Paper Topic:

Law Scenario

1 . Is Mary an independent contractor or an employee ? Describe the factors that led to your determination

Initially , Mary was hired to work on a specific project . At this stage Mary was an independent contractor . As this project was nearing completion , she was asked to continue with a new project under a supervisor . While doing this work she was given access to company materials and equipment and also she had to adhere to the work schedules inherent in the company . This changes her status to that of an employee .2 . Has the employer

/employee relationship changed over the course of time ? If so , how

This relationship changed over a period of time , because Mary 's work allotment and working conditions changed in such a manner that they were similar to what an employee generally works under . As such her employment status changed from that of an independent contractor to that of an employee . This is because from a particular piece 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 supervisor

3 ) Was Mary 's release legal under the doctrine of employment-at-will Why or why not ? If not , which of the following exceptions to employment-at-will have been violated ? Why

a ) Breach of public policy , b ) Breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and c ) Breach of implied contract

Mary 's release was not legal under the doctrine of employment at will because this is violative of breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing . The covenant of good faith and fair dealing exists in every employment relationship , it has been interpreted to imply either that employer personnel decisions are subject to a `just cause standard or that terminations made in bad faith or motivated by malice are prohibited ' Mary 's work was outstanding and even during the period of economic crisis she did a very good job . However , after the company recovered and good times for the company were ushered in , the supervisor ignored her loyalty and indulged in nepotism by employing his cousin . In this way an injustice was done to Mary and instead of being rewarded for her dedicated and loyal work , she was summarily dismissed and replaced by a person whose main qualification was that she was the supervisor 's cousin

Muhl , Charles J . The Employment - at - will doctrine : three major exceptions . Monthly Labor Review . January 2001 . Retrieved from HYPERLINK "http /www .bls .gov /opub /mlr /2001 /01 /art1full .pdf http /www .bls .gov /opub /mlr /2001 /01 /art1full .pdf on August 12 , 2006 . Law Scenario PAGE 2...

2 pages

30.0 KB

Free sing-up