An employee has the right to work in a safe environment, one that is free from hazards that could lead to serious harm. Causing dissention and the hostile work environment for employees created the potential for a violent incident to occur. At the very least, the potential for a costly mistake due to duress they were under, which could have caused physical harm. The defendants’ faced discrimination and retaliation based on their race. This appalling treatment violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and by doing so, invoked the Civil Rights Act of 1991 allowing the monetary damages
3 II FACTS On the 25th of April, 1959, the plaintiff Priscilla D. Webster, her sister and her aunt were seated at the defendant’s restaurant in Boston on the third floor of an old building on T wharf overlooking the ocean. The plaintiff previously had her breakfast at about 9 A.M and was feeling perfectly fine without any complaints of sickness. The plaintiff, a native New Englander entered the defendant’s restaurant at around 1 P.M to have her lunch with her companions.
At a Red Lobster in Pleasant Hills, Pennsylvania a waitress was fired. The waitress’s name was Ruth Hatton age 53, and had been working at this Red Lobster for 19 years (Carroll A. B., Buchholtz A. K. 2014). Hatton was fired for allegedly stealing a comment card from the Red Lobster, which according to management was against company policy. Red Lobster a company controlled by Darden Restaurants decided to put this case through a peer review process; in an attempt to avoid any legal action from Hatton, such as a law suit (Carroll A. B., Buchholtz A. K. 2014).
The plaintiff should be able to defend themselves if these hearings are provided. The cases mentioned relate to one another in that all of the plaintiffs were found to be untenured, with the exception of Preston Barbee in the case of Barbee v. Union City of Bd. of Ed. (2014). Also with the exception of Barbee, the decisions made by the court were justified in that none of the plaintiff’s rights were breached in any way. The employers of these plaintiffs were not subject to rehire them for the following school year.
Legal History/Procedure: The tribunal for the Ellison v. Burger King Corp. case was presiding judge, Blackburn of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. The trial court granted summary judgement in favor of defendants Burger King, SRH (Southern Restaurant Hospitality), Carl Payton (SRH president), and the manager. Ellison appealed the judgement of the trial court to the Court of Appeals contending that material issues of fact impeded summary judgment. Operative Facts: Sharon Ellison, went to a Burger king to put in her order and wanted to know why no one was serving her. She claims the manager on duty put her hands around her neck and eventually started shaking her head.
As a consequence, of the legal case between Mrs. Liebeck (plaintiff) and McDonald’s (defendant) many companies and citizens started a campaign against this kind of lawsuits. In fact, they considered the Hot Coffee lawsuit a frivolous one that took economical advantage of the legal system to make some “easy money.” So, the media turned it up side down the “Hot Coffee” legal case and Mrs. Liebeck and the entire situation became a joke. As a consequence, this case became the example and the propaganda of why the Tort reform was “necessary” or that was what the media and the government made us believe. So, a Tort Reform limits the general public’s rights to go to court.
Punitive Damages: Punitive damages are very rare and they have a specific purpose which is to change the behavior of the wrongdoer. This are awarded in addition to actual damages and are considered as a punishment for the defendant. In fact, one of the jurors of the documentary claimed that punitive damages are “the only way you can get the attention of a big company.” So, with the punitive damages the jury is trying to set a public example to others for malicious, negligent, violent acts. Compensatory Damages: This refers to the sum of money that is awarded to the plaintiff, this money indemnify him/her for the injury suffered, loss or detriment.
This resulted in the 4 students protesting and sitting at the lunch counter until they were served which turned out to be a little over 5 months. Once other people found out about this many other african americans and even some whites joined. Eventually they had to serve them because it was slowing down their business and they were losing a huge amount of money. The african americans were able to get served and broke some of the segregation laws in other restaurants, stores, etc. Although they ended up getting what they wanted there were some problems that they faced.
On Thursday April 15, 2018 two black men walked into a Starbucks in Philadelphia on and sat down to talk. Officials say that they asked to use the bathroom, but because they did not buy anything, an employee refused to let them go into the bathroom. They were eventually asked to leave, and they said no, which led to the cops coming to the coffee shop where they were arrested. What began as an opportunity to talk about real estate at a Philadelphia Starbucks, led to two black men being arrested, which has lately sparked a lot of outraged protests, accusations of racism towards Starbucks, and many more things. This all started with Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson at a Starbucks.
Starbucks and Tim Hortons Nowadays, the number of coffee drinkers are increasing. As the demand for coffee grows, the number of coffee chains is also increasing. Of that, the representative coffee chains in North America are Starbucks and Tim Hortons. Starbucks has the highest brand awareness amongst the world coffee chains. It started in Seattle, the United State in 1971.
The woman in the car was on her phone and had the dog in her lap, which is not the safest situation to be receiving a hot beverage in. Maximum safety of individuals would require Starbucks to cool down the temperature of their hot beverages, and remove any remote possibility of this incidence occurring again. On the other hand, where does this regulation stop? By reducing the heat too much, the drinks would not be a decent temperature for drinking. Another safety issue involving Starbucks occurred in 2013, when Howard Schultz announced that Starbucks stores would become “gun free zones,” both inside and outside.
Part A. The primary externals influences to Starbucks PESTEL describes a framework of macro-environmental factors used in the environmental factors component of strategic management. PESTEL analysis includes some several factors: political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental factors. This report analyzes the factors which have main impact on Starbucks. 1.
These actions are not the right thing to be done from a business viewpoint. Therefore, Starbucks is seemed as extremely unethical and
Starbucks was founded in 1971. They have 18.850 stores in more than 40 countries which makes them the first coffee specialty retailer in the world. They operate most of their stores having only 50 franchises (as of 2017) as to keep strict control over quality. The success of Starbucks is based on their unique value proposition. They offer customer the finest coffee produced by themselves, with strong commitment on creating a global social impact, served in stores that promote a welcoming and warmth sphere where everyone can feel “like home”.
2.5.1.1 Realism Theory Realism focuses on state security and power above all else. Early realists such as E.H. Carr and Hans Morgenthau argued that states are self-interested, power-seeking rational actors, who seek to maximize their security and chances of survival.[10] Cooperation between states is a way to maximize each individual state 's security (as opposed to more idealistic reasons). Similarly, any act of war must be based on self-interest, rather than on idealism.
