BSW4804 Assignment 1 (ANSWERS) 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED

Well-structured BSW4804 Assignment 1 (ANSWERS) 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED. (DETAILED ANSWERS - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED!). .... Read the case study and answer the questions that follow: ScreenInk Architects (Pty) Ltd Source: ScreenInk Architects (Pty) Ltd is one of the top 10 architectural firms in South Africa. The architectural firm focuses on designing both contemporary and traditional buildings, as well as luxurious homes tailored to the needs of their clients. The firm remains at the forefront of design by exploring new forms, pushing the boundaries without compromising on the authenticity of the design, aesthetics, materials, and originality. Recently, ScreenInk Architects (Pty) Ltd has found that the business is not doing as well as in the past. With the advent of innovation and technology, competing architectural firms have recently entered the market and have been offering “high tech architecture” at lowest prices and they are attracting new clients including the ones who were previously serviced by ScreenInk Architects (Pty) Ltd. 2 Sindy Nzuile, the HR manager at the firm, has noticed that the workload of five employees, who are primarily in charge of researching historic architecture has declined considerably. She is also aware that she simply cannot transfer one of them to a new position. Further, the firm does not receive grants from the government based on their employment equity status. Thus, Adri has reluctantly decided that she must terminate the employment of one of these employees. Her question is, which one? Cameron Froneman: 50 years old; male; white; married with three children; 15 years with the firm, graduated from an FET college with a national Diploma in architecture; knows how to resolve difficult spatial designs issues due to his experience in urban planning; is difficult to get along with; antagonises other employees at firm; hates filling out reports or completing any administration-related tasks and refuses to do so on certain occasions, which forces others to complete it for him in order to get the job done. Anushka Reddy: 26 years old; pregnant female; Indian; married; currently studying at an FET college for a National diploma in Architectural technology; one year with the firm; spouse works as an ICT technician at the firm; works very hard and is eager to learn; well-liked by all employees and she is highly dependable; is rarely absent and will gladly work overtime to deal with emergencies; with more experience she should be an outstanding research consultant; is highly loyal and dedicated; moved recently to a new apartment across the street from the office where she works. Tshediso Skweyiya: 31 years old; female; black; single; Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch.) and currently studying towards her Master of Architecture (M. Arch.) at night; three years with the firm; very reserved and does not get along with many of the employees; very active in community development initiatives; capable of moving up to a top management position with the firm; often misses work due to school and community activities. Jerome Buchanan: 36 years old; male; coloured; married; attended FET college but did not complete his qualification; ten years with the firm; nephew of Sindy Nzuile; has had eye problems and headaches, which have affected the quality of his work over the last year and may continue to do so; has been very helpful in getting new business for the firm; is well known and highly respected by other firms. Marius Brand: 63 years old; male; white; married; 25 years with the firm; no higher education, but has gained recognition prior learning (RPL) due his extensive experience in the field; hard working and liked by all employees; three children in college; a solid, stable employee who is able to remain calm and solve problems in crisis situations; excellent at resolving conflict between employees; well known to other companies and industries; a very slow but highly accurate worker who produces excellent quality work. TASK ONE [33] 1.1 From the information provided in the case study, some employees had challenges that could have a negative impact on their performance. Identify the employee who might be experiencing low levels of job performance. State the reasons for identifying this employee. (2) Assessment criteria To answer this question, you need to identify the employee who is likely to experience low levels of job performance and state reasons for identifying the employee. 3 1.2 Discuss the steps that should be followed if an employee is not performing satisfactorily. (10) Assessment criteria To answer this question, you need to provide a detailed discussion about the necessary steps to be taken when an employee is under performing. Further, your discussion needs to be guided by specific laws and regulations. 1.3 From the information provided in the scenario/case study, explain the criteria which can be used to determine whose employment should be terminated? (6) 1.4 You are one of the panel members making the final decision as to whose employment should be terminated. Go to the module site, under Discussions: Assignment 02_ Task 1_Activity 1.4., engage in healthy debates with other panel members (your fellow students) on who you think should be terminated from the firm and why. You are encouraged to utilise all South African laws pertaining to employment, which should assist you in arguing your case. Assessment criteria: This activity requires you to engage on the discussion forum. Take a screen shot of your own comments, then paste and submit them in your assignment for marking. Students who do not submit their screen shot will not be credited marks for this activity. A 0% mark will be awarded for question 1.2. (5) 1.5 Suppose the firm were to terminate the employment contract of each employee; what would the firm loose? Evaluate the possible consequences of “firing” each employee (5) 1.6 After making the decision to terminate the employment of each candidate, the firm is faced with the following issues: (5) Cameron Froneman lodges a suit against the firm, claiming unfair dismissal. He further claims that he was dismissed due to discrimination because he is white. Anushka Reddy lodges a suit against the firm, claiming that she was unfairly dismissed because she is pregnant. Tshediso Skweyiya lodges a suit, claiming that she was unfairly dismissed because she is black and unmarried. Jerome Buchanan lodges a suit, claiming that he was unfairly dismissed because he is disabled. Marius Brand claims that he was unfairly dismissed because of his age. You now need to respond to each one as a representative of ScreenInk Architects (Pty) Ltd and explain the reasons for your decision of terminating each one. Explain why your decision is not based on the claims they are each making. 4 TASK TWO [35] Table 1: Architect pay by experience level. 2.1 In South Africa, an entry level architect with less than three years of experience earns an average base salary of R 250 000 gross per year. A professional architect with 4-9 years of experience earns an average salary of R 380 000, while an experienced Architect with 10-20 years of experience makes on average R 520 000. Architects with more than 20 years of experience may earn more than R 600 000 yearly. However, at ScreenInk Architects, senior architect such as Cameron Froneman earn 428 000 per year. Compare their base salary with the average base salary offered in the market and identify the pay strategy (policy) implemented by ScreenInk Architects (1 mark). Briefly discuss this pay strategy in relation to other pay policies (6 marks). (7) 2.2 Discuss factors that could be attributed to the basic salary differences between ScreenInk Architects and the market. (8) 2.3 Explain how the law regulates the remuneration practices within the South African labour market? Refer to the specific Acts and/ regulations. (10) 2.4 Describe various talent management approaches that ScreenInk Architects can implement to retain highly talented architects whilst improving the firm’s competitive advantage in the market. (10)