Write a 5–7-paragraph script for an oral argument in defense of the organization

Question

Write a 5–7-paragraph script for an oral argument in defense of the organization. This should be solely from the perspective of an attorney for the organization.

Identify related laws or legislation that supports this perspective.

Summarize a logical case outcome and the relief requested from the court.

Read the following case:

Joanna Capella came to work for Educational Books (a small academic publishing house) in 2010 as an assistant to Arthur Moore, CEO. In 2012, Moore, her mentor, promoted her to vice president in charge of author relations. Her responsibilities included putting scholars under contract to write academic works. From 2012–2014 she failed to sign anyone upper management considered significant. In late 2014 she was reassigned to a position as vice president in charge of marketing, where her primary duty was to promote the company at book conventions. Upon reassignment, she promptly resigned from the company and brought suit for sexual harassment/constructive discharge.

It is undisputed by either side that Moore and Capella had a consensual sexual relationship, which ended in late 2011. It is also undisputed that Mr. Moore stated on two occasions to other executives that Ms. Capella "was a good lay." Ms. Capella was not present for these statements. It is also undisputed that Mr. Jeffrey Marx, also a vice president, stated in 2013 that she "only had her job because of her personal relationship with the boss." Sandy Alder, also a vice president is quoted as saying in front of three subordinates with Ms. Capella present that Capella "slept her way to the middle." Lastly, one of these three subordinates, Victor Johnson, asked her on an occasion in early 2014, "Could I sleep with you to get a promotion?" He later apologized and said he was joking.

Educational Books' executive handbook has a strong anti-harassment policy. The handbook also provides for a complaint procedure by filing an official complaint which, at the executive level, is sent to Mr. Moore for investigation and action. Ms. Capella did not ever file such a form.

Explanation / Answer

Answer:-

Every case of any kind could rest on certain artefacts that will help to arrive at a particular decision. Mere words and perception of few people cannot be baseline as artifact to any case.

Moore and Capella shared a protege-mentor relationship. These relationship is many times end in certain sour note, same looks repeated here but the steps taken by mentor is harsh and is affecting organisation as these individuals were of highest leadership position and often looked after by employees as role model. Moreover, the role played by these individual and such a huge allegation to CEO definately bring down the brand image of organisation not only affecting one or two stakeholders, to certain extent it impacts the complete existence of organisation if not dealt properly.

Moore as a protege, should not have been carried away and given public statement to his colleagues regarding Capella and his certain relationship which he defends after charges are put on him. Being a CEO of organisation having highest responsibility as well as being protege of Capella, it was his responsibility to maintain dignity of his colleagues and especially his mentor student. This spells Moore as not taking his responsibility seriously and need to be liable of such action if it proved that he has made some unpleasant statement of Capella. This unpleasant statement of Capella if is truly made by Moore, definately it would result in Grapevine type communication, spreading like fire tarnishing image of Capella across organisation, especially when CEO is involved. This could be root cause of Capella taking a route of resignation and filing suit against CEO.

Capella on her part didn't follow the organisation process. If she had realised that her image is getting tarnished by certain action of CEO, then she should had spoken to Moore or followed organisation process based on harassment policy. Though Moore was involved for policy process approval, kick stating the process would had made her position stronger. Also, process kick start would had corrected Moore if he truly had done some unpleasant action putting a type of warning to Moore regarding correcting his action. This would had been not only win-win situation to both Moore and Capella but also the organisation as a whole.

Now, with current situation, when organisation brand image is at stake, organisation need to arrive at out of court settlement with Capella and get things right. Also, organisation need to arrive at decision to have Moore continue as CEO by being on his side and supporting him or get him removed by not supporting him, decision taken under lenses of artifact it has. Also, post this organisation need to invest in Public Relation activity to rebuild its image.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse W
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.