Lending Store Case Study Essay

1. In the above case, Mary Smith is suing Lending Store, Inc. for being fired without any form of explanation. Mary Smith can argue that she has been decimated and the company has violated the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. Under the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, “the right of all employees and job applicants (1) to be treated without discrimination and (2) to be able to sue employees if they are discriminated against” Cheeseman, 2007, p. 428). Mary Smith can argue that she was discriminated for having a permanent disability, which requires her to work from a wheelchair, thus causing her to arrive a couple minutes late to work. In addition, according to the Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination Questions And Answers, “An individual with a disability is "qualified" if he or she satisfies skill, experience, education, and other job-related requirements of the position held or desired, and who, …show more content…
31). Therefore, according to Titles I and V of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Mary Smith can argue she had the skills required for the position and they promoted John Jones, who didn’t have any mortgage lending experience. In addition, Mary Smith can argue that the company violated disparate-treatment discrimination due to her sex.

2. In the lawsuit, Smith v. Lending Store, Inc., the company is being sued for the termination of Ms. Smith without any explanation. The company can argue that Ms. Smith was an at-will employee, which indicates the plaintiff didn’t have a contract. Under common law, Lending Store, Inc., could terminate an employee at any time and for whatever reason (Cheeseman, 2007, p. 428). The