The doctrine of at-will employment is governed by the presumption that employment should be voluntary and purely indefinite to the employees and employers. This law dictates that employees can leave jobs at will, and similarly, the employers can lay off the employees at any time for either anything or nothing at all. The discussion below provides the fundamental law, facts, and the analysis of the legal doctrine of “at-will employment.” The main concern of the work is to scrutinize the ethical issues in acts of wrongful discharge, where employees have been laid off for refusal to participate in illegal activities.
According to the at-will employment doctrine, the law governing the contract states that either party in the job can terminate the employment relationship at their wish. The law is not restricted to collective bargaining as in the case of the recognized unions provided there is a definite term of the contract expressed by the employer. At-will employment, therefore, means that the corporation does not guarantee a job for a given time without a prior agreement from the CEO. Some of the facts presented in the case study of “Martin Marietta Corp. v. Lorenz (1992), include the following. Paul M. Lorenz was an employee of Martin Marietta Corporation. The court of appeal reversed the verdict against Lorenz, which claimed wrongful discharge of Lorenz’s refusal to act illegally.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Lorenz was responsible for the investigations of NASA projects and designing the US equipment for the space shuttle program. Lorenz was encountered with significant concerns of NASA projects; mixed mode contract, the NDI contract, and Tug Irad contract. All the three concerns required Lorenz to analyze the quality of materials used in the designing of the space shuttle. In his response, Lorenz stated that the testing sequence was inadequate; the current data would not be sufficient for a safe tank in the new pricing guidelines. His ideas were negatively received by the management claiming that Lorenz failed in his work and he ended up being laid off in 1975.
According to Clyde W. Summers in his article “Individual Protection Against Unjust Dismissal: Time for a Statute” (1976), the at-will employment doctrine provides the employer and employee a free will to terminate employment relationship (pg 484-485). The utilitarian perspective favors the satisfaction of the majority in any case at hand, making the rule ethically right and legal. The parties involved in the case are, therefore, expected to act ethically according to the directions of the law governing the case under scrutiny (Clyde 1976). In the case study presented about Martin Marietta Corp. v. Lorenz, the respondent, Paul M. Lorenz, acted ethically in addressing the issues surrounding him. The Martin Marietta Corporation did not ethically respond since it conceded some information against the firing of Lorenz.
The Colorado court could not recognize Lorenz’s claim of wrongful discharge since the claim had exceeded the time limit of six years after termination. Consequently, a direct verdict was passed on Lorenz for appearing to present a null claim to the court. The utilitarian perspective of ethics is evident where Lorenz’s case for the direct verdict was reversed and given a chance for a new trial (Lorch, 1991). The court, therefore, presented substantial evidence that Lorenz’s case had a cognizable wrongful discharge claim, that Lorenz could not perform as instructed by the employer, Martin Marietta. The fraudulent act committed by Martin Marietta Corporation violated the federal law because it would interfere with the public policies of at-will employment, thus not penalizing Lorenz for his honesty.
According to Kant’s perspective, the justification of action is primarily based on the extent to which they have performed their duties other than the aftermaths. Martin Marietta Corporation did not provide information regarding Lorenz’s refusal to undertake obligations as expected. Lorenz was terminated for not upholding the directed command by the superiors to ensure the Biaxial Text Fixture machine is built for less than $10000 rather than the allocated $25000. Additionally, Lorenz failed to write a report attesting the adequacy of materials claiming that it will endanger his usefulness to the Martin Marietta Corporation. In an ideal situation, Lorenz evaded at any cost being held responsible for engaging in fraudulent activities against NASA, thus using his integrity to attend to his duties. Lorenz was presented as a hardworking employee of Martin Marietta Corporation, and he even attempted to participate in work even after being laid off.
James Martin, in his book “The Jesuit Guide to Everything,” argued that Jesuits are contemplative in action. The Jesuit values are applied in guiding and educating people on quality leadership and especially the Ignatian principles. To begin with, one of the Jesuit values is “Cura personalis,” which means care for every person. The second Jesuit value is “forming and educating agents of change,” and involves applying critical thought, responsible and moral actions in ethical issues (James 2018). By applying the two Jesuit values, Lorenz is considered to be right in his actions, and therefore, the right judgment should be upheld by the court to ensure fairness and justice. Besides, the Jesuit values would justify Lorenz’s honesty by avoiding fraudulent activities, uncovering Martin Marietta’s manipulative nature to the employees. Therefore in real life situations, Jesuits insist that there is no separation between the spiritual life and the material owned. Even though the at-will employment doctrines take the lead at the end, Jesuits dictate that the fraudsters should be executed and honest people freed.
References
Clyde W. Summers (1976). “Individual Protection Against Unjust Dismissal: Time for a Statute” Virginia Law Review .
James Martin, (2018). “The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything” New York Times.
Lorch, Robert Stuart, (1991). Colorado’s Government: Structure, Politics, Administration, and Policy (5 th ed.). University Press of Colorado.
