Solution Manual F#
Employment Law for Business, 10th Edition,
F# F# F# F# F#
Dawn Bennett-Alexander, Chapters 1 -
F# F# F# F#
16
F#
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
F# F#
Chapter F#1 F#The F#Regulation F#of F#Employment
Chapter F#2 F#The F#Employment F#Law F#Toolkit: F#Resources F#for F#Understanding F#the F#Law F # and
F#Recurring F#Legal F#Concepts
Chapter F#3 F#Title F#VII F#of F#the F#Civil F#Rights F#Act F#of F#1964
Chapter F#4 F#Legal F#Construction F#of F#the F#Employment F#Environment F # Chapter F#5
Affirmative F#Action
F#
Chapter F#6 F#Race F#and F#Color F#Discrimination
F# Chapter F#7 F#National F#Origin F#Discrimination
F# Chapter F#8 F#Gender F#Discrimination F#
F# Chapter F#9 F#Sexual F#Harassment
Chapter F#10 F#Sexual F#Orientation F#and F#Gender F#Identity F#Discrimination F # Chapter
11 F#Religious F#Discrimination
F#
Chapter F#12 F#Age F#Discrimination F# Chapter
13 F#Disability F#Discrimination
F#
Chapter F#14 F#The F#Employee’s F#Right F#to F#Privacy F#and F#Management F#of F#Personal
Information
Chapter F#15 F#Labor F#Law F#857
Chapter F#16 F#Selected F#Employment F#Benefits F#and F#Protections
Chapter F#1
, The F#Regulation F#of F#Employment
Chapter F#Objective
The F#student F#is F#introduced F#to F#the F#regulatory F#environment F#of F#the F#employment
F#relationship. F#The F # chapter F#examines F#whether F#regulation F#is F#actually F#necessary F#or
F#beneficial F#or F#if, F#perhaps, F#the F # relationship F#would F#fare F#better F#with F#less F#governmental
F#intervention. F#The F#concepts F#of F#―freedom‖ F#to F # contract F#in F#the F#regulatory F#employment
F#environment F#and F#non-compete F#agreements F#are F#discussed. F # Since F#the F#regulations
F#and F#case F#law F#discussed F#in F#this F#text F#rely F#on F# an F# individual‘s F#classification F# as F # an
F # employer F#or F#an F#employee, F#those F#definitions F#are F#delineated F#and F#explored.
LearningF#Objectives
(Click F#on F#the F#icon F#following F#the F#learning F#objective F#to F#be F#linked F#to F#the F#location F#in F#the
F#outlinewhere F#the F#chapter F # addresses F#that F#particular F#objective.)
At F#the F#conclusion F#of F#this F#chapter, F#the F#students F#should F#be F#able F#to:
1. Describe F#the F#balance F#between F#the F#freedom F#to F#contract F#and F#the F#current
F#regulatory F # environment F#for F#employment. F#
2. Identify F#who F#is F#subject F#to F#which F#employment F#laws F#and F#understand F#the F#implication
F#of F#eachof F # these F#laws F#for F#both F#the F#employer F#and F#employee. F#
3. Delineate F#the F#risks F#to F#the F#employer F#caused F#by F#employee F#misclassification. F#
4. Explain F#the F#difference F#between F#and F#employee F#and F#an F#independent F#contractor
F#and F#the F#tests F # that F#help F#us F#in F#that F#determination. F#
5. Articulate F#the F#various F#ways F#in F#which F#the F#concept F#―employer‖ F#is F#defined F#by
F#the F#various F # employment-related F#regulations. F#
6. Describe F#the F#permissible F#parameters F#of F#non-compete F#agreements. F#
Detailed F#Chapter F#Outline
Scenarios—Points F#for F#Discussion
, Scenario F#One: F#This F#scenario F#offers F#an F#opportunity F#to F#review F#the F#distinctions F#between
F#an F # employee F#and F#an F#independent F#contractor F#discussed F#in F#the F#chapter F#(see F#―The
F#Definition F#of F # Employee,‖ F#particularly F#Exhibits F#1.3–1.5). F#Discuss F#the F# IRS F#20-factor
F# analysis, F#as F#it F#applies F#to F # Dalia‘s F#position. F#In F#light F#of F#the F#low F#level F#of F#control
F#that F#Dalia F#had F#over F#her F#fees F#and F#her F#work F # process, F#and F#the F#limits F#upon F#her
F#choice F#of F#clients, F#students F#should F#come F#to F#the F#conclusion F#that F # Dalia F#is F#an
F#employee F#(therefore, F#eligible F#to F#file F#an F#unemployment F#claim), F#rather F#than F#an
F # independent F#contractor.
Scenario F#Two: F#Soraya F#would F#not F#have F#a F#cause F#of F#action F#that F#would F#be F#recognized
F#by F#the F#EEOC. F # Review F#the F#section F#―The F#Definition F#of F#‗Employer‘‖ F#with F#students, F#and
F#discuss F#the F#rationale F#that F # determines F#the F#status F#of F#a F#supervisor F#vis-à-vis F#anti-
discrimination F#legislation. F#Because F#Soraya F#is F # Soraya‘s F#supervisor, F#not F#her
F#employer, F#he F#cannot F#be F#the F#target F#of F#an F#EEOC F#claim F# of F#sexual F # harassment.
CCC, F#Soraya‘s F#employer, F#would F#be F#vulnerable F#to F#an F#EEOC F#claim F#if F#the F#company
F#lacked F#or F#failedto F # follow F#a F#system F#for F#employee F#redress F#of F#discrimination
F#grievances. F#However, F#in F#this F#case, F# CCC F # appears F#to F#have F#a F#viable F#anti-
discrimination F#policy F#that F#it F#adhered F#to F#diligently; F#consequently, F#Soraya F # would F#be
F#unlikely F#to F#win F#a F#decision F#in F#her F#favor. F#The F#court F#in F# Williams F#v. F#Banning F#(1995)
F#offered F#the F # following F#rationale F#for F#its F#decision F#in F#a F#similar F#case:
―She F#has F#an F#employer F#who F#was F#sensitive F#and F#responsive F#to F#her F#complaint. F#She
F#can F#take F # comfort F#in F#the F#knowledge F#that F#she F#continues F#to F#work F# for F#this
F#company, F#while F#her F#harasser F # does F#not F#and F#that F#the F#company's F#prompt
F#action F#is F#likely F#to F#discourage F#other F#would F#be F # harassers. F#This F#is F#precisely
F#the F#result F#Title F#VII F#was F#meant F#to F#achieve.‖
Scenario F#Three: F#Students F#should F#discuss F#whether F#or F#not F#Mya F#non-compete F#agreement F#is
F#likely F#tobe F # found F#reasonable F#by F#a F#court, F#and F#elaborate F#the F#aspects F#of F#the
F#agreement F#that F#Mya F#might F#contest F#as F # unreasonable F#(see F#section F#below, F#―Covenants
F#Not F#to F#Compete‖). F#Does F#Mya F#have F#a F#persuasive F # argument F#that F#the F#terms F#of F#her
F#non-compete F#agreement F#are F#unreasonable F#in F#scope F#or F# duration?
Might F#she F#have F#grounds F#to F#claim F#that F#the F#agreement F#prohibits F#her F#from F#making F#a
F# living?
Given F#the F#diversity F#of F#state F#laws F#regulating F#non-compete F#agreements, F#discuss F#the
F#range F#of F#legal F # restrictions F#that F#might F#apply F#to F#Mya‘s F#particular F#agreement F# with
F#her F#employer. F#As F#an F#employeewho F # works F#across F#several F#states, F#Mya‘s F#defense
F#may F#depend F#upon F#the F#presence—and F#specific F # language—of F#a F#forum F#selection
F#clause F#in F#her F#non-compete F#agreement. F#Consider F#what F#language F # would F#be F#more
F#likely F#to F#provide F#Nan F#with F#a F#strong F#defense F#against F#the F#breach F#of F#contract F#claim.
Mya F#might F#also F#argue F#that F#the F#company‘s F#client F#list F#is F#available F#through F#public
F#means, F#and F # therefore, F#her F#access F#to F#this F#list F#should F# not F#be F#prohibited.
General F#Lecture F#Note F#for F#Employment F#Law F#Course
In F#order F#to F#teach F#this F#course, F#instructors F#have F#found F#that F#students F#must F#be F#made F#to
F#feel F#relatively F # comfortable F#with F#their F#peers. F#Instructors F#will F#be F#asking F#the F#students
F#to F#be F#honest F#and F#to F#stay F#in F # their F#truth, F#even F#at F#times F#when F#they F#feel F#that
F#their F#opinion F#on F#one F#of F#these F#matters F#will F#not F#be
Employment Law for Business, 10th Edition,
F# F# F# F# F#
Dawn Bennett-Alexander, Chapters 1 -
F# F# F# F#
16
F#
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
F# F#
Chapter F#1 F#The F#Regulation F#of F#Employment
Chapter F#2 F#The F#Employment F#Law F#Toolkit: F#Resources F#for F#Understanding F#the F#Law F # and
F#Recurring F#Legal F#Concepts
Chapter F#3 F#Title F#VII F#of F#the F#Civil F#Rights F#Act F#of F#1964
Chapter F#4 F#Legal F#Construction F#of F#the F#Employment F#Environment F # Chapter F#5
Affirmative F#Action
F#
Chapter F#6 F#Race F#and F#Color F#Discrimination
F# Chapter F#7 F#National F#Origin F#Discrimination
F# Chapter F#8 F#Gender F#Discrimination F#
F# Chapter F#9 F#Sexual F#Harassment
Chapter F#10 F#Sexual F#Orientation F#and F#Gender F#Identity F#Discrimination F # Chapter
11 F#Religious F#Discrimination
F#
Chapter F#12 F#Age F#Discrimination F# Chapter
13 F#Disability F#Discrimination
F#
Chapter F#14 F#The F#Employee’s F#Right F#to F#Privacy F#and F#Management F#of F#Personal
Information
Chapter F#15 F#Labor F#Law F#857
Chapter F#16 F#Selected F#Employment F#Benefits F#and F#Protections
Chapter F#1
, The F#Regulation F#of F#Employment
Chapter F#Objective
The F#student F#is F#introduced F#to F#the F#regulatory F#environment F#of F#the F#employment
F#relationship. F#The F # chapter F#examines F#whether F#regulation F#is F#actually F#necessary F#or
F#beneficial F#or F#if, F#perhaps, F#the F # relationship F#would F#fare F#better F#with F#less F#governmental
F#intervention. F#The F#concepts F#of F#―freedom‖ F#to F # contract F#in F#the F#regulatory F#employment
F#environment F#and F#non-compete F#agreements F#are F#discussed. F # Since F#the F#regulations
F#and F#case F#law F#discussed F#in F#this F#text F#rely F#on F# an F# individual‘s F#classification F# as F # an
F # employer F#or F#an F#employee, F#those F#definitions F#are F#delineated F#and F#explored.
LearningF#Objectives
(Click F#on F#the F#icon F#following F#the F#learning F#objective F#to F#be F#linked F#to F#the F#location F#in F#the
F#outlinewhere F#the F#chapter F # addresses F#that F#particular F#objective.)
At F#the F#conclusion F#of F#this F#chapter, F#the F#students F#should F#be F#able F#to:
1. Describe F#the F#balance F#between F#the F#freedom F#to F#contract F#and F#the F#current
F#regulatory F # environment F#for F#employment. F#
2. Identify F#who F#is F#subject F#to F#which F#employment F#laws F#and F#understand F#the F#implication
F#of F#eachof F # these F#laws F#for F#both F#the F#employer F#and F#employee. F#
3. Delineate F#the F#risks F#to F#the F#employer F#caused F#by F#employee F#misclassification. F#
4. Explain F#the F#difference F#between F#and F#employee F#and F#an F#independent F#contractor
F#and F#the F#tests F # that F#help F#us F#in F#that F#determination. F#
5. Articulate F#the F#various F#ways F#in F#which F#the F#concept F#―employer‖ F#is F#defined F#by
F#the F#various F # employment-related F#regulations. F#
6. Describe F#the F#permissible F#parameters F#of F#non-compete F#agreements. F#
Detailed F#Chapter F#Outline
Scenarios—Points F#for F#Discussion
, Scenario F#One: F#This F#scenario F#offers F#an F#opportunity F#to F#review F#the F#distinctions F#between
F#an F # employee F#and F#an F#independent F#contractor F#discussed F#in F#the F#chapter F#(see F#―The
F#Definition F#of F # Employee,‖ F#particularly F#Exhibits F#1.3–1.5). F#Discuss F#the F# IRS F#20-factor
F# analysis, F#as F#it F#applies F#to F # Dalia‘s F#position. F#In F#light F#of F#the F#low F#level F#of F#control
F#that F#Dalia F#had F#over F#her F#fees F#and F#her F#work F # process, F#and F#the F#limits F#upon F#her
F#choice F#of F#clients, F#students F#should F#come F#to F#the F#conclusion F#that F # Dalia F#is F#an
F#employee F#(therefore, F#eligible F#to F#file F#an F#unemployment F#claim), F#rather F#than F#an
F # independent F#contractor.
Scenario F#Two: F#Soraya F#would F#not F#have F#a F#cause F#of F#action F#that F#would F#be F#recognized
F#by F#the F#EEOC. F # Review F#the F#section F#―The F#Definition F#of F#‗Employer‘‖ F#with F#students, F#and
F#discuss F#the F#rationale F#that F # determines F#the F#status F#of F#a F#supervisor F#vis-à-vis F#anti-
discrimination F#legislation. F#Because F#Soraya F#is F # Soraya‘s F#supervisor, F#not F#her
F#employer, F#he F#cannot F#be F#the F#target F#of F#an F#EEOC F#claim F# of F#sexual F # harassment.
CCC, F#Soraya‘s F#employer, F#would F#be F#vulnerable F#to F#an F#EEOC F#claim F#if F#the F#company
F#lacked F#or F#failedto F # follow F#a F#system F#for F#employee F#redress F#of F#discrimination
F#grievances. F#However, F#in F#this F#case, F# CCC F # appears F#to F#have F#a F#viable F#anti-
discrimination F#policy F#that F#it F#adhered F#to F#diligently; F#consequently, F#Soraya F # would F#be
F#unlikely F#to F#win F#a F#decision F#in F#her F#favor. F#The F#court F#in F# Williams F#v. F#Banning F#(1995)
F#offered F#the F # following F#rationale F#for F#its F#decision F#in F#a F#similar F#case:
―She F#has F#an F#employer F#who F#was F#sensitive F#and F#responsive F#to F#her F#complaint. F#She
F#can F#take F # comfort F#in F#the F#knowledge F#that F#she F#continues F#to F#work F# for F#this
F#company, F#while F#her F#harasser F # does F#not F#and F#that F#the F#company's F#prompt
F#action F#is F#likely F#to F#discourage F#other F#would F#be F # harassers. F#This F#is F#precisely
F#the F#result F#Title F#VII F#was F#meant F#to F#achieve.‖
Scenario F#Three: F#Students F#should F#discuss F#whether F#or F#not F#Mya F#non-compete F#agreement F#is
F#likely F#tobe F # found F#reasonable F#by F#a F#court, F#and F#elaborate F#the F#aspects F#of F#the
F#agreement F#that F#Mya F#might F#contest F#as F # unreasonable F#(see F#section F#below, F#―Covenants
F#Not F#to F#Compete‖). F#Does F#Mya F#have F#a F#persuasive F # argument F#that F#the F#terms F#of F#her
F#non-compete F#agreement F#are F#unreasonable F#in F#scope F#or F# duration?
Might F#she F#have F#grounds F#to F#claim F#that F#the F#agreement F#prohibits F#her F#from F#making F#a
F# living?
Given F#the F#diversity F#of F#state F#laws F#regulating F#non-compete F#agreements, F#discuss F#the
F#range F#of F#legal F # restrictions F#that F#might F#apply F#to F#Mya‘s F#particular F#agreement F# with
F#her F#employer. F#As F#an F#employeewho F # works F#across F#several F#states, F#Mya‘s F#defense
F#may F#depend F#upon F#the F#presence—and F#specific F # language—of F#a F#forum F#selection
F#clause F#in F#her F#non-compete F#agreement. F#Consider F#what F#language F # would F#be F#more
F#likely F#to F#provide F#Nan F#with F#a F#strong F#defense F#against F#the F#breach F#of F#contract F#claim.
Mya F#might F#also F#argue F#that F#the F#company‘s F#client F#list F#is F#available F#through F#public
F#means, F#and F # therefore, F#her F#access F#to F#this F#list F#should F# not F#be F#prohibited.
General F#Lecture F#Note F#for F#Employment F#Law F#Course
In F#order F#to F#teach F#this F#course, F#instructors F#have F#found F#that F#students F#must F#be F#made F#to
F#feel F#relatively F # comfortable F#with F#their F#peers. F#Instructors F#will F#be F#asking F#the F#students
F#to F#be F#honest F#and F#to F#stay F#in F # their F#truth, F#even F#at F#times F#when F#they F#feel F#that
F#their F#opinion F#on F#one F#of F#these F#matters F#will F#not F#be
