ENGL 101 Actions Errors and Omissions
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
ENGL 101 Actions Errors and Omissions
Assessment 3: Critical Incident Analysis
Write a 5–6-page paper analyzing the critical incident at Capra Tek.
INTRODUCTION
As a result of the chart and memorandum you created for your consulting client, legal counsel for Capra Tek has determined that the company experienced a critical incident related to COVID-19 that has resulted in serious legal risks. The critical incident includes a potential failure to implement appropriate precautions in the workplace and a potential failure to properly select essential workers to remain onsite during the pandemic. The company has hired an outside investigator to interview five key Capra Tek employees regarding this incident. The CEO has now asked you to analyze the interviews of these employees and write a memorandum in narrative form addressing the six deaths reported in the wrongful death worker complaints.
In this assessment, you will analyze the transcript of interviews with five key Capra Tek employees and write a memorandum in narrative form addressing the following for each of the wrongful death complaints. See the Capra Tek Key Employee Interviews [DOCX].
Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints; assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.
Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.
Refer to the specific U.S. law, regulation, recommendation, or order involved.
Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint. Include a summary of the plaintiff’s case and potential defenses against each claim.
Address the severity of potential legal liability.
Summarize the plaintiff’s potential case.
Describe any defenses Capra Tek might be able to assert to avoid liability.
Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed, providing your rationale indicating why they should be interviewed.
Evaluate the skills of the interviewer, including their selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.
Indicate what, if anything, you believe the interviewer left out that should have been included, or that they included that should have been left out.
Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript that address protections for both the company and the interviewed employees.
If this transcript were obtained by a plaintiff’s attorney, could it be used at trial against the wishes of Capra Tek?
For the interviewed employees, what are the limits of confidentiality that protects them?
Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
Memorandum should be concise, well organized, and written in narrative form,
Adhere to conventions for spelling, grammar, sentence structure, legal/business terminology, and word usage.
Adhere to APA citation and referencing standards.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
As you complete your assessment, be sure it meets the following guidelines:
Written communication: Use error-free doctoral-level writing, with original (non-plagiarized) content, logical phrasing, and accurate word choices.
Scholarship: Use 3–4 professionally reputable sources to support your main points and analysis. Be sure to include scholarly sources. Course readings may be included among the required sources.
APA formatting: All resources and citations should be formatted according to current APA style and formatting guidelines.
Length: 5–6 typed, double-spaced pages, in addition to the cover page, illustrations, reference page, and appendix.
Font and font size: Consistent, APA-compliant font, 12-point.
Please also note:
For this assessment, you are required to follow the Standard Naming Convention requirements and the Track Changes requirements for any files you upload. You will find the requirements on the DBA Submission Requirements page.
Before submitting your assessment, you are required to use Recite to check that your in-text citations match the reference list at the end of your assessment. Recite also checks for stylistic errors related to referencing. Make any corrections to your assessment based on the Recite report.
COMPETENCIES MEASURED
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:
Competency 1: Create rule- and value-based arguments from human resource models and theories, supported with clear and relevant evidence that convey professional tone and style.
Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
Competency 4: Appraise multiple responses to a managing a human resource problem for compliance within ethical, legal, or regulatory frameworks.
Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint, including a summary of the plaintiff’s case, and potential defenses against each claim.
Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed with a rationale for each choice.
Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript addressing protections for both the company and the interviewed employees.
Competency 5: Analyze an organization’s human resource management problem from the perspective of the legal and regulatory environment in which the organization operates.
Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints; assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.
Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.
Evaluate the skills of the interviewer including selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.
Resources: Workplace Investigations
Dworkin, L. B., & Squire, M. B. (2018). Best practices in conducting internal workplace investigations of discrimination and harassment complaints. Employee Relations Law Journal, 44(2), 20–38.
This article explains key considerations in conducting investigations of worker complaints, such as confidentiality, privilege, and investigation procedures.
Branigan, K. S., Nowicki, C. L., Buzan, L. A., & Allen, J. S. (2019). Conducting effective independent workplace investigations in a post- #MeToo era. Dispute Resolution Journal, 74(1), 85–110.
This article explains key considerations in conducting investigations of worker complaints and supplements the above article.
NLRB issues decisions for week of Dec. 16-20. (2020, January 7). Targeted News Service.
Search for the ruling on “Apogee Retail LLC d/b/a Unique Thrift Store.” This case explores the limits of confidentiality in workplace investigations. Workers may be asked to keep their part in an investigation confidential as a condition of continued employment, despite an earlier ruling by NLRB that found such a condition would infringe on worker rights under NLRA.
Resources: COVID-19 Business Impacts
Dey, M., Frazils, H., Loewenstein, M. A., & Sun, H. (2020, June). Ability to work from home: Evidence from two surveys and implications for the labor market in the COVID-19 pandemic. MLR. Monthly Labor Review, pp. 1–18.
This resource shows how to determine if workers can perform their job remotely or must report to an onsite workplace.
McWilliams, P.L. (2020). Employment law implications of a refusal to work due to fear of COVID-19. Employee Benefit Plan Review, 74(5), 6–9.
This resource offers practical suggestions for how an employer can respond to COVID-19 legal requirements.
Hamel, D., & Rodriguez, D. B. (2020). Public health framework for COVID-19 business liability. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7, 1–19.
This article suggests ways to defend lawsuits brought as a result of a plaintiff contracting COVID-19.
Assessment 3
In this assessment, you will analyze the transcript of interviews with five key Capra Tek employees. NOTE – This is an outline of the assessment requirements. Be sure to read the entire assignment to understand all of the nuances of the requirements. For good organization – Head each section of your paper e.g., Errors and Omissions; Potential Legal Liabilities, etc., and follow the outline below.
Identify actions, errors, and omissions that may have contributed to the six wrongful death complaints;
assign each action, error, or omission to the individual(s) involved.
Analyze potential legal liabilities to the company resulting from the incident supported by references to the legislation, order, or recommendation involved.
Refer to the specific U.S. law, regulation, recommendation, or order involved.
Assess the severity of the legal risk for each complaint. Include a summary of the plaintiff’s case and potential defenses against each claim.
Address the severity of potential legal liability.
Summarize the plaintiff’s potential case.
Describe any defenses Capra Tek might be able to assert to avoid liability.
Identify any unanswered questions and additional individuals to be interviewed, providing your rationale indicating why they should be interviewed.
Evaluate the skills of the interviewer, including their selection of key employees interviewed, facts gathered, thoroughness of interview questions, confidentiality of the interview transcript, and any omissions by the interviewer.
Indicate what, if anything, you believe the interviewer left out that should have been included, or that they included that should have been left out.
Explain confidentiality and privilege considerations for the interview transcript that address protections for both the company and the interviewed employees.
If a plaintiff’s attorney obtained this transcript, could it be used at trial against the wishes of Capra Tek?
For the interviewed employees, what are the limits of any confidentiality that protects them?
Remember –Use error-free doctoral-level writing, with original (non-plagiarized) content, logical phrasing, and accurate word choices. Use 3–4 professionally reputable sources to support your main points and analysis. Be sure to include scholarly sources. Course readings may be included among the required sources. All papers, resources and citations should be formatted according to APA 7 style and formatting guidelines. Use Recite to check that you’re in-text citations match the reference list at the end of your assessment. Recite also checks for stylistic errors related to referencing. Make any corrections to your assessment based on the Recite report. As always, let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of any help.
Be sure you consider the information found at the following links as you work on Assessment 3!
covid FAQ 11232020 (002).pdf (illinois.gov)
Alabama_USLAW_Compendium_COVID19_WorkersCompQuickGuide_2020.pdf.
2020 GA WC Covid-19 Compendium (00217965.DOCX;1) (uslaw.org)
ENGL 101 Actions Errors and Omissions
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!