Strategic Workforce Reduction Plan: Legal and Ethical Considerations

This report, written from the perspective of a VP of HR at Moore Beer Inc., addresses a workforce reduction scenario involving five employees. The analysis considers legal implications, including potential claims of discrimination based on age, race, sex, and pregnancy, and evaluates each employee's performance, attendance, and potential for legal challenges. The report emphasizes the importance of a grading scale based on factors like punctuality, productivity, and performance evaluations to justify termination decisions and avoid discrimination claims. It recommends retaining Mike Smith and Jenny Williams by reassigning them, while terminating Sally James (with severance), Philip Pierce, and Margaret Jones. The report highlights the relevance of the Wagner Act, ADEA, Title VII, and PDA Amendment, as well as FMLA, in making informed decisions about employee terminations. The conclusion underscores the need for a strategic approach to workforce reduction, balancing business needs with legal and ethical considerations.

reduction in workforce

1
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2
First employee- Mike Smith........................................................................................................................2
Second employee- Philip Pierce..................................................................................................................3
Third employee- Sally James.......................................................................................................................4
Fourth employee- Margaret Jones...............................................................................................................4
Fifth employee- Jenny Williams..................................................................................................................5
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................6
References...................................................................................................................................................7

2
Introduction
This paper has identified the applicable laws and how they are applied to different employee
situations. There have been 5 people on the list out of which the VP of HR is asked to terminate
at least 3 employees and 2 employees are to be rolled into any other job. This paper is designed
to show how the VP of HR is going to plan out the reduction of the workforce.
Here for this paper, I am playing the role of VP of HR and in such capacity, to begin with, the
project I need to create a strategic plan in order to design the reduction in the workforce. The
first step in this process would be to make a grading scale in order to decide how and in what
order to let the people go. This grading should be assigned based on the work related items only,
which may include punctuality, productivity, and performance evaluations of each employee on
the termination list. It is better to have a grading scale since it can be provided by the company in
order to prove that it has not discriminated against any employee. While looking into all these
cases, one need to see if there are any legal implications if the person who has been terminated
from the company claims against the company in future.
First employee- Mike Smith
It has been observed that Mike is a 34-year-old and thus he would not be falling into the age
discrimination act, but since he is an Asian, thus, it is possible that he can claim against the
company on account of discrimination against him on the basis of race (Twomey, 2013, page no
420). Also, he would have supporting evidence as most of his coworkers used to complain
against him using a heavy English accent. Also, it has been given that a union contract could ask
the company to fire by order of seniority. Thus, due to the Wagner act, the company must follow
the rules that are a part of the union.

3
But there is no need to worry about these future legal implications as Mike has an impeccable
record and also it has been observed that he had been performing really well in the past and the
company’s processes will be obsolete if he goes. It has also been noticed that the best indicator
of future performances is to measure the past performances. Thus, the company must consider to
retain such an employee and should be rolled elsewhere.
Second employee- Philip Pierce
It can be observed in his case that Philip could explain his absenteeism on the grounds of being
harassed by the co-workers but still absenteeism of 17 days cannot be justified. But the company
must consider the fact that in future Philip can claim against the company on the grounds of sex
discrimination as he can show that his harassment by co-workers for his sexual orientation had
caused him to not to go to work out of fear and that would be a serious problem for the company
(Twomey, 2013, page no 410). The company should go for an investigation so as to find out if
harassment is happening in the company or not. For this purpose, the company should hold
annual training on discriminations and harassments in order to show to its employees that the
company is not going to tolerate this kind of behavior.
In this case, the company should hold a counseling session with Phillip in order to know the real
cause of his absenteeism. If he had been abusing the company's policies, then he should be fired,
but if he is seriously a victim of harassment then the company must try to work through with
him. Also if the company wishes to fire him, it can take the plea that he had himself stated that
he was being treated differently but not being necessarily harassed.

4
Third employee- Sally James
The company must consider the good service that Sally has been giving to the company for 20
years. She has also been getting along well with others in the company and has been performing
quite well. But whatever situations she might be facing at her home that has no concern with the
company. So by not considering the financial crunch that she might face after losing this job, the
company must just focus that she had missed 13 days within last two months.
But in terms of future implications, the company must consider that she might file a suit against
the company for her termination on the grounds of age discrimination. The ADEA or Age
Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits any kind of discrimination at wok with anyone who
is aged 40 years or more (Twomey, 2013, page no 545). And Sally definitely falls in such
category. And she may also claim on the grounds of discrimination against women. Thus, again
it is advisable for the company to have a grading system to show it as evidence in such cases.
Also, it is advised that the company must terminate Sally but by giving her a hefty severance pay
for giving her 20 years of services to the company, and which up to $ 13,000 would be sufficient.
Fourth employee- Margaret Jones
Margaret has proved to be a great employee, but the only problem is that she has been absent for
two months in last 12 months. Also, she is not a good team player who is considered as a bad
thing in most of the organizations, but on the other hand, she knows how to get the work done,
and also she speaks confidently for others who are afraid of speaking for themselves.
The company here is advised to see why she is speaking on behalf of others and should make
sure that there is no unfair treatment with anyone in the company for which they are not able to
speak for themselves. This is because if there is an unfair treatment done with any worker, then

5
the company can be sued on the grounds of discrimination and unfair treatment. It has been
observed that Margaret falls under the race and gender which are covered by the two protected
classes. The Title VII law has prohibited any discrimination in hiring, union, membership, terms
of employment, and representation (Twomey, 2013, page no 528).
Fifth employee- Jenny Williams
Jenny has been a very hardworking employee and is from South Africa which shows that the
company supports diversity. She has missed the work for a couple of days on account of her
pregnancy, but that is not a big concern. With regards to legal implications, Jenny can be covered
by under the PDA Amendment of Title VII as she can be protected under three different classes
which are: race, sex and Pregnancy Discrimination Act. It has been given under the PDA that
unless the employee who is pregnant is different from others with regards to the working ability,
then that employee must be treated equally as others in the organization. The company must also
consider the employees on FMLA (The Family and Medical Leave Act), as this act allows the
employees to take medical leave for any serious illness due to which the employee not able to
perform the functions that are required by his job. Also, FMLA includes employee leaves
involving birth or adoption. FMLA also allows persons to take care of others who are not able to
take care of themselves if the person is the sole caretaker and the family member requires
caretaker. Thus, the company needs to make sure that no employee was on FMLA (Twomey,
2013, page no 465).

6
Conclusion
In the capacity of a VP of HR of Moore Beer Inc., I would like to conclude that the company
must first decide to have a grading scale in order to work on discrepancies in performances of
employees and which may include factors like production, tardiness, absenteeism, etc. And the
persons with the lowest grades must be fired. For the current situation and keeping the future
legal implications that may arise on account of removing people from protected classes, I would
like to conclude that the company must keep Mike Smith and Jenny Williams by rolling in some
other job and rest three employees must be terminated.

7
References
Twomey , D. P. (2013). Labor and employment law (15th ed.). Mason Ohio , Cengage Learning.