percentages.

5. How would you have handled this situation? What would you have done differently?

Provide a chronology of steps. Would you use an outplacement service?

1. Inform employee of downsizing in advance and why it needs to happen.

2. Inform employees of any options they may have (moving to another location at their

expense, retirement, etc.)

Appendix B-226

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

Table 12.1.2

Answers to Form 12.1.2

1. Based on what you know so far, evaluate the Brooks approach to workforce reduction?

What did Brooks do right and what did the company do wrong?

While the HR oversight is recommended and the internal assessment of adverse impact statistics is

“reverse discrimination” lawsuit.

2. What additional information do you need about the downsizing effort at Brooks to fully

understand the legal implications of its restructuring?

The key data would be the actual results of the downsizing broken down by protected classes and

terminated could have a claim.

3. One month after the restructuring, Brooks is informed by the EEOC that, thus far, four

complaints have been file against Brooks for discrimination in the process. What data

should you examine to determine the possibility of discrimination? Should Brooks be

concerned about an ADEA claim based on disparate impact theory?

Brooks should examine the process as it affected the four individuals. The particular claims of the four

will drive the need for certain data. Thus, the general question regarding the four complaints should

Appendix B-227

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Brooks should be concerned about an ADEA claim based on disparate impact theory since the Smith v.

Jackson (2005) and the 2008 Meacham et al. v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory Supreme Court cases

permitting “disparate impact” theory to be used in age discrimination lawsuits and that the employer

must show that action against a worker stems from “reasonable factors other than age.”

Appendix B-228

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

Chapter Exercise 12.2

Compududes Considers Arbitration Options for Employee Disputes

Catherine Tyler

Objective. In Circuit City v Adams, the Supreme Court. determined that an employer can insist on the

submission of an employment dispute to arbitration as a condition of employment. This Exercise

gives students an opportunity to discover the critical elements to a defensible alternative dispute

resolution agreement. Students will also gain knowledge of the differences in attitudes toward that

ADR options and the implications of those attitudes.

Description. Prior to class students should review the four ADR options presented in Exhibit 12.2.1

and complete the ratings for each of these options on Form 12.2.1. Students should expect to spend

30 minutes outside of class to complete Part A. For Part B: Group Analysis, students should break

into groups of six, calculate ratings for each option, then representing Compududes interest, attempt

to reach consensus on the policy to adopt. Groups may also reject all options and derive an

alternative program instead. Instructors should plan on using 30-45 minutes of class time.

Discussion

“A visionary lawyer from State of Illinois said it best, more than

150 years ago: Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to

History

Since the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane

Appendix B-229

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

less attention than the arbitration of statutory rights.) Gilmer opened the door to

arbitration of statutory claims by holding that an employee’s claim of age

litigating his claim in court.

Lower courts since Gilmer have held that employees’ claims brought under Title VII of

the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the

Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, the

Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Jury Systems

unmistakable waiver of an employee’s rights to a civil forum for claims of employment discrimination

under the Americans with Disabilities Act.3

In Ramirez v. Circuit City Stores, the Court of Appeals for the First District, on December 10, 1999,

found that an employer’s arbitration agreement was unconscionable, therefore unenforceable.

Appendix B-230

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

On March 1, 2001 the National Employment Dispute Resolution Act (NEDRA) was introduced in the

House of Representatives (HR 820 IH). The bill calls for amending Title VII of CRA of 1964, ADEA of

1967, ADA of 1990, the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the CRA of 1991 to require the

EEOC to mediate employee claims arising under such acts.5 The EEOC “has taken the position that

agreements that mandate binding arbitration of discrimination claims as a condition of employment

are contrary to the fundamental principles evinced in these laws.”6

Circuit City Stores v. Saint Clair Adams, the Supreme Court ruled that employers could

require employees to take a dispute to arbitration rather than to court. 7

Employees’ Rights

Critics of mandatory arbitration believe that it waives employee rights and leads to inequity in

bargaining power giving more power to the employer due to the “take-I-or-leave-it” way in which

5 Mediate.com. (2001). National Employment Dispute Resolution Act of 2001 (NEDRA).

www.4hr.com/hrcom/index.cfm/62/6C8971AD-D5EC-44C3-B6EA6D8117240F4F accessed August 5, 2002.

9 Janis, M. (2001). Is Your Alternative Dispute Resolution Program a Flea-Dip? www4.hr.com/hrcom/index.cfm/WeeklyMag/BC6854B9-

2D87-451A-98AFACE34FEDA366 accessed August 5, 2002.

10Mediate.com. (2001). What Attracts People to Mediation? Do We Really Want Win-Win? www.mediate.com/articles/pickell2.cfm

accessed August 5, 2002.

Appendix B-231

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

All the studies show that employees actually prevail more often in arbitration than in

court. The American Arbitration Association in one study found a winning rate of 63

percent for arbitral claimants. In a much-criticized system operated by the securities

industry, employees still prevailed 55 percent of the time, according to the U.S.

General Accounting Office.11

“As it stands currently, arbitration does not always allow for punitive damages as is provided for in

employment claims arising under the 1991 Civil Rights Act.”12

RESISTANCE

Norman Pickell offers these reasons as reluctance to enter into mediation.

1. I am not sure what mediation is or how it works.

2. What are the advantages of mediation for me?

3. The other side is too miserable and mean.

18. Mediation is just “free discovery”.

19. My lawyer says we don’t need mediation.

20. I want my lawyer present.

21. What are the advantages of mediation for the lawyers?

11 St. Antoine, T. (2000). For small claims, mandatory arbitration may be blessings in disguise.

Appendix B-232

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

22. Mediation does not guarantee success.

23. What if the mediation process is not working?

“Surveys show, however, that employees are generally receptive to arbitration procedures. Thus,

properly educating employees about the benefits of arbitration should minimize the danger of

Increased Risk of Unionization?

An employer-implemented arbitration program may actually reduce employees’ desire for

Mean ratings of the four options by college students are as follows (see Form 12.2)*:

QUESTION OPTION 1 2 3 4

3 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.5

13 Pickell, N. (2002) Reluctant to Mediate. www.mediate.com/articles/pickell2.cfm accessed August 5, 2002.

Appendix B-233

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

4 3.1 3.0 2.8 2.3

* Based on a sample of 256 college students.

Appendix B-234

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

Chapter Exercise 12.3

Handling an Employee’s Termination

Jennifer Robin

Objective. Students will experience the process by which HR professionals handle requests for

termination by line managers and supervisors in the organization. They will also make decisions on

crucial issues involved in the termination process, and develop an understanding of the sensitivity and

gravity of the termination process.

Description. This exercise was created as a mini in-basket in which students must sort through

relevant information, analyze and distill the information in order to understand the sequence of

events and the company’s policy, and utilize the information to make judgments on a very important

HR issue, that of termination.

Table 12.3.1

Answers to questions and points to discuss

1. The first step is to investigate the situation to make sure the supervisor’s claims are true.

Who will you contact? What questions will you ask? What precautions should you take to

assure that your investigation is confidential and legally appropriate?

In an investigation of such a situation, the first step would be to contact Paul directly to ensure that

the situation he has described in the email is completely understood. He is clearly irritated at this

Appendix B-235

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

noted that she understood that further steps would be taken if her performance did not improve.

Because it appears that she knows the ramifications of her actions, speaking to her becomes more

feasible.

Confidentiality should be communicated to both parties. Specifically, both parties should be made

aware that the HR department considers the investigation confidential, and the HR Professional

should encourage confidentiality on the part of both Paul and Jeanette.

2. Ensure that the necessary documentation is in place based upon the discipline policy and

your expertise as an HR manager.

The Daily Register has a progressive discipline policy in which four steps are to be taken before

termination. Failure to meet performance requirements is considered a minor infraction; so all

measures on the progressive discipline process are to be taken. Paul has not submitted

It is important to realize that this situation has only been on HR’s radar screen (through

3 Assume that the termination was in fact warranted. Managers typically hold termination

meetings at The Daily Register, but it is not unheard of for the HR department to conduct

this meeting. Given the available information, who should conduct the meeting? What

Appendix B-236

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

steps will you take to prepare the manager and/or yourself for this meeting? Prepare an

agenda for the termination meeting.

Operating on the assumption that the termination was warranted, it is clear that representatives from

HR should hold this meeting. Paul expressed a “punishment” mentality in his email, so it is unlikely

The agenda may be as follows: Notification that the employee has been fired and the reason behind

the actions. Make sure there is an outline of the severance, benefits, and any non-compete

4. The Daily Register has some guidelines for severance packages, benefits, and outplacement

services, but they are very informal and typically decided upon on a case-by-case basis. In

this situation, what would you recommend for Jeanette?

Looking to the position description, Jeanette’s position is an entry-level position, and one that

operates from commission rather than salary. A very minimal severance package is recommended,

Appendix B-237

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

CHAPTER 13 – CHAPTER EXERCISES

Chapter Exercise 13.1

Organizing a Union

Nancy Brown Johnson

Objectives. The purpose of Exercise 13.1 is to develop student empathy and reinforce student

learning about why people join labor unions and to understand the reactions of union organizing

efforts from the perspective of employer and employee.

Description . This exercise requires that you assign students to one of the two roles for completion of

the assignment. (An alternative approach would be to have the students write one letter for each of

the roles). Both the “union organizer” role and the “general manager” role require a letter to be

written. For either role, the Individual Analysis (Part A) requires about one hour of out–of-class

preparation after the student has read Chapter 13. The Group Analysis (Part B) requires that all group

members read each other’s letter and agree on the most effective letter. Each group must also derive

a chronology of steps to be taken by either the union organizer or Mr. Cameron (the general

manager). Allow about 45 minutes for the Group Analysis. Tables 13.1.1 and 13.1.2 present examples

of letters from the union organizer and Cameron, the manager.

Criteria for Evaluating the Letters.

The criteria for the evaluation of the letters are:

1) Content — thorough and convincing argument. Accurate illustrations supported by chapter

material and evidence.

Appendix B-238

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

4) Mechanics/Usage — complete sentences (no run-ons or fragments). Subject/verb agreement.

Correct punctuation, capitalization, and spelling.

Appendix B-239

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

Table 13.1.1

Example of Union Organizer Letter

Dear Fellow Employees:

As most of you know, many employees of ARC are very upset about the bad pay and bad working

conditions. Management responds to our complaints by telling us we are free to leave if we want to,

but most of us do not have any other jobs to go to. Yet, we do not have to continue to put up with

Despite these benefits, management will probably tell you why you should not join the union. They

may lie. They may harass you. They may even threaten to fire you. But, the National Labor Relations

Act protects you — you cannot be fired for union activity. We will file unfair labor practice charges

with the National Labor Relations Board and get you your job back with back pay should the company

engage in such illegal actions. Do not let management’s scare tactics frighten you off. Once the CSRA

becomes your collective bargaining agent, they can protect you from this type of harassment. Make

sure that you have the facts about unions and do not accept what management says as truth.

Management will probably tell you that you will not be able to go to them directly if you organize.

We plan to respond to these accusations and others made by management in informal meetings in

employee’s homes over the next few weeks. Contact the union representatives at the gate or at

John’s Bar to find out the dates and times of these meetings.

Sincerely,

Appendix B-240

| Appendix B – Chapter Exercises

Len Smith