Respond to at least two of your fellow students’ posts in a substantive manner.
Agree or disagree with your classmate’s position. Defend your position by using information from the week’s readings or examples from current events.
1. Discuss What duty or duties a business has with regard to checking the background of potential employees before hiring.
Do you agree that businesses should be liable for injuries resulting from negligent hiring? Why or why not?
Yes, I do believe that businesses should be liable for injuries resulting from negligent hiring and supervision. When it comes to criminal cases, the responsible should be held liable, but for punitive damages and civil cases, the employer should share in the liability. In Maloney v B&L Motor Freight Inc. the company failed to properly screen a candidate who had a history of violence and sexual assault and their negligence in part led to the victim’s injuries. In other cases, if an employer fails to properly protect themselves, by running a very basic criminal background/history check, they assume the responsibilities that come with their decision. Although not all crimes are foreseeable, and some crimes are committed without warning, the employer must prove that they have done everything to a reasonable extent within their power to prevent injuries to any other person or company by their employee.
Hickox, S. (2011). Employer liability for negligent hiring of ex-offenders. Saint Louis University Law Journal, 55, 1001. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/[email protected]2&vid=5&hid=4210
Seaquist, G. (2012). Business law for managers. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
2.
|
Hi class, Over the years, I have learned through reading entrepreneurship and business related books, that a business should not hire on the first interview, but rather after subsequent interviews and background check (depending on the type of business or industry). An interviewer learns much more about an interviewee with multiple interviews. Interviews are human based factor that confirms the information on a resume is consistent with either or combination of in-person behavioral, team, and stress interview questions or scenarios. Hiring the wrong person cost time, money, and possible litigation for failing to get the right person, with the right skills, and the right values on the bus in order to put him/her in the right seat is vital to the prevention of future issues of either not being a team player, hidden past coming out, or being incompetent (lacking aptitude to perform the job). According to Hauswirth (2009), “If recruiting and hiring practices are careless, a company can face unexpected and unwelcome consequences. Negligent hiring resulting from one bad hire could embroil a company in a lawsuit, resulting in potentially detrimental financial consequences and damage to the company’s reputation — classic risk management dilemmas.” I do agree a business should be liable for hiring of an employee who’s either incompetent, untrained, or has criminal past associated or in-line with the type of business. Day care owners are in a risky business of attempting to hire the right people, because it requires no formal advance education like possessing a bachelor’s degree. If a daycare owner unknowingly hires a person with a criminal background of assault, child endangerment or neglect, or the daycare failed to have adequate supervision and a child get hurt, then this daycare owner (or LLC) is negligent in his/her duties to provide a safe environment for both employees and children. ReferenceHauswirth, W. (2009, August). Negligent Hiring: Employer Risk. ISO Review. Retrieved on 02 Sept 2014 from, http://www.iso.com/Research-and-Analyses/ISO-Review/Negligent-Hiring-Employer-Risk.html.3.hould employers be permitted to discriminate based upon attractiveness? Yes, I believe that employers should be able to discriminate based upon general attractiveness. Many businesses are driven by sales and if a customer feels uncomfortable when approached by a salesperson on the floor, this may be a deterrent from them making a purchase. The opposite argument is that an attractive salesperson may be able to drive sales if people feel that person is more approachable. Many industries: television, modeling, etc., may not have guidelines about how an employee must look, but it would be a fallacy to say that these industries do not take into account how a person looks when making employment decisions. I do not, however, feel that attractiveness should be the sole factor for making an employment decision. There should be many reasons why someone is hired or not, and how a person looks is often times a weighted factor.
If, however, an employer tells a specific candidate that they did not hire them because they are not attractive, that person may file a discrimination lawsuit against the potential employer. It would then be up to the employer to prove that their company would suffer damages from hiring the person and that attractiveness is a viable reason to either hire or not hire someone. I do believe that how someone looks goes into the hiring process. Most people put on nice clean clothes and get haircuts etc. when applying for a new job. If an employer feels that the way you look is inappropriate or not attractive toward their customer base, they have the right to “hold that against you” to a reasonable extent.
4. Hi class, Each of us was conceived without permission and unknowingly entered this world lacking knowledge of the destructive disparities set before us by some folks through the discrimination of someone’s color, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, age, disability, or pregnancy. As we develop mentally and physically from adolescents to adults, we learn and are engrained with the morals, values, discipline, kindness, respectfulness, courage, poise, and other positive attributes our parents instilled in us. Unfortunately for some folks, negative attitudes and behavior are also learned and engrained, thus, depositing these individuals into society to do more harm than good. These individuals go on to become law makers (politicians), business leaders, professors, teachers, doctors, lawyers, and just plain ole’ employees looking to keep some one down. Therefore, my argument is to take the side of an employer whom should not be permitted by law to discriminate against persons who are not attractive. To go a step further, it’s not the employer who is discriminating; it’s the human in the leadership or influential position who is discriminating against another. Everyone deserves to be treated humanely, because we have no control over our development in what shade of color we become, what ethnicity, what nationality, what gender, whether we’d be fat, skinny, handsome, or gorgeous, or possible, born with a disability. A reasonable person standard would have the courage to stand up for someone who is struggling, battling by him or herself. If you see something wrong, say something right. |
0 comments