Workplace Law Scenario Analysis

Write a 750-1,000 word paper in which you review public policy and how it affects employment. Address the following scenarios:

Scenario 1: Nurse Deb was due for her annual flu vaccination as mandated by her hospital’s policy. Nurse Deb is a big supporter of the antivaccination movement and refused to obtain her annual flu vaccination. Upon notice that nurse Deb did not obtain the vaccination, the nurse manager fired Nurse Deb. Nurse Deb has decide to file a wrongful termination suit. As the director of nursing, how would you handle this situation?

What evidence does Nurse Deb have that could help her win the case?
What law protects the hospital’s mandated vaccination procedures?
How concerned should the hospital be if the lawsuit is a success?

Scenario 2: Joe Gomez worked as a plant operations specialist at Premier Hospital. While Joe’s manager was working on the HVAC system that protects patients from harmful viruses and bacteria, he noticed that he was not using OSHA-approved filters. Joe felt that it was important to report this to the compliance officer. The day following his report, Joe was fired by his manager. As the CEO of Premier Hospital, how would you handle the situation?

How concerned should you be about the termination of Joe?
What legal principles are involved?
If Joe was a member of the local employee services union, does this make the termination different?

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HLT-520	HLT-520-O500	Workplace Law Scenario Analysis	80.0
Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)	Satisfactory (79.00%)	Good (87.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Scenario 1 Analysis	35.0%	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is not included.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is incomplete or incorrect.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is included but lacks detail.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is complete and includes detail.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is extremely thorough with substantial supporting evidence.
Scenario 2 Analysis	35.0%	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is not included.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is incomplete or incorrect	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is included but lacks detail.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is complete and includes detail.	An analysis of the scenario and its relation to workplace law is extremely thorough with substantial supporting evidence.
Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100% Submission Ide: 355a4f30-c35d-4870-b28b-15af69730613 47% SIMILARITY SCORE 10 CITATION ITEMS 21 GRAMMAR ISSUES 0 FEEDBACK COMMENT Internet Source 0% Institution 47% ESSAM Shabbar WorkPlaceLawScenario.docx Summary  1344 Words Scenario 1 • What evidence does Nurse Deb have that could help her win the case?  Spelling mistake: Shabbar  Scabbard  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Punctuation error, sentence looks lik…: If Running head: WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 1 Workplace Law Scenario Essam Shabbar Dr. Loretta Cain HLT 520 Grand Canyon University June 8, 2020. WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 2 There could be some evidence that could help Deb win this case. If there was not a reasonable amount of time give to Deb to get her flu vaccination. The hospital could also be in trouble if Deb could not get the shot for religious or medical reasons. There also could be a case for Deb if she was a part of a union. Some unions believe that medical professional should have the option to get a flu vaccination, “One analysis which compiled the results of three previous trials found that there was no evidence that vaccinating healthcare workers prevented any flu cases or associated complications in patients living in senior residences.” (foxusforhealth.org). There is not a lot that Deb has regarding winning her case. My suggestion to Deb would be to drop the lawsuit for wrongful termination. I assume that the flu vaccination was gone over with her when she was hired. In this case, the hospital would also argue the employment at will which would allow them to terminate her at any time. “Moreover, most states recognize the doctrine of employment-at-will, under which employers can terminate a worker for any reason as long as a prohibited motivation, such as race or disability status, is not involved. In the absence of a proscribed rationale, vaccination can be used as a condition of continued employment.” (Field, 2009). • What law protects the hospital’s mandated vaccination procedures? Multiple laws protect the hospital regarding these mandates. “Chapter 7 of the National Action Plan to Prevention Health Care-Associated Infections: Road Map to Elimination supports the influenza vaccination of health care personnel to protect health care personnel and their patients, as well as to reduce disease burden and health care costs.” (ODPHP, 2017). There is a lot of research stating that this vaccination is an ethical duty of a health care worker. From these laws, the hospital has very little to worry about regarding this termination. “Those that support healthcare worker mandates of the flu vaccine argue that it is the ethical duty of healthcare workers to be vaccinated based on the concepts of non-maleficence and beneficence. It is argued that the flu vaccine is the best way to protect immunocompromised patients from getting the disease, therefore, if a healthcare worker refuses the vaccine, they could be causing harm and violating their ethical duty.” (focusforhealth.org) • How concerned should the hospital be if the lawsuit is a success? As the director of nursing, there are a few specific things that I would do regarding this case. Nurse Deb is filing the wrongful termination lawsuit due to her termination regarding her not getting her flu vaccination. Depending on the state which the hospital is in there could be an employment-at-will cause. This would allow nurse Deb to get fired for not getting her flu vaccination. Some many states and facilities mandate health care employees to get their flu vaccinations, “Vaccination coverage was highest (94.8%) among health care personnel working in settings where vaccination was required. Among health care personnel whose employers did not have a requirement for vaccination coverage was higher among those who worked in locations where vaccination was offered at the worksite at no cost for 1 day only (70.4%) or >1  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Passive voice: It is argued that  Spelling mistake: immunocompromised  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 3 day (76.0%) or who worked in locations where their employer did not provide influenza vaccination on-site at no cost but actively promoted vaccination through other mechanisms (75.1%) compared with that among health care personnel working in locations where employers did not have any vaccination-related requirements or provisions (47.6%).” (cdc.gov). The hospital should have a policy and procedure regarding flu vaccination. The only way that this would be wrongful termination if there was a policy would be if Deb did not get the flu vaccination for a religious or medical reason. Healthcare facilities need to have these policies and procedures in place, “In the first year of the mandatory policy (2009–2010), 99.2 percent of employees received the vaccine, 0.7 percent were exempted for religious or medical reasons, and 0.1 percent refused vaccination and chose to terminate employment. The results were sustained: in 2012, 98.7 percent were vaccinated, 1.2 percent were exempted, and 0.06 percent refused vaccination.” (ODPHP, 2017). Overall because the hospital has a written policy stating that the flu vaccination is mandatory the hospital does not have much to worry about. My suggestion would be for Deb to drop with case because there is little to no evidence that supports her wrongful termination lawsuit. Scenario 2: • How concerned should you be about the termination of Joe? I would be very concerned regarding the termination of the operations specialist Joe Gomez. Joe was terminated because he reported to the compliance officer that OSHA-approved filters were not being used. One the same day that the report was filed Joe was fired by his manager. The whistleblower act makes me very concerned regarding Joe’s termination. • What legal principles are involved? If the company is in employment-at-will state then the manager does not have to have a reason to terminate him. I would also be very worried about Joe being protected by the whistleblower act, “A whistleblower is defined as someone who informs the authorities about a person or organization engaged in illegal or unacceptable behavior. OSHA’s whistleblower laws protect employees from employer retaliation, such as dismissal, discipline, harassment, and demotion. These are important things to know about whistleblower labor laws. Seventeen Acts protect whistleblowers, which protect qualified employees from the following: Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSH Act) for complaints filed by protected employees about workplace  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Passive voice: filters were not being use…  Statistically detect wrong use of …: One  On  Passive voice: Joe was fired by  Spelling mist…: whistleblower  whistle blowe…  Punctuation error, s…: …  Passive voice: Joe being protected by  Spelling mist…: whistleblower  whistle blowe…  Spelling mist…: whistleblower  whistle blowe…  Spelling mist…: whistleblower  whistle blowe…  Spelling mist…: whistleblower  whistle blowe…  Spelling mist…: whistleblower…  whistle blowe…  Spelling mistake: oshaeducationcenter  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 4 WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 5 safety and health hazards” (oshaeducationcenter.com). Legally I believe that it was wrongful termination of Joe because he reported a safety issue and his job would be protected. If joe reached out to a lawyer or to an OSHA representative the hospital could be a danger of a lawsuit. “Any adverse action that results directly from your efforts to improve safety and health on the job or the environment is considered discrimination. That includes dismissal; demotion; assignment to an undesirable job or shift; loss of seniority; denial of a promotion you otherwise would have received; denial of benefits earned, such as sick leave or vacation time; harassment; blacklisting with other employers; taking away company housing; damaging your credit at banks or credit unions; reducing pay or hours. To prove discrimination, OSHA must be able to show that your employer acted wrongly in demoting, firing, or transferring you because you complained about safety and health conditions on the job or the environment. You must have been treated differently than similar workers who did not complain about hazards. Further, the alleged discrimination must have occurred around the time you expressed your safety and health or environmental concerns.” (osha.gov). • If Joe was a member of the local employment services union, does this make the termination different?  Spelling mistake: joe  Joe  Unpaired braces, brackets, quotation m…: “  Passive voice: have been treated  Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University  Punctuation error, sentence looks lik…: If  Three successive sentences begin with …: I WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 6 If Joe was a member of a union then I believe that union would fight this termination. As the CEO of the hospital, I would have a conversation with Joe as soon as I heard about his termination. I would rehire him and apologize for the actions of the manager. I would also make sure that the correct filters were used for the safety of our staff and patients. I would also terminate the manger who wrongfully terminated Joe. A person who wrongfully terminates an employee for doing the right thing should never be in a management potion. These measures would be to limit exposure to the situation and try to avoid a lawsuit. WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 7 References Field, R. I. (2009, November). Mandatory vaccination of health care workers: whose rights should come first? Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2810172/ (2019, May 17). Healthcare Worker’s Mandates and Exemptions for the Flu Shot. Retrieved from https://www.focusforhealth.org/healthcare-workers-mandates-and-exemptions-for-the- flu-shot/ (n.d.). Influenza Vaccination Information for Health Care Workers \| CDC. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/healthcareworkers.htm Odphp. (2018, November 7). Influenza Vaccination of Health Care Workers: A Patient Safety Imperative – News & Events. Retrieved from https://health.gov/news/blog/2017/08/influenza-vaccination-of-health-care-workers-a- patient-safety-imperative/ (n.d.). Protecting Whistleblowers With Job Safety and Health Complaints. Retrieved from https://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3164.html (n.d.). The Complete Guide to Whistleblower Labor Laws. Retrieved from https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/articles/whistleblower-laws/ WORKPLACE LAW SCENARIO 8