EMPLOYMENT LAW &

RELATION

Student Name:
[Email address]
 1

Introduction

The security guard tried to coerce a football player into a university-sponsored event because he

thought the footballer would make a substitute for the women. The provisional court ruled that

the employee was dismissed for several legal reasons.

Summary

During a street party with the support of the university, a security guard was needed at a private

university. He saw what I thought was fighting. White female representation was strongly

supported by an African American alternative (he was also a footballer). The woman rolled her

legs, giving the impression that she was trying to be free. The moment the guard asked the man

to shoot the female, he turned and stood with his hands fixed on the guard. Peach the male

vigilance. There followed a physical battle in which the guard joined various observers and used

an application to bring the male to the ground. The male alternative was charged with lead

confusion and later granted to heighten the harmony. The group that witnessed the incident was

increasingly affected, and many saw the goalkeeper's activities as racially motivated. Social

freedoms and alternative societies asked the school for a test. In the end, the audit committee

concluded that the guard had exploited and used the excess violence, but that there was no

obvious race readiness. Also, the university was accused that she had not properly prepared her

safety lessons. Although he was initially informed that he would not lose his job and that he was

expelled in the queue of progress. The student is finally unfair.

 2

Question 1

The legitimate problem was whether, in the specific case of the indefinite voluntary action

strategy, the security guard was inappropriately released on a large scale when he finally set up a

permit movement to safeguard state criminal law. The Iowa Supreme Court upheld the District

Court's decision to dismiss the case, but for a different reason. The decision of the district court

has shown that the offender has not proved that his purpose is based on an investment in the

insured movement. Instead, there were several legal reasons behind the end. The Iowa Supreme

Court said the problem of causality had been questioned and improved. However, this was

because the party concerned had forgotten to distinguish between the open-ended approach,

which was identified and which contained the action in which it was concluded. The Court

agreed that the criminal law of the State reflects a general approach to the population against

irregularities. And for the safety of people in general. No specific legal or sacred agreement was

mentioned that would be helpful in this case. The decision of the district court, which sees a

"unique relationship" between the Harmony officials and the residents they serve, does not refer

to the obligation of private security forces to investigate and arrest the alleged offenses. The

obligation to deal with the problem was the duty of the Open Harmony Officers to help and

protect the people in their care.

Question 2

It is observed that the university didn’t handle this case very well however according to UAE

labor law termination from job was the right decision by the university but on the grounds of

criminal law when president Maxwell and his wife assured Lloyd that they will support him in

this case and will revoke his termination the moment this matter will sort. The rule of the district

court is usually recognized. First, while it may be important for private-sector citizens to
 3

volunteer for the ratification of criminal law, we can not set out an open, deliberate and well-

defined strategy to eliminate a specific case of voluntary business training and to support the

complaint. Unfair release only for the "maintenance of criminal law". Secondly, Lloyd has made

much of his slander pledge, and the ads that protected the mistake can not be understood as

slander. In the end, the finder of the plausible truth can not conclude with a clear, convincing,

and convincing insight that Maxwell has some current targets for fraud when referring to

representations.

“As per UAE Federal Law No. (08) Of 1980, Article No. 102”:

The disciplinary sanctions that the company or its agent can impose on employees are:

1. Warning to the employee.

2. Penalty.

3. Stop working or suspension with low payments for no more than 10 days;

4. Abandonment or postponement or accidental addition to a business that has an elevated

property;

5. Give up or progress in institutions that have progressed;

6. Refusal without prejudice to the payment of the remuneration;

7. Refusal to waive the full or partial termination of the benefit payment. Such punishment may

be imposed only for the reasons expressly provided for in Article 120 of this Law.