GBS 205 Essay 2
CASE EXAMPLE B
Legal Issues: The legal issue that I see with Chuck and his anger issues at job; which happens to be XYZ Counseling Agency is that it is a conflict to the environment that the company is creating and the description of the business. How can anyone go to a counseling facility seeking help on many different subjects and topics of which anger is something people go and seek counseling for or are court ordered to take anger counseling classes. If an employee of the counseling agency has anger issues him/herself how will the agency be able to be taken as serious in that particular area and how will others be able to say and see that this agency is successful in helping individuals out in this particular area if their employees can even behave and act appropriately. Since the counseling agency has a policy against violence; the company in all its legal right has the right to fire anyone who does not honor this company policy.
Plaintiff's Arguments: I am here today because I have been unlawfully fired due to a miscommunication and misinterpreted situation. The client Wilbur was the first to initiate the conflict between the two of us. During the counseling session we were discussing the reason and what brought him in to seek counseling from us, Wilbur started to tell his story of how this is court ordered and that he does NOT have a problem with anger. Let the court know that Mr. Wilbur was arrested for domestic violence and it was ordered by the judge for ager management classes and counseling be taken by Mr. Wilbur. I do agree that I have past issues with anger myself and I was even fired from another agency for an altercation with a client; that was five years ago, since then I myself have taken anger classes and counseling classes and have changed my ways. I believe that because of my past I have been wrongfully terminated and I am her to seek monetary damages.
Defendant's Arguments: It is company policy and procedure to not tolerate any employee to conduct themselves in the manner of violence or anything of the sort. We are a counseling agency and as such there is no room for our employees to conduct themselves in a manner that goes against everything that we counsel our clients on; if we allow for that kind of thing to take place at our business; well quite frankly we will not have a business for very long. All employees are given a handbook at their start date orientation and in that handbook it states amongst other items that company policy is that we will not tolerate violet behavior. Chuck was warned a week prior to the incident at hand that actions of this nature tarnish an agencies image and therefore we cannot allow this to continue. It was at that time that Chuck was laced on a probationary period. After checking a little further into his job history it was brought to the company’s attention that Chuck was fired from another counseling firm for hitting a client. I understand that people change; after all that is the business that we are in. The is no contract between the company and its employees; we are a right to work state therefore Chuck was given a warning, placed on a probationary period, then decided to let his anger get the best of him during a counseling session with a client.
My Decision as the Judge: I have heard both sides of the argument and based on the given facts of and laws of there is no contract to maintain employment with the counseling agency; we are reside in a right to work state, I do not find that you were unlawfully terminated by the agency Chuck, I understand that you have a past; that is exactly where it is, is in the past. We are talking about your conduct and behavior recently within the last six months. After given a warning you were placed on probation and still decided to let your anger get the best of you; might I suggest on a side note that you might want to consider going back to some classes or counseling for yourself. I also find that you Mr. Chuck are in material breach or inferior performance. You know that this was an agency that counseled people with ager issues; why would you risk tarnishing the image of the company. I am denying your motion for monetary compensation Chuck, I find that the company acted in their rights and accordingly. That is all court is adjourned. My Own Opinion: Since we are in a right to work state a lot of the issues that might arise in other states do not in ours. I believe that the company acted in the best interest of the company but also handle the situation as a whole in a great fashion because instead of just firing the guy right on the spot, it was decided to allow him a chance to change his behavior by placing him on a probationary period. It was the employees decision to allow his anger get the best of him and from his past history although it was many years ago; it seems to be repeating or starting up again. So I have to agree with the way the agency handled it. I definitely would not want my employees to counsel others and snap at them at the drop of a dime.