Win-Dixie company Case Study

After reading this case yes I believe that Mr… Aileron’s employee rights were violated for a number of reasons.

For starters the case did not provide any evidence that proved that his personal life behavior affected his performance at work. The case study did not mention anything about Mr… Oilier cross-dressing at work or doing so while spending time with fellow employees.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

What Mr.

.. Oilier chose to do during his personal mime did not affect his job in any way according to this study. In fact it was shown that he was a good employee with a great reputation and work ethic. On another note I also believe that Mr..

. Lowlier right to have a personal life was violated by his former employer. I say this because employees all over the world may engage In certain actively that may not be appropriate for the workplace, however they keep them very separate.

In doing this is how we have a work-life balance, what happens In the office should remain professional and benefit the company. Just as what happens at home or after work hours etc.

Would remain personal. This remains true as long as employees aren’t representing the company by wearing a company uniform etc. Personal time should be just that… Personal time.

2. What do you see as the consequences of organizations that punish employees for certain off-the-Job behaviors?

Explain a) Unfortunately in this case Mr… Oilier was fired and the lawsuit was a victory for the Win-Dixie company.

However I think that an employer who chooses to punish their employees because they do not agree with or take offense to their “off-the-job behaviors” should be mindful that employees may to respond to this kind of situation quietly. I believe that employers should be aware that consequences such as lawsuits, bad press and a change In reputation can occur due to such actions.

In a case like this the press alone would have a field day with exposing Win-Dixie as possibly a biased or unfair company that does not believe in their employees having a personal life. Once this kind of situation is exposed the attention could be on a large scale and could possible affect the reputation of Win- Dixie in a negative light to their consumers, future employees and possibly other companies affiliated with them. Another consequence could be the one included in the study and that is employee protest which affects productivity and company profit.

Any of these consequences are possible which is why employers need to create alternatives for how to handle situations such as Mr.

.. Aileron’s. 3. Would you consider Win-Dixie an organization that exhibits characteristics of progressive deadlines or the hot stove approach? Defend your position.

A) In my opinion I disagree with how Win-Dixie handled this situation based on what was included in the case study. To be quite honest I do not believe that they’ve exhibited Dixie took bits and pieces from each of these to create a wrongful decision.

For example if looking at the progressive discipline Win-Dixie did not give Mr…

Oilier any kind of warning, however they did punish him by firing him. Although the punishment wasn’t gradually severe, it was certainly severe. If we’re discussing the hot stove rule Win-Dixie acted immediately however they did not provide ample warning, being consistent in this case isn’t applicable, and lastly I believe that it was personal rather than impersonal because Mr… Lowlier off-the-Job behavior had no effect on his work performance.