Benchmarking

Introduction

The states and federal government continually impose new laws that will better the employment in the workplace. These laws are constructed to not only protect employees from discrimination, but give them a voice in this working world. The Equal Employment opportunity (EEO) Laws are laws that the state continually impose to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, color, sex, age, handicap or religion. The laws that pertain mostly to FastServe, Inc. are: Title I and Title IV , Title VII of Civil Rights Acts of 1964 , The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 .

Situation Analysis

FastServe, Inc, is a $25 million dollar company with a workforce of 350 employees directly involved in the marketing of sports apparel for boys and girls. Generation Y was the primary target for business. In an effort to concentrate sales on American’s sports oriented for generation Y, the company made a strategic move into an online sales approach. FastServe online marketing and distribution channels contain 10% of its workforce who managed the online distribution website. After the website was operating problems with the 3-D drape-n-see mannequins became a threat to FastServe financials. The website attracted many new consumers from the targeted age group, but the program was too cumbersome to download. Consumers were not able to download needed materials which were a direct reflection of the elimination of the business segment. This situation and lack of sales opted FastServe to eliminate the online marketing and distribution channels.

With this strategic move, FastServe acknowledged that the 3-D mannequin technology was not worth the costly investment for the business in return. The complications with the website made the organization eliminate the business segment. As part of the lay-off process, five candidates were identified of which three of whom would be dismissed. The senior managers are responsible for the implementation and communication of the decision (UOP, 2007). The employees in consideration for termination are Brian Carter, Carl Holmes, Jenny Mills, Nora Mason, and Sarah Boyd. The five employees worked for FastServe over two years. Nevertheless, all have absenteeism problems with the exception of Carl Haimes. The two employees that are not laid off must be in the best interest of the organization and shareholders.

Employee Profile

Names Facts

Brian Carter Brian Carter is a contract employee that contains a certification in advance programming . He is responsible for the programming online. Upon closure of the channels his Supervisor advised the management team that his skills would be redundant. He has been absent for 17 days in the last two months. The explanatory circumstance is that this employee was diagnosed with carpal syndrome which may be a result from his job assignment. According to this employee his absenteeism has reportedly been because of his injury.

Carl Haimes Carl is a contract employee that has a BS in Information Systems. According to the performance and productivity report this employee is above average. Upon the closure of the marketing and online channel, his Supervisor advised the management team his skills will be redundant. The extenuating circumstance is the investigation into the sexual orientation harassment (reported by Carl) by his superior which was found to be factual (UOP, 2007).

Sarah Boyd Sarah is a full time employee that is dedicated to what she does. Her performance is above average and productivity is medium. Absenteeism is 12 days in the last 2 months. The Supervisor concluded that her skills would be redundant upon closure of this department. The extenuating circumstances is that she is 53 years of age and she is an at will employee with 15 loyal years with the organization.

Nora Mason Nora is a contract employee whose performance is average and productivity is below medium. The supervisor of her departments stated that her skills are a good mix. Nora absenteeism was cumulative of 2 months. She is trained in public speaking which is a reflection of her membership with NAACP chapter. The extenuating circumstance is her active membership in the local NAACP. She is known to have a directed numerous colleagues to file discrimination complaints with the EEOC against FastServe (UOP, 2007).

Jenny Mills Jenny is a contract employee that holds a BS in public Relations. She has been absent for 14 days in the last one month. The management team advised that her skills are non-critical. The performance rating states that she is average and productivity is medium. The extenuating circumstance is her pregnancy which is a reason for her reportedly frequent breaks. There is no proof of her breaks impacting her job (UOP, 2007).

Decision

Workforce reductions make an organization vulnerable to many of the same legal issues related to terminations. The lay off decision were made on the best interest of the organization and shareholders. The decision is for the dismissal of Nora Mason, Brian Carter and Jenny Mills.

Not in defense

Nora Manson’s is based on her poor productivity and performance. This termination may bring attention to a Title VII, Civil Rights race and color discrimination allegation. The attorney stated that she has a strong claim that will support this Act. In addition, the management team stated that she have a grounds to form a disparate treatment case. This will prompt other African American individuals with the organization to fill a joint discrimination law suit. According to the disparate treatment case, employees claim that the company is treating them differently from other individuals of a different race. Nevertheless, a proven case of McDonnell Douglas v. Green, an employee provided sufficient