Articles About Cases Affecting the Human Resource Segments Comparison

Case article 1: Perez versus Mortgage Bankers Association

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The case subjected above is dated 9th March 2015, where, the petitioner sought the clarification of the answer to the question on the possibility of granting Fair Labor Standard Acts (FLSA) requirements for overtime pay to mortgage brokers. As defined by the Secretary of Labor under the advice of the FLSA, the viability of this kind of pay is also inclusive of workers holding an administrative capacity in their companies.

The conflict of the issue was triggered by earlier opinion letters released by the Department of Labor categorically disqualifying the mortgage brokers from the exempt category of employees legible for the overtime pay requirements and grants. The employees association, the mortgage bankers association (MBA) sought for a modified opinion on the matter during the Department of labors (DOL) promulgation of new policies and regulations on the matter in 2006. The DOL then ruled over their earlier opinion and qualified them for the cause, an opinion which was reversed by the DOL by withdrawing its earlier opinion letters in 2010. During this period, the DOL was issuing these opinion letters without prior notice and the chance for any comment. As a result, the affected groups termed these opinion letters as interpretive rules due to the omission of the notice and comment procedures. This omission, therefore, meant that they did not have the full effect and force of the law as legislative rules.

The MBA cited the 2010 opinion letter as invalid due to the omission of the notice and comment procedures. The court ruled that the amendments made by the DOL were uncalled for since it is not required to use the procedures either for issuing an interpretive rule or its amendment. Furthermore, the court cited the administrative procedures act that excludes the application of notice and comment procedures of the interpretive laws (Blevin).

Case Article 2: Pellegrino versus the Communication Workers of America (CWA)

As per the Federal law, qualified employers have to provide their employees with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave. Until 2006, this leave is usually unpaid and did not restrict the movement of employees on leave. In the new amendment of the sickness leave and absenteeism act, the employees were now restricted to travel within the immediate surrounding of their homes.

Denise Pellegrino, a former employee with the CWA, was granted a paid sick leave following her request to undergo a medical procedure (Hysterectomy). She was concurrently granted a Family and Medical Leave Act leave for the same period of the sick leave. A fortnight following her procedure, Pellegrino decided to take a trip to Mexicos Cancun for a period running up to one week without informing her employer and obtaining permission to leave the country. The CWA categorically restricts their workers on sick leave within their homes immediate vicinity. The CWA, therefore, read violation of their work rules and policies for leave.

In court, Pellegrino sued her former employers for interfering with her proper utilization of the FMLA leave by terminating their employment contract. The company argued that she took advantage of her sick leave to travel and they could have terminated her contract without regard to the FMLA. On fairgrounds, the court backed the fact that the FMLA leave protected her conducts during the leave. However, they ruled out that the company had the privileges of enforcing and acting on its policies and rules. The employers conducted was also considered inappropriate, with or without the FMLA leave. Somehow, the court did find that the CWA actions were appropriate as the employer had policies that ensured the privileges assured by the FMLA were not abused by employees (Pellegrino V CWA).

Analysis and Discussion

The above articles represent cases affecting the human resource segments of the respective organizations. In both cases, rights and privileges that seem to be outright and straightforward are brought into balance revealing their comprehensive meanings and validity in the real business conflict. For instance, the mortgage brokers would assume they are legible for the overtime pay, but as they later find out they are not indeed just as the department of labor brings rules. In the second instance involving the leave rules by the CWA, the employer, Pellegrino assumes the vital details of her employers leave policies and ends up losing her job, a cause justified by the court as well. The court presents a legitimate avenue for the interpretation of labor laws affecting the segment of human resources (Deschenaux).

Both of the issues represented in the articles have significant implications on the productivity of both the employee and the organization. In the case of the mortgage brokers, their illegibility for overtime pay will directly affect their commitment to the work out of the regular working hours. The provision of the same is subject to labor acts and the policies of the organization. Sick leaves and FMLA leaves, on the other hand, are vital to the employee since they are entitled to rest and well-being of their loved ones. A proper rest and time well spent outside work implicates a positive attitude at work. Restrictions and regulations during the leave are subject to the company policies, and a violation of the same requires disciplinary action. The topic on the legal aspects of human resources is, therefore, an interesting area of study that reveals some of the answers to employees complaints. In the cases described in this paper, there are important revelations to some of the employees questions. Surprisingly, not every type of employee is entitled to an overtime pay.

Works Cited

Blevin, Sara. "Recent U.S. Supreme Court Employment Law Cases". Indianapolis, IN SHRM Chapter, 2015, http://indyshrm.org/recent-u-s-supreme-court-employment-law-cases/.

"Pellegriny V CWA". Uscourts.Gov, 2015, http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/112639np.pdf.

Deschenaux, Joanne. "Recent Court Cases Provide Guidance For HR". SHRM, 2011, https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-news/pages/casesguidanceforhr.aspx.