Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays, [2008]
Mr. Keays was hired in 1986 by Honda as an assembly-line worker. In 1997 he was discharged with chronic fatigue syndrome and consequently went on disability benefits until the insurer declared that he was fit to return to work. When he returned, the employer put him into its disability program, which required him to submit medical reports for every absence from work. The employer began to doubt the veracity of Mr. Keay’s doctor’s reports and, therefore, in 2000, ordered him to see a doctor it had selected. Mr. Keays obtained legal advice recommending that he not see the employer’s doctor unless the employer clearly indicated the purpose of the examination. The employer ignored the lawyer’s request and summarily dismissed Mr. Keays for cause (without notice) when he refused to meet with the employer’s doctor. The employer claimed that this was insubordination, entitling it to dismiss Mr. Keays without notice.
Mr. Keays sued for wrongful dismissal. He argued that his employer did not have a contractual right to force him to attend a different doctor chosen by the employer simply because the employer did not like opinion of the employee’s own doctor. Therefore, he was not being insubordinate by refusing an order that the employer had no right to make. Moreover, he argued that the requirement to submit to a medical examination by the employer’s doctor amounted to harassment and discrimination on the basis of his disability and was part of a conspiracy between the employer and the doctor intended to enable the employer to dismiss him for cause after doctor issued a report saying Mr. Keays was able to work. Therefore, he argued that in addition to reasonable notice damages, he should be entitled to damages for bad faith in the manner in which he was dismissed and to punitive damages to for the employer’s egregious conduct.
Source: Belcourt, M., Singh, P., Bohlander, G. && Snell, S. (2014) Managing Human Resources (7th ed.) Toronto, ON: Nelson Education Ltd.
Questions
- Do you think the employer should be entitled to dismiss Mr. Keays without giving him reasonable notice? Explain why.
- Does an employer have a right to insist that employees submit to medical examinations by doctors chosen by the employer? Explain why.
- If the doctors inform the employer that Mr. Keays’s absences are due to his chronic fatigue syndrome and that they are likely to continue in the future, should the employer be entitled to dismiss Mr. Keay’s? Explain why.
- If Mr. Keays wins his wrongful dismissal case, will the court order Honda to reinstate him to previous employment? Should it do that?
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Step by stepSolved in 2 steps
- A machine operator employee with a major depressive disorder intermittently takes leaves under the Family and Medical Leave Act, resulting in alleged harassment by her employer surrounding her FMLA usage as well as a transfer to various difficult machines after her return from leave. Two months after her last FMLA leave, she is terminated for “improper phone usage.” [Hite v. Vermeer Mfg. Co., 361 F. Supp. 2d 935 (S.D. Iowa, 2005).] explaining your conclusion regarding whether the scenario constitutes a violation of public policy or a breach of a covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Support your conclusion with legal analysis and reasoning. Explain whether any of the scenarios give rise to potential employer liability and what steps should have been taken to avoid the exposure.arrow_forwardA co-worker of Illinois licensee Mona shared a client’s confidential information with her and asked Mona not to tell anyone. Instead of keeping it to herself, Mona gave the information to another licensee. Which statutory duty has been breached? Adhere to the brokerage agreement’s terms Employ reasonable skill and care in performing brokerage services for the client Keep all confidential information provided by the client confidential Serve the client’s best interestsarrow_forwardSubstantive law defines and creates legal rights and obligations in such matters as real property, torts, crimes, family, and others. True or Falsearrow_forward
- Ellen, a citizen of California, was seriously injured in an automobile accident while driving in California. She was injured due to the negligence of Sara, a citizen of Arizona, who ran a red light at an intersection. Ellen is seeking 1.5 million in damages. 1. Where may Ellen bring her suit? 2. Discuss the process Ellen would have to follow in order to fully litigate her claim. 3. If Sara is granted summary judgment at the trial court level, what may Ellen do next? Explain her options.arrow_forwardIn 2001,Troy Stubblefield, the owner of Shreveport Air Tools, a company that sold equipment for the petroleum, automotive, and construction industries, was prompted to create an online business when he lost one of his major customers to an early online retailer. Online retailing was a new and risky prospect at the time, but Troy was an early adopter of the business model. Lacking the necessary technical skills to create an e-commerce website, he turned to his son Ryan, who set up the first ToolTopia.com site. Relatively soon afterward, they realized their best option was to function as an affiliate, which meant they processed orders and askedb their suppliers to actually fill the orders. The Stubblefields needed people with technology and sales skills to grow ToolTopia.com and eventually they replaced their part-time help with a combination of full-time and part time employees. As the company grew, it also become a virtual workplace, with employees working from various locations and…arrow_forwardhomas Persson and Jon Nokes founded Smart Inventions, Inc., to market household consumer products. The success of their first product, the Smart Mop, continued with later products, which were sold through infomercials and other means. Persson and Nokes were the firm’s officers and equal shareholders. Persson was responsible for product development, and Nokes was in charge of day-to-day operations. In time, they became dissatisfied with each other’s efforts. Nokes represented the firm as financially “dying,” “in a grim state, . . . worse than ever,” and offered to buy all of Persson’s shares for $1.6 million. Persson accepted.On the day that they signed the agreement to transfer the shares, Smart Inventions began marketing a new product—the Tap Light. It was an instant success, generating millions of dollars in revenues. In negotiating with Persson, Nokes had intentionally kept the Tap Light a secret. Persson sued Smart Inventions, asserting fraud and other claims. Under what principle…arrow_forward
- Lend Co. discovered that one of its employees, Dana, is an alcoholic. Her manager realized that Dana's alcoholism must be the reason for her absenteeism. To help Dana overcome her alcoholiśm, the employer provided her with counseling services and also asked her to make a firm choice between treatment and discipline. Lend Co. also offered outpatient treatment, and Dana participated in the program without success. When all of these efforts failed, Lend Co. offered to provide inpatient treatment, and Dana refused. Lend Co. fired Dana. According to the courts: O A. Dana has a valid claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act because she willingly participated in the outpatient treatment, even though it did not produce positive results. O B. Lend Co. is not liable under the Americans with Disabilities Act because it offered a reasonable accommodation, and Dana refused. O C. Lend Co, is liable under the Americans with Disabilities Act because it failed to offer Dana time off from…arrow_forwardMichael Hauck claimed that he was discharged by his employer, Sabine Pilot Service, because he refused its direction to perform the illegal act of pumping the bilges of the employer’s vessel into the waterways. Hauck was an employee at will, and Sabine contends that it therefore had the right to discharge him without having to show cause. Hauck brought a wrongful discharge action against Sabine. Decide.Please give your answer using the IRAC format. Issue: Call of the QuestionRule: Rule of Law to be applied to properly answer the questionAnalysis: Applying the rule of law to the facts of the problem presentedConclusion: Answer to the Issuearrow_forwardJohn works as an engineer for a technological company, and Maria works as a sales executive for a competitor business. Maria reminded John that her profession contains sensitive information, and she cautions him not to reveal anything he learns from her work to anyone. While attending a conference, John overheard two executives from Maria's company discussing a new product launch. He chooses to buy a modest amount of Maria's company's shares, intending to profit from the predicted increase in the company's stock price following the product launch. John double-checked his company's regulations to ensure that there was no conflict of interest or limitation on the purchase. However, as a result of unanticipated factors, the product introduction was delayed, and the stock price of Maria's company fell instead. Instead of the predicted profit, John's investment resulted in a loss. Question : In the view of conflict of interest of ethics in financial analysis, state the key points of the…arrow_forward
- Girly will have the burden of "going forward," meaning that she has to establish the elements of her claim. If she meets the "prima facie claim," then the defendant MMLP will have the burden that the actions taken against Girly were for a legal reason. If MMLP can meet this burden, the burden then shifts back to Girly to prove that the reason MMLP gave is a pretext (or coverup) for discrimination. (See Chapter 21, p.454) 1. Sexual Discrimination: Does Girly have a via claim for intentional sexual discrimination, that is that she is being treated differently based on her gender? Reference specific facts from the case and apply them to the law to reach your final opinion. 2. Sexual Harassment: Does Girly have a viable claim of sexual harassment against MMLP based on "quid pro quo" sexual harassment OR hostile working environment. Both types are discussed in your text.arrow_forwardMa3. Explain in brief. Sally Henderson is an employee of Good Eats Restaurant. Sally's contract with Good Eats Restaurant states: "Sally Henderson shall ensure the bathrooms and dining room area are reasonably clean during operating hours." Sally's good friend James is also employed by Good Eats Restaurant as a parking attendant, a person who parks customers’ cars. On a very busy night at Good Eats Restaurant, without the authorization of Good Eats Restaurant, Sally decided to help her friend James park cars. Sally injures a customer due to Sally's negligent driving while parking cars. The injured customer sues Sally and Good Eats Restaurant. Is it likely that Good Eats Restaurant will be determined to be liable to the injured customer. BRIEFLY EXPLAIN.arrow_forwardFederal laws such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and HIPPA, apply to claims handling and to the professional activities of the claims representative. True Falsearrow_forward
- Practical Management ScienceOperations ManagementISBN:9781337406659Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.Publisher:Cengage,Operations ManagementOperations ManagementISBN:9781259667473Author:William J StevensonPublisher:McGraw-Hill EducationOperations and Supply Chain Management (Mcgraw-hi...Operations ManagementISBN:9781259666100Author:F. Robert Jacobs, Richard B ChasePublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
- Purchasing and Supply Chain ManagementOperations ManagementISBN:9781285869681Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. PattersonPublisher:Cengage LearningProduction and Operations Analysis, Seventh Editi...Operations ManagementISBN:9781478623069Author:Steven Nahmias, Tava Lennon OlsenPublisher:Waveland Press, Inc.