FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2992373431> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2992373431 startingPage "113" @default.
• W2992373431 abstract "CASE DESCRIPTION This short case focuses on harassment and intimidation problems faced by a manager and his family shortly after an employee has been terminated. Whether the departed employee is the intimidator, whether the employer is obligated to investigate and get involved in the matter, and which options or possible actions the manager and his family can take are the key issues in the case. The case has a difficulty level of four, and is best-suited for use in junior or senior undergraduate-level courses in human resource management or employment law. This case can be presented and discussed in about one and a half hours, and is expected to require about two hours of outside preparation by each student. CASE SYNOPSIS This is a case about a disgruntled employee at a software development company that was being downsized. The employee became upset when he was terminated, claimed he was fired because of his Iranian background, and had to be escorted from the premises by a security guard. A few weeks later, his former manager started receiving bills for hundreds of dollars of purchases that neither he nor his wife had ordered, such as magazine subscriptions, life insurance policies, and gifts. The manager thought the terminated employee was probably doing this, but he only had a few forged signatures on some order cards as evidence. The company HR Director was informed about these harassment incidents and shown the signature cards, but didn't offer to get involved to resolve the situation. As more magazines, pornographic pictures, suggestive notes, and even a note with a veiled threat to the wife and baby arrived in the daily mail, the manager realized that his family was being intimidated and threatened in a criminal way. This was no longer just a prank. The police were called and an investigation was begun, but there still seemed to be little support from the company and the HR Director. Does the employer have a responsibility to protect its managers and their families from work-related harassment? What should the manager do now? Should the family move to a safer place? Should they wait for the police to do something? Should the manager leave his job at the company? Should they retain a lawyer and sue the company? DISGRUNTLED EMPLOYEE RETALIATION Mark Sargent is a programming manager at McAlister Systems Incorporated, a software development company that produces and markets various firewall and virus-removal products. In early 2010, the company went through a modest company- wide layoff in which a number of low performing employees were terminated. Corporate reviews had determined that a software engineer in Mark's group, Mohamed Aziz, had a history of marginal productivity reviews, and he was the logical one to lay off. Mark's manager, Bob Bryan, told him that since he was the group programming manager, it was his responsibility to inform Mohamed Aziz of the termination. This was Mark's first experience in laying off anyone, and he was rather anxious about the whole process. On the designated day, Mark called Mohamed into his office where he delivered the news. Mohamed did not take the layoff well, and started shouting at Mark, saying that he was being singled out unfairly because he was Iranian. When Mark's secretary heard the shouting (and swearing), she called security, and an officer and the Human Resources Director, Esther Coles, quickly arrived to assist. Mohamed was eventually escorted from the premises while threatening legal action. This incident left Mark a bit shaken, but thankful that Ms. Coles and the security officer had been able to intervene. Neither Mark nor the company had any direct contact or communication with Mohamed Aziz after this incident. About four weeks later, the Sargents started receiving unexpected magazines in the mail along with bills demanding payment for the initial subscriptions. Bills also began to appear for various gifts, CDs, and even an insurance policy, most of which were supposedly ordered by Lisa Sargent, Mark's wife. …" @default.
• W2992373431 created "2019-12-13" @default.
• W2992373431 creator A5017596534 @default.
• W2992373431 creator A5067280484 @default.
• W2992373431 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W2992373431 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W2992373431 title "Disgruntled Employee Retaliation: Does the Employer Have Responsibility?" @default.
• W2992373431 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2992373431 type Work @default.
• W2992373431 sameAs 2992373431 @default.
• W2992373431 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2992373431 countsByYear W29923734312015 @default.
• W2992373431 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2992373431 hasAuthorship W2992373431A5017596534 @default.
• W2992373431 hasAuthorship W2992373431A5067280484 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C141141315 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C162853370 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C2778976716 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C2778983918 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C10138342 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C141141315 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C144133560 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C162853370 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C17744445 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C182306322 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C199360897 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C199539241 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C2778976716 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C2778983918 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C39549134 @default.
• W2992373431 hasConceptScore W2992373431C41008148 @default.
• W2992373431 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2992373431 hasLocation W29923734311 @default.
• W2992373431 hasOpenAccess W2992373431 @default.
• W2992373431 hasPrimaryLocation W29923734311 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W129750059 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W1480229253 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W1526162451 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W1528580093 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W22241413 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2338013149 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2477804248 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2480104235 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2487738436 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2489061856 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W257816288 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2598787402 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2620660012 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2992799726 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2993028717 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W2993887694 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W304953440 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W311922710 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W340855730 @default.
• W2992373431 hasRelatedWork W177249527 @default.
• W2992373431 hasVolume "18" @default.
• W2992373431 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2992373431 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2992373431 magId "2992373431" @default.
• W2992373431 workType "article" @default.