Case Study 12-2: Falsification of the Application
- Should Kane receive credit for his previous years of employment with the company?
Before the termination of his employment on August 21, 2014, Kane had worked for the company for only five months since he was hired on March 10, 2014. However, this was not the company’s first hired him. Before his recent employment, he had been engaged three times. Following the seasonality of work, he had to be retrenched and only to be recalled back after business resumed. One of the factors that the company considered when rehiring him was his “seniority on recall provisions in the contract” (Holley, Ross, & Wolters, 2017). In other words, he was a key and potential employee. According to Jain (2014), giving credit to employees is critical when it is determined that they gave their utmost best. This broadly resonates with what he meant for the company when the business season resumed. He was always available for rehiring; hence, there is no good reason for the company to deny him credit for his previous years of employment.
- Compare the weight given to the company doctor to that of Kane’s doctor.
Kane’s dismissal morphed into a controversy that saw the Union seek his reinstatement while the company stood firm that it legitimately sacked him. In its argument, the Union cited the conflicting medical information given by Kane’s doctor and that provided by the company’s doctor. It is important to note that the company’s position to sack the employee was reached after the company’s doctor, Dr. Stanwich, revealed that he was suffering from a condition that he denied when filling out the New Employee Health History Form (Holley, Ross, & Wolters, 2017). However, Dr. Stanwich discovered Kane’s medical condition after going through medical notes written by Kane’s doctor, Dr. Condale. Dr. Vadik, a medical doctor, specializing in internal medicine, substantiated that he was fit and not suffering from the purported ailment. His opinion resonated with what Dr. Condale had suggested about the fatty liver condition. He had told him that it was reversible, provided he embraced a healthy lifestyle. The company’s doctor alleged that two other medical doctors refuted this in this case. The information given by Dr. Condale, therefore, was weightier.
- What level of proof should be used in this decision?
To make such a contentious decision to sack Kane, scientific proof drawn from clinical pathology and epidemiology research is needed. The company has sacked Kane for giving falsified information. It claims that he was previously diagnosed with a fatty liver but failed to indicate that when being recruited. He defends his actions by stating that his doctor had advised him that the condition was reversible, which is why he never considered it a health problem. When deciding to sack Kane, the company must look into medical findings to see if Kane’s claims are false or true.
- Now you decide. Did the company have cause to terminate James Kane? If so, why? If not, why not?
Unfortunately, the company had a reasonable basis for sacking Kane. Firstly, it is scientifically proven that alcohol-related fatty liver condition is irreversible; hence, a patient must live with medication to manage it (Arteel & Crabb, 2016). Secondly, the New Employee Health History Form required the employee to indicate if he had earlier been informed that he was suffering from a range of ailments, with a fatty liver condition being one of them. Despite his doctor telling him that he had the situation, he decided to mark “NO.” By all means, the employee lied, and the company cannot be blamed for sacking him.
References
Artel, G. E., & Crabb, D. W. (2016). Pathogenesis of alcoholic liver disease. Alcoholic and Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, 103(2), 41-69. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20538-0_3
Holley, W. H., Ross, W. H., & Wolters, R. S. (2017). Employee discipline. In The labor relations process, 11th edition (pp. 641-646). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Jain, S. H. (2014, March 7). The importance of giving credit. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/03/the-importance-of-giving-credit
«
The Tariffs Effects on the Market between China and America •
Contemporary Feminism, according to Christine Macleod »
