Legal Issues on Different Situations

Situational Questions
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Instructor
Date
Question One: Employee in the Payroll Department
The legal issue is whether it was right for the employer to dismiss the payroll clerk because he raised a discrimination claim. Knowing whether the worker should sue the defendant for violating the Fair Labour Standards Act is critical. Employment law protects staff's rights by ensuring they enjoy equal employment opportunities, engage in collective bargaining with employers, have terms and conditions that meet minimum standards, receive compensation for employee harm, and respect their fundamental liberties. In this scenario, an employee in the payroll department noticed that some workers were receiving less than minimum wages during the pay period based on the complex structure of calculating the number of hours worked and recent state law changes. The employee brought this issue to the attention of the management, which ignored his emails. He later scheduled a meeting with the company president, who was aware of the discrimination about the payroll issue and did nothing about it. Instead, he fired the employee who raised the concern.
Some employment laws protect workers in a direct approach by specifying the minimum standard of safety, pay, and other employment aspects. Such regulations include the Fair Labor Standard Act, the Occupation Safety and Health Act, and the Medical Leave Act. The employer discriminated against the employee, contradicting the Employment Act that states minimum wage payments according to state law. The employer fired him upon realization, and nothing changed. The plaintiff can sue a class action lawsuit on behalf of the larger group of employees. In the absence of an employment contract for a specific time, work can be terminated by the employer at any time with no particular reason as stipulated by law.
Question Two: The Dental Hygienist Scenario
The legal issue in this situation is whether it was right for the employer to terminate the employee's job based on her views on race and history. The second issue was whether it was wrong for Chelsea to participate in the election campaign as a school board member. The case scenario indicates that she has been working for two years, receiving positive reviews from patients and dentists. This suggests that her performance is excellent. She is a mother of three who decides to run for a position on the school board because she questions the reading materials in the history classes. Once the dental practice owner found out about her views on race and history, he was offended and decided to terminate her.
The employment-at-will doctrine states that employees are not entitled to their positions nor have any right to be employed. The principle argues that without a contract illustrating a specified duration of employment, the employment relationship can be terminated at any time by the employer. The nondiscrimination and equal employment opportunity substantive right protect the employees against discrimination based on sex, age, race, or other grounds. In this case, Chelsea's views on race and history contradict the employer's perceptions, which leads to job termination.
Question Three: Graphic Artist Contracto...