Mana help | Human Resource Management homework help


I think these types of behaviors are perfectly acceptable:

The use of any and all non-human resources (e.g., printed materials, hypertext and hypermedia materials, audio recordings, video records, works of art, etc.) – assuming that direct quotations are identified and cited and assuming that any big ideas from sources other than your own original analysis are cited. You may use any of the standard citation systems that you like, as long as it’s one of these: APA, MLA, Chicago, Turabian, Bluebook, Harvard, McGill, ALWD, Tanbook, Greenbook, Maroonbook, OSCOLA, AAA, or APSA – either in text or in footnotes.

Here are the relative weights of the exam components:




10 %


25 %


60 %


5 %

Prompt for The Case

In 800 hundred words, provide a thorough legal analysis (preferably using the suggested “IRAC” format) of the legal issues presented, which is probably:

· Weather the Salvatore Violated Titel VII? (Also if you find any other issue you are welcome to address and answer it)

Something Seems Sus at Salvatore

On January 27, 2022, the Salvatore Family of Hospitals (“Salvatore”) terminated Keneshia Williams’s (“Williams”) employment. Williams was a Salvatore employee for a little over six months. Williams asserts that she was terminated because of her race and in retaliation for complaining about racial comments directed at her. Williams alleges that Linda Benson (“Benson”), her African American supervisor, directed racial comments towards her regarding her mannerisms and personality. Williams also alleges that after she spoke with Benson’s supervisor Susanne Castillo (“Castillo”) about these comments, Benson retaliated against her in different ways and ultimately decided to terminate her.

Williams is an African American woman who was employed at Salvatore as a Patient Access Representative (“PAR”) from July 20, 2021, until January 27, 2022. On January 27, 2022, Salvatore allegedly terminated Williams’s employment because she had attendance issues and conflicts with three of her co-workers while she was in the introductory phase of her employment.

Throughout Williams’s time at Salvatore, she had conflicts with three of her co- workers, Illeana Fanjul (“Fanjul”), Jennifer Taladriz (“Taladriz), and Cheryl McDonald (“McDonald”). The issues relevant to Williams’s claims began in October 2021, when Williams asked to meet with Benson to discuss allegations that she was being bullied by Fanjul, Taladriz, and McDonald. On October 23, 2021, Benson initially met with Williams and her three co-workers, but then dismissed the three co-workers and had an independent meeting with Williams. The subject matter of this independent meeting is in dispute. Williams alleges that after her three co-workers were asked to leave the meeting, Benson made racially charged statements, stating that Williams had a “home-girl personality,” and that Williams’s mannerisms were “too black.” Benson also allegedly stated that she had a problem with the “black community” because they are “too ghetto.” Further, Benson also allegedly stated that if Williams repeated what Benson stated, she would deny making the comments.

After the meeting, Williams emailed Benson because she still felt “uneasy” about what was said during the meeting, noting that Benson stated that she had a “home girl personality.” Benson responded to the email stating that it “was not that [Williams] had a ‘home-girl personality,'” but that others perceive this from Williams and that she should be “aware of that perception.” Castillo and Elena Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) from Human Resources (“HR”) were copied on this email. At some point directly after Williams’s initial meeting with Benson, she allegedly had a meeting with Castillo and Benson together, but Williams does not specifically remember when this meeting occurred.

– On November 5, 2021, Williams met with Castillo to discuss the alleged bullying from her three co-workers and Benson’s racial statements. Whether Benson was in this meeting is disputed. Castillo’s notes from the meeting reference Benson’s alleged retaliation against Williams and Benson’s alleged “home-girl personality” comment. Williams testified that she felt as if Benson was commenting on her “work ethic” in retaliation for complaining about Benson’s racial comments, specifically her “home-girl personality” comment.

In December 2021, Williams met with Castillo for a second time, allegedly regarding Benson’s retaliation. A December 8, 2021, email states that Castillo, Williams and Benson were scheduled to meet on December 10, 2021. In this meeting, Benson allegedly said that she could not handle Williams. After this meeting, Williams contends that Benson said that she was going to “get her in trouble” because Williams got Benson in trouble with Castillo. Benson denies making this threat.

On January 8, 2022, Williams received a Counseling Report (a formal disciplinary letter) for her attendance issues, citing several tardies and several unscheduled absences. She had eight tardies and five unscheduled absences as of the time of the January 2022 Counseling Report. Williams violated Salvatore’s policy that within the first six months of an employee’s tenure with the company—their introductory period—they are allowed no more than two unscheduled absences, and not more than three tardies in any three-month period. The Counseling Report specifically noted that Williams violated Section 123 of Salvatore’s Policy, regarding an unscheduled, unauthorized absence not covered by paid time off (“PTO”).

However, she disputes that this absence should count against her since she was told to stay home by the Occupational Health Department due to her being sick.

In the time between Williams receiving her Counseling Report and being terminated in late January 2022, she was not tardy or absent. But Fanjul and Taladriz filed complaints with Benson regarding specific actions taken by Williams at work during this time.

Rodriguez testified that Williams was terminated due to her attendance and her conflicts with her co-workers while being in her introductory period. But she testified that during the termination meeting Williams was only told that she was not a “good cultural fit” for Salvatore, that she was an “at-will” employee, and that her termination was like an “outsource.” There is no written documentation to corroborate Rodriguez’s testimony because she did not complete a “PeopleSoft Form” after consulting with Salvatore’s legal counsel. There is no evidence that Rodriguez or Benson told Williams that she was terminated because of her attendance or conflict issues which occurred while she was in her introductory period.

Williams began her employment on July 20, 2021, thus, her introductory period ended on January 20, 2022. Williams was terminated outside of her introductory period, but Rodriguez testified that Williams was considered to have been inside her introductory period when she was terminated. Later, Rodriguez provided an affidavit which stated that Williams was terminated because of her attendance issues and conflicts with her co-workers and because these issues had occurred “while still in her introductory period.”

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 10% with the coupon code: best10