UMUC AMBA610 week 6 discussion

.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/122920/viewContent/6026270/View” title=”‘Topic #1: gizmo, inc.’ – discussion topic”>Topic #1: Gizmo, Inc.Discussion Topic.googleusercontent.com/proxy/Gn3c7hRNrkvpan7yLs2Mts3-8FthnKFNw0KoLHo_IfJ12yXQyEIP76zjiIMvaQZSgdp6hsM7oj3UCFQfs6VZFrI=s0-d-e1-ft#https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/img/lp/pixel.gif” alt=”Well done! you have contributed to the discussion”>Becky Sharp and Sydney Carton applied to become administrative assistants for Gizmo, Inc. (GI). After the interviewing process, both were hired and asked to sign contracts that contained the same provision: “If there is any dispute as to employment practiced or employee/employer actions, this dispute will be decided via binding arbitration.”Both signed the contract after being given ample time to review it and to consult an attorney. Several months later, Sydney became addicted to cocaine, and Becky became pregnant with her first child. When Becky experienced complications during her pregnancy, GI initially agreed to grant her medical leave, but shortly thereafter the company informed Becky that her position had been eliminated due to a “reorganization.”Fearing that Sydney might have trouble picking up the slack for the recently released Becky, GI asked him to take a surprise drug test. Sydney was confused and alarmed and refused to take the test. GI informed him that because of his refusal, he was fired. Becky decided to file a lawsuit in state court under the state and federal Family and Medical Leave Acts that guarantee pregnant women a set number of weeks off for pregnancy. Sydney, on the other hand, submitted his case to an arbitrator.Will either of their grievances be heard in court? Why?What will the results of each be?Each student must post his or her response to this topic no later than 11:59PM on the final day of this discussion week..umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/122920/viewContent/6026271/View” title=”‘Topic #2: wheels for hire’ – discussion topic”>Topic #2: Wheels for HireDiscussion Topic.googleusercontent.com/proxy/Gn3c7hRNrkvpan7yLs2Mts3-8FthnKFNw0KoLHo_IfJ12yXQyEIP76zjiIMvaQZSgdp6hsM7oj3UCFQfs6VZFrI=s0-d-e1-ft#https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/img/lp/pixel.gif” alt=”Task: reply to this topic”>Wheels for Hire, a new and used car dealership, hired Sam Spade to perform various duties, such as cleaning and gassing vehicles, moving vehicles from one lot to another and maintaining the showroom and vehicle lots. In this position, Sam had access to keys to the vehicle through an “ignition kiosk access process.” Under this process, a designated attendant, Curly Hurley, keeps the keys in a restricted kiosk. When any employee wants to move a company vehicle, s/he must fill out a key “tag” or request form, which contains spaces for the date, time, stock number of vehicle, name of employee checking out the vehicle, and the destination of the vehicle. For example, the vehicle might be taken to a body shop for repairs or to a gas station, or to a company lot at a different location. Every time an employee checks out a vehicle, the reason must be for company business use. It was not necessary to put the expected return time on the tag, but if a vehicle was expected to be gone for a long time, this information was supposed to be put on the tag. Sometimes Curly fills the tag out for the employee. When the tag is completed, Curly adds the information from the tag to key control log, gives the keys to the employee who has requested them, and hangs the tag on the board in the control shack. When the vehicle is returned Curly crosses out the entry for the vehicle in the control log, replaces the keys, and removes the tag from the board. Sometimes vehicles are gone for more than one day, but a new page of the control entry is started each day. Some vehicles may be removed permanently if they are sold from another lot. In these cases, the managers of the other lots call to let Curly know that the vehicle will not be coming back. Sometimes employees would drive cars back and leave the keys with other employees. This practice was acceptable to the dealership.One day Sam asked Curly if he could use a car for 30 minutes on his lunch break to go to his mother’s house. Curly told him it was okay as long as he brought it back because, otherwise, she could get in trouble. Sam took the car and left. On his way back to the dealership, Sam rear-ended a car stopped at a stop light, causing injuries to the driver and a passenger. Sam told a police officer at the scene of the accident that he was on a lunch break from his job and that he had permission to drive the car, but his boss was not aware he had the car.The plaintiffs sued the car dealership on the grounds that it was responsible for the injuries caused by Sam.There are three subtopics posted in this topic: 2(a) For the Plaintiff; 2(b) For the Defendant; and 2(c) The Judgment. Your faculty member will assign you to the role of Plaintiffs’ attorney, Defendants’ attorney or Judge. Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ attorneys must post a well-reasoned analysis to support their respective clients’ positions. This is not a team assignment. It is an individualassignment. Each individualPlaintiffs’ and Defendants’ attorney should post his or her argument no later than 11:59 PM on day 4 of this week’s discussion. Judges should read the arguments posted in Topics 2(a) and 2(b) and post in 2(c) a well-reasoned opinion ruling in favor of either the plaintiff or the defendant based on the law and the facts presented. Each individual judge is required to post only one decision onthe case no later than 11:59 PM on the final day of this week’s discussion. Earlier postings are encouraged, if at all possible, in order to give everyone more opportunity to discuss the rulings. Individual judges may ask questions of both sides but should post only one opinion per judge. Everyone should participate in the Judge’s topic and discuss your views of the judges’ rulings.