Sarbanes-Oxley Act | Whistle-Blower Protection | Assignment

Added on - Sep 2019

Trusted by 2+ million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 3 of 6 pages
Case 2.5- Lawson v. Fmr LLC.Answer1The Supreme Court reversed the decision of lower court because it said that under theSarbanes-Oxley Act, the whistle-blower protection is given to the employees who areemployed under private contractors and subcontractors that serve under the public companies(Kim, 2003). It argued that the provisions of the act protects the employees who areemployed under private contractors and subcontractors in the same way as the employeeswho are employed under public contractors and subcontractors are protected in this act. Butthe lower court said that only the whistle-blowers of the public companies that are registeredunder the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are protected under Sarbanes-Oxley Act, andnobody else.Answer2Meaning of ‘employee’ within the scope of Sarbanes-Oxley Act is that the person should becovered under the whistle-blower protections and he should also be engaged in the conductthat is protected by that section (Ge, 2005). Under this act the employee is interpreted in away that he should be employed under public contractors and subcontractors that serve underthe public companies. The public companies should be registered under the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934.Answer3I am in favour of the position of Supreme Court because the plaintiffs and the petitioners arethe former employees of the private companies that are indulged in advising the mutual fundsand are responsible for managing them. The public companies comprise of mutual funds evenif they don’t have any employees. So, the whistle-blowers are covered under the act f they are
working in the area of mutual funds. Also, the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley act protectsthe employees who are employed under private contractors and subcontractors in the sameway as the employees who are employed under public contractors and subcontractors areprotected in this act.Case 4.5, Marken v. Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School Dist.Answer1The interests of the minor involved in the investigation should outweigh the employee’sprivacy interests. This is because the teacher violated the sexual harassment policy of thedistrict so he should be punished and not protected from the public. The minor is the victim inthe case; therefore he should be protected from any kind of harm and not the employee.Answer2The fact that the employee whose files were sought in the case, was a teacher, does notchange my answer to the above question because it is clear from the case that the employeewas none other than the teacher. Law is same for everyone, no matter the employee is theteacher of the school or the district. If he/she has done something unlawful then he should bepunished without any biasness or discrimination. The teacher violated the sexual harassmentpolicy of the district so he should be punished and not protected from the public. The minor isthe victim in the case; therefore he should be protected from any kind of harm and not theemployee, even if the employee was a teacher.Answer3It is assumed that the court correctly denied the defendant’s request for accessing the personalfiles but if he could have done something that could have tipped the balance in his favour,and the judge had to grant access to him, then the court should have sent a senior person or
responsible person with him for doing the scanning of the files so that no unauthorized thingis done by the employee and he does not do any unlawful act.Case 6.1, Griggs v. Duke Power CompanyAnswer 1Duke Power intentionally discriminated against the African Americans in hiring, prior to thepassage of the Title VII because they preferred the white employees over the AfricanAmericans. They think that the black people are not good and white people have more skillsand knowledge of doing the task (Williams, 2015). It is a stereotype among people that theblack African Americans are backward class and they don’t deserve to stand equally to thewhite people. So, they are not given equal chance in all the areas and places, they arediscriminated on the basis of their colour.Answer 2The high school diploma requirement and the aptitude tests requirement operated todisqualify African Americans from the eligibility for transfer at a greater rate than whitesbecause the white employees are preferred over the African Americans in all fields. It isthought that the black people are not good and white people have more skills and knowledgeof doing the task, so they should be given more opportunities. It is a stereotype among peoplethat the black African Americans are backward class and they don’t deserve to stand equallyto the white people. So, they are not given equal chance in all the areas and places, they arediscriminated on the basis of their colour.Answer 3
Desklib Logo
You are reading a preview
Upload your documents to download or

Become a Desklib member to get access