Legal Issues

Question one
The right to hire, fire and make an honest profit is deeply embedded in the American grain. Consequently, the right to privacy is also enshrined in the American tradition (Beatty and Samuelson 702). Workers have rights against intrusive employees that primarily range from off-duty conduct as well as alcohol and drug testing together with lie detector tests and electronic monitoring. A plaintiff can invoke off-duty conduct as course of action in legal proceedings as states permit any lawful conduct when off-duty irrespective of company demands like off-duty anti-smoking policy.  Employees of the government are only subject to tests when they show signs of use or are engaged in a line of duty where the said abuse endangers the public. The Employee Polygraph Protection Test bars employers from conducting such tests on employees with the exception of instances where crimes have been committed. The Electronics Communications Privacy Act (1986) only permits employers to monitor employees upon employees consent or when such activity falls in line with ordinary organizational scheduling. Inn cases of emails, plaintiffs have a valid legal proceeding when the employer monitors employees correspondence yet heshe does not supply the email.

Question Two
The law that concerns the contractor in the case of negligence primarily regards compliance programs. The federal sentencing Guidelines are detailed regulations that judges adhere to when sentencing defendants. The issue that arises with regard to the contractors case is whether he had in place serious a compliance program which primarily is a plan to prevent damage. As a result of the contractor delineating a detailed functioning compliance program, it convinces investigators to curtail the investigation and limit the prosecution to those directly involved other than convicting high ranking management officers of the contractor. Though it is so, the set damage control regulations that the contractor employed must be reasonably capable of reducing the prospect of damage and as such the damage could not have been foreseen. 

Question Three
The United States Congress has over time passed a variety of laws and statutes to protect citizens from employer discrimination. Firstly the issues that Bettys advert raises concern with regard to the Family and Medical Leave Act passed by U.S. Congress in 1993. This act guarantees both women and men up to 12 weeks of leave (unpaid) each year medical emergencies that concerns themselves as well as their families. Corporate firms who treat their workers cruelly are liable for intentional inflection of emotional distress. Bettys potential candidate could argue that Betty as an employer is inflicting emotional distress on her for contending that having children is unfavourable. Thirdly Bettys ad concerns employee right to privacy. Justice Louis D. Brandeis branded it the right to be let alone and as such Bettys ad interferes with family matters that can be defined as falling outside the realm of employers. Bettys job ad raises issues regarding religious discrimination as well as age bias.  These two particularizations of the ad violate the antidiscrimination laws of the federal government. The 1967 Age Discrimination Employment Act does not allow using of prejudicial tests in employment and as such Bettys requirement in law of a candidate who is not opposed to Christian values is in violation of this act.

Question Four
The Fifth Amendment includes three important protections for criminal suspects which are self incrimination, the right to due process as well as protection from double jeopardy. The concept of due process as outlined in the Fifth Amendment postulates that criminals suspects have a right to a fair trial at all phases of the case for instance at the suspect identification stage if a witness states that a black man robbed a liquor store, it would violate due process if law enforcement officers placed three whites and a black man in line for identification. This incriminates the man because he himself is evidence as the only black man. The Fifth Amendment also bars the government from coercing criminal suspects into giving testimony that is to their own detriment. This is the right against self incrimination. 

Question five
A will is a document viable in law which disposes of the testators property upon his death. A spouse has valid claim of a forced share of the decedents estate. This is because in community property states, the widow can override the written will and go on to claim a half of all marital property that has been acquired during marriage with the exception of assets that were inherited or received as gifts. In this instance because of the short-lived marriage which primarily implies that the decedents property clearly could not have been acquired by mutual effort of the widow and the decedent, it follows that the widow has no recourse in law. If the spouse was to be in a non-community property state, she could override the will and go on to claim some percentage subject to longevity of marriage. In this particular instance the spouse is not entitled to anything as laws only permit percentages of the estate where marriages have lasted five years and longer.