To what extent could Phoenix’s liability have been avoided had it documented Wilson/s alleged inability to perform requested tasks on the new computer system? In your opinion, is Phoenix required to wait until Wilson makes a costly mistake before concluding that he cannot perform the functions of the job? Are there alternatives short of waiting for a mistake?
What could Phoenix have done to improve its handling of the medical diagnosis? Where did it go wrong?
What type of policy could you develop that would instruct your managers about how to handle an employee with Parkinson’s disease or other serious medical condition that would have avoided the mistakes that Wilson’s employer made?
These solutions may offer step-by-step problem-solving explanations or good writing examples that include modern styles of formatting and construction of bibliographies out of text citations and references. Students may use these solutions for personal skill-building and practice. Unethical use is strictly forbidden.I think Phoenix’s liability could possibly have been avoided completely if it had documented Wilson’s alleged inability to perform requested tasks. It is vital to note that the Fourth Circuit court’s decision pivoted on its finding that the company had a “firm perception that Wilson was disabled” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2009, p. 645): essentially a preconception formed and held despite a lack of facts to support it and in the face of facts to the contrary, followed by shunning behavior...
By purchasing this solution you'll be able to access the following files: