Law Scenario

1 . Is bloody shame an autarkical contractor or an employee ? calculate the factors that led to your determinationInitially , bloody shame was hired to convey on a specific project . At this stage Mary was an independent contractor . As this project was nearing completion , she was asked to act with a new project under a supervisor . eyepatch doing this extend she was given access to connection materials and equipment and in any case she had to adhere to the work schedules inherent in the keep company . This changes her posture to that of an employee .2 . Has the employer /employee blood changed e genuinelyplace the course of time ? If so , howThis endure changed over a period of time , because Mary s work parceling and working conditions changed in much(prenominal) a behavior that they were identical to what an e mployee generally works under . As such her utilization status changed from that of an independent contractor to that of an employee . This is because from a peculiar(prenominal) ready of work that she was initially working on , she was being utilized for different projects and she was asked to work with equipment owned by the company and also to follow the work schedules under the control of the company s supervisor3 ) Was Mary s release legal under the principle of employ-at-will why or why not ? If not , which of the following exceptions to practice session-at-will ask been break ? Whya ) check of public policy , b ) give out of implied promise of intimately trust and fair dealing and c ) Breach of implied contractMary s release was not legal under the doctrine of employment at will because this is violative of breach of implied stipulation of adept faith and fair dealing .

The covenant of straightforward faith and fair dealing exists in every employment relationship , it has been interpreted to imply either that employer personnel decisions be exposed to a `just cause standard or that terminations do in bad faith or actuate by malice are prohibited Mary s work was prominent and even during the period of economic crisis she did a very good job . However , after the company regain and good times for the company were ushered in , the supervisor neglected her fealty and indulged in nepotism by employing his cousin . In this office an manginess was done to Mary and instead of being rewarded for her consecrate and leal work , she was summarily dismissed and replaced by a person whose main qualification was that she was the supervisor s cousinMuhl , Charles J . The duty - at - will doctrine : three major exceptions . monthly lug Review . January 2001 . Retrieved from HYPERLINK http /www .bls .gov /opub /mlr /2001 /01 /art1 total .pdf http /www .bls .gov /opub /mlr /2001 /01 /art1full .pdf on rarefied 12 , 2006 . PAGE 2...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper