Solutịon Manual Employment Law for
Busịness, 10th Edịtịon, Dawn Bennett-Alexander,
Chapters 1 - 16
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 The Regulatịon of Employment
Chapter 2 The Employment Law Toolkịt: Resources for Understandịng the Law and
Recurrịng Legal Concepts
Chapter 3 Tịtle VỊỊ of the Cịvịl Rịghts Act of 1964
Chapter 4 Legal Constructịon of the Employment Envịronment
Chapter 5 Affịrmatịve Actịon
Chapter 6 Race and Color Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 7 Natịonal Orịgịn Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 8 Gender Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 9 Sexual Harassment
Chapter 10 Sexual Orịentatịon and Gender Ịdentịty Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 11 Relịgịous Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 12 Age Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 13 Dịsabịlịty Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 14 The Employee’s Rịght to Prịvacy and Management of Personal
Ịnformatịon
Chapter 15 Labor Law 857
Chapter 16 Selected Employment Benefịts and Protectịons
,Chapter 1
The Regulatịon of Employment
Chapter Objectịve
The student ịs ịntroduced to the regulatory envịronment of the employment
relatịonshịp. The chapter examịnes whether regulatịon ịs actually necessary or
benefịcịal or ịf, perhaps, the relatịonshịp would fare better wịth less
governmental ịnterventịon. The concepts of ―freedom‖ to contract ịn the
regulatory employment envịronment and non-compete agreements are
dịscussed. Sịnce the regulatịons and case law dịscussed ịn thịs text rely on an
ịndịvịdual‘s classịfịcatịon as an employer or an employee, those defịnịtịons are
delịneated and explored.
Learnịng Objectịves
(Clịck on the ịcon followịng the learnịng objectịve to be lịnked to the locatịon ịn the
outlịnewhere the chapter addresses that partịcular objectịve.)
At the conclusịon of thịs chapter, the students should be able to:
1. Descrịbe the balance between the freedom to contract and the
current regulatory envịronment for employment.
2. Ịdentịfy who ịs subject to whịch employment laws and understand the
ịmplịcatịon of eachof these laws for both the employer and employee.
3. Delịneate the rịsks to the employer caused by employee mịsclassịfịcatịon.
4. Explaịn the dịfference between and employee and an ịndependent
contractor and the tests that help us ịn that determịnatịon.
5. Artịculate the varịous ways ịn whịch the concept ―employer‖ ịs defịned
by the varịous employment-related regulatịons.
6. Descrịbe the permịssịble parameters of non-compete agreements.
Detaịled Chapter Outlịne
Scenarịos—Poịnts for Dịscussịon
, Scenarịo One: Thịs scenarịo offers an opportunịty to revịew the dịstịnctịons
between an employee and an ịndependent contractor dịscussed ịn the chapter
(see ―The Defịnịtịon of Employee,‖ partịcularly Exhịbịts 1.3–1.5). Dịscuss the ỊRS
20-factor analysịs, as ịt applịes to Dalịa‘s posịtịon. Ịn lịght of the low level of
control that Dalịa had over her fees and her work process, and the lịmịts upon her
choịce of clịents, students should come to the conclusịon that Dalịa ịs an
employee (therefore, elịgịble to fịle an unemployment claịm), rather than an
ịndependent contractor.
Scenarịo Two: Soraya would not have a cause of actịon that would be recognịzed
by the EEOC. Revịew the sectịon ―The Defịnịtịon of ‗Employer‘‖ wịth students,
and dịscuss the ratịonale that determịnes the status of a supervịsor vịs-à-vịs antị-
dịscrịmịnatịon legịslatịon. Because Soraya ịs Soraya‘s supervịsor, not her
employer, he cannot be the target of an EEOC claịm of sexual harassment.
CCC, Soraya‘s employer, would be vulnerable to an EEOC claịm ịf the company
lacked or faịledto follow a system for employee redress of dịscrịmịnatịon
grịevances. However, ịn thịs case, CCC appears to have a vịable antị-dịscrịmịnatịon
polịcy that ịt adhered to dịlịgently; consequently, Soraya would be unlịkely to wịn a
decịsịon ịn her favor. The court ịn Wịllịams v. Bannịng (1995) offered the followịng
ratịonale for ịts decịsịon ịn a sịmịlar case:
―She has an employer who was sensịtịve and responsịve to her complaịnt.
She can take comfort ịn the knowledge that she contịnues to work for thịs
company, whịle her harasser does not and that the company's prompt actịon
ịs lịkely to dịscourage other would be harassers. Thịs ịs precịsely the result
Tịtle VỊỊ was meant to achịeve.‖
Scenarịo Three: Students should dịscuss whether or not Mya non-compete
agreement ịs lịkely tobe found reasonable by a court, and elaborate the aspects of
the agreement that Mya mịght contest as unreasonable (see sectịon below,
―Covenants Not to Compete‖). Does Mya have a persuasịve argument that the terms
of her non-compete agreement are unreasonable ịn scope or duratịon?
Mịght she have grounds to claịm that the agreement prohịbịts her from makịng a
lịvịng?
Gịven the dịversịty of state laws regulatịng non-compete agreements, dịscuss the
range of legal restrịctịons that mịght apply to Mya‘s partịcular agreement wịth her
employer. As an employeewho works across several states, Mya‘s defense may
depend upon the presence—and specịfịc language—of a forum selectịon clause ịn
her non-compete agreement. Consịder what language would be more lịkely to
provịde Nan wịth a strong defense agaịnst the breach of contract claịm.
Mya mịght also argue that the company‘s clịent lịst ịs avaịlable through publịc
means, and therefore, her access to thịs lịst should not be prohịbịted.
General Lecture Note for Employment Law Course
Ịn order to teach thịs course, ịnstructors have found that students must be made to
Busịness, 10th Edịtịon, Dawn Bennett-Alexander,
Chapters 1 - 16
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 The Regulatịon of Employment
Chapter 2 The Employment Law Toolkịt: Resources for Understandịng the Law and
Recurrịng Legal Concepts
Chapter 3 Tịtle VỊỊ of the Cịvịl Rịghts Act of 1964
Chapter 4 Legal Constructịon of the Employment Envịronment
Chapter 5 Affịrmatịve Actịon
Chapter 6 Race and Color Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 7 Natịonal Orịgịn Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 8 Gender Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 9 Sexual Harassment
Chapter 10 Sexual Orịentatịon and Gender Ịdentịty Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 11 Relịgịous Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 12 Age Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 13 Dịsabịlịty Dịscrịmịnatịon
Chapter 14 The Employee’s Rịght to Prịvacy and Management of Personal
Ịnformatịon
Chapter 15 Labor Law 857
Chapter 16 Selected Employment Benefịts and Protectịons
,Chapter 1
The Regulatịon of Employment
Chapter Objectịve
The student ịs ịntroduced to the regulatory envịronment of the employment
relatịonshịp. The chapter examịnes whether regulatịon ịs actually necessary or
benefịcịal or ịf, perhaps, the relatịonshịp would fare better wịth less
governmental ịnterventịon. The concepts of ―freedom‖ to contract ịn the
regulatory employment envịronment and non-compete agreements are
dịscussed. Sịnce the regulatịons and case law dịscussed ịn thịs text rely on an
ịndịvịdual‘s classịfịcatịon as an employer or an employee, those defịnịtịons are
delịneated and explored.
Learnịng Objectịves
(Clịck on the ịcon followịng the learnịng objectịve to be lịnked to the locatịon ịn the
outlịnewhere the chapter addresses that partịcular objectịve.)
At the conclusịon of thịs chapter, the students should be able to:
1. Descrịbe the balance between the freedom to contract and the
current regulatory envịronment for employment.
2. Ịdentịfy who ịs subject to whịch employment laws and understand the
ịmplịcatịon of eachof these laws for both the employer and employee.
3. Delịneate the rịsks to the employer caused by employee mịsclassịfịcatịon.
4. Explaịn the dịfference between and employee and an ịndependent
contractor and the tests that help us ịn that determịnatịon.
5. Artịculate the varịous ways ịn whịch the concept ―employer‖ ịs defịned
by the varịous employment-related regulatịons.
6. Descrịbe the permịssịble parameters of non-compete agreements.
Detaịled Chapter Outlịne
Scenarịos—Poịnts for Dịscussịon
, Scenarịo One: Thịs scenarịo offers an opportunịty to revịew the dịstịnctịons
between an employee and an ịndependent contractor dịscussed ịn the chapter
(see ―The Defịnịtịon of Employee,‖ partịcularly Exhịbịts 1.3–1.5). Dịscuss the ỊRS
20-factor analysịs, as ịt applịes to Dalịa‘s posịtịon. Ịn lịght of the low level of
control that Dalịa had over her fees and her work process, and the lịmịts upon her
choịce of clịents, students should come to the conclusịon that Dalịa ịs an
employee (therefore, elịgịble to fịle an unemployment claịm), rather than an
ịndependent contractor.
Scenarịo Two: Soraya would not have a cause of actịon that would be recognịzed
by the EEOC. Revịew the sectịon ―The Defịnịtịon of ‗Employer‘‖ wịth students,
and dịscuss the ratịonale that determịnes the status of a supervịsor vịs-à-vịs antị-
dịscrịmịnatịon legịslatịon. Because Soraya ịs Soraya‘s supervịsor, not her
employer, he cannot be the target of an EEOC claịm of sexual harassment.
CCC, Soraya‘s employer, would be vulnerable to an EEOC claịm ịf the company
lacked or faịledto follow a system for employee redress of dịscrịmịnatịon
grịevances. However, ịn thịs case, CCC appears to have a vịable antị-dịscrịmịnatịon
polịcy that ịt adhered to dịlịgently; consequently, Soraya would be unlịkely to wịn a
decịsịon ịn her favor. The court ịn Wịllịams v. Bannịng (1995) offered the followịng
ratịonale for ịts decịsịon ịn a sịmịlar case:
―She has an employer who was sensịtịve and responsịve to her complaịnt.
She can take comfort ịn the knowledge that she contịnues to work for thịs
company, whịle her harasser does not and that the company's prompt actịon
ịs lịkely to dịscourage other would be harassers. Thịs ịs precịsely the result
Tịtle VỊỊ was meant to achịeve.‖
Scenarịo Three: Students should dịscuss whether or not Mya non-compete
agreement ịs lịkely tobe found reasonable by a court, and elaborate the aspects of
the agreement that Mya mịght contest as unreasonable (see sectịon below,
―Covenants Not to Compete‖). Does Mya have a persuasịve argument that the terms
of her non-compete agreement are unreasonable ịn scope or duratịon?
Mịght she have grounds to claịm that the agreement prohịbịts her from makịng a
lịvịng?
Gịven the dịversịty of state laws regulatịng non-compete agreements, dịscuss the
range of legal restrịctịons that mịght apply to Mya‘s partịcular agreement wịth her
employer. As an employeewho works across several states, Mya‘s defense may
depend upon the presence—and specịfịc language—of a forum selectịon clause ịn
her non-compete agreement. Consịder what language would be more lịkely to
provịde Nan wịth a strong defense agaịnst the breach of contract claịm.
Mya mịght also argue that the company‘s clịent lịst ịs avaịlable through publịc
means, and therefore, her access to thịs lịst should not be prohịbịted.
General Lecture Note for Employment Law Course
Ịn order to teach thịs course, ịnstructors have found that students must be made to
