HRM 546 Human Resource Law Presentation

HRM 546 Human Resource Law Presentation

Instructions/Descriptions

HRM 546 Human Resource Law Presentation

“Stress Free Estates” is a national estate planning firm with 2,500 employees in eight states.

Prepare a 10- to 15-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation with speaker notes for upper management at “Stress Free Estates” to address the following areas:

An overview of Title VII as applied to race and national origin discrimination

Ways “Stress Free Estates” can minimize liability for race and national origin discrimination in its employment practices

The three types of affirmative action

Whether any type of affirmative action is required or recommended for the firm

Include visual interest in the form of relevant photos, clip art, and/or graphics.

[Order Now]

Format your presentation consistent with APA guidelines and include both an introduction slide and reference slide,

On a separate MS Word file, you will cut and paste all of your speaker notes. Please ensure you clearly mark what slide the notes are for in this file. This file will be posted with your Presentation.

When I grade, I will be grading from your speaker notes, I will not be looking in the slides for substantive material. While you are graded on your presentation and its layout, you will find my rubrics and remarks on the MS Word file you post with the presentation.

Slides should never have more than 30 words. More than that causes the listener to tune out the speaker and just read the slides. Speaker notes should contain all of your substantive material.

You may not copy and paste any information into your work. Read the information from your source and put it into your document in your own words, then correctly cite your source with in-text citations and a reference at the end of your document.

[Order Now]

Resources

Center for Writing Excellence

Reference and Citation Generator

Grammar Assistance

Jennifer Ryan Contracts Discussion

Reply to both responses.

Jennifer Ryan

I don’t feel that Pacific has any damages against Fred. §Section 2-610 states that when “either party repudiates the contract with respect to a performance not yet due the loss of which will substantially impair the value of the contract to the other…”; right there Pacific did not suffer any loss as they were able to resell the same boat for $500, more than they were selling to Fred. Section § 2-706 allow Pacific to resell the boat and recover the difference between the resale price and the contract price together with any incidental damages allowed but less expenses saved in consequence of the buyer’s (Links to an external site.) breach. Again, Pacific didn’t lose anything but in face made $500 more than the previous selling price.

Another section of the UCC § 2-708 Seller’s Damages for Non-acceptance or Repudiation (2) states if the measure of damages provided is inadequate to put the seller (Links to an external site.) in as good a position as performance would have done then the measure of damages is the profit (including reasonable overhead) which the seller would have made from full performance by the buyer (Links to an external site.), together with any incidental damages provided due allowance for costs reasonably incurred and due credit for payments or proceeds of resale. Pacific promptly resold the same boat Fred rejected for more money than they were selling to Fred. This all seems to point to the fact that Pacific had no right to bring any action for damages for Fred’s.

Lonnie Wynne

In this case Pacific Marine, Inc originally had a contract to sell a 20ft Sailboat to Fred Jones for $25K. Fred decided to back out of the offer. Pacific Marine successfully sells the boat to another person for $500 more than the original price. Now after sell the the boat Pacific Marine is trying to go after Fred for his breach of contract. I personally don’t this Pacific Marine has a fighting chance since they did not take a loss for the boat. In fact, Fred is arguing that because Pacific Marine took a $500 gain they cannot go after Fred for any damages because there were no damages.

According to UCC 2-610. Anticipatory Repudiation. “When either party repudiates the contract (Links to an external site.) with respect to a performance not yet due the loss of which will substantially impair the value of the contract to the other”. (Cornell law, 2021) While this is true for most cases. I don’t think it is true for this case. Fred backed out of the del well before taking delivery of the Sailboat thus allowing Pacific Marine enough time to put it back on the market. Pacific Marine did decide to try and resale the Sailboat and was successful enough to make an additional $500 on the new deal. I believe if Pacific Marine continues to try an go after Fred for breach of contract that they would most likely end up paying out more money for lawyer an court fees and ultimately lose the case. Pacific Marine should take their $500 profit and leave well enough.

HRM 546 Human Resource Law Presentation

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!