英语论文网

r the law.

Alternatively, they can pay unemployment expenses for ETA employees who will have to be laid off as a result of hiring new employees in Massachusetts. As can be gleaned from the discussion of the persons present in the meeting, it is evident that the acquisition made by Midwest of the ETA company resulted in taking over the existing staff of ETA and merging them with those from the Midwest. Since Midwest Education and ETA are engaged in the same line of business, there is no substantial difference in the work performed by their respective employees before the acquisition. Hence, Midwest Education can either relocate the employees of ETA, if the latter agree, or pay unemployment expenses for those who will not be willing to relocate.

As a general rule, employers cannot be selective on who it offers relocation benefits to. All employees who are required to relocate and who agree to do so are entitled to receive relocation allowance as the circumstances warrant. The employment contract is also the governing law between the employer and the employee and if there is a mobility clause in the contract requiring the employee to relocate when needed, then the latter must abide under the agreement.

However, if there is no mobility clause in the employment contract, then the relocation shall be treated as a new employment condition which is subject to negotiation between the parties. Midwest Education cannot demand from ETA employees to transfer to Massachusetts absent any mobility clause in the latter's employment contract because when Midwest Education acquired ETA, it is understood that it assumed all the responsibilities of the former management to its employees, in the absence of contrary stipulation.

Are the employees of ETA who merged with the creative development division guaranteed positions at Midwest Education, or should they be treated as a pool of applicants?

The employees of ETA are not guaranteed positions at Midwest Education because not all divisions of Midwest Education can accommodate additional staff. There will also be some employees of ETA whose work is no longer necessary for Midwest. Furthermore, while all employees of ETA have work which are similar to those performed by the Midwest staff, not all of them can be absorbed because this will result in redundancy of the work performed and hence, additional costs for the company. However, they are entitled to all employee benefits pertaining to them from their former employer.

Chief Operating Officer Frank Rose pointed out during the Midwest Education senior management retreat that relocating all the ETA employees to Massachusetts will cost more than million dollars and as such, they should treat the East Coast positions as new hires. However, as correctly argued by Lawrence Wilson, the Vice President of HR, all ETA's staff are Midwest Education employees. Furthermore, he pointed out that they have in the past paid relocation expenses for employees to move to California office and they are also willing to pay the Audio Visual department of ETA to move from Anaheim to San Jose.

Wilson clarified that while the company does not have to pay relocation costs to move staff to Massachusetts, they will however have to pay unemployment expenses for ETA staff who will be laid off in the process. This means that Midwest can chose to hire new applicants instead of relocating