The Project

Management Lawsuit
Asignment - 1
Subject-business operation
Submitted by- Gurjot singh
Submitted to – Mr.sheikh Akhtar
Student id. - 21025976
Q.1-Why do most executives hire into companies under written
contracts rather than a one-page employment acceptance letter?
1. Ans. Well, there is difference between written
contracts and one-page employment acceptance letter,
they’re generally used for different types of work. In
case of written contract typically has a specific time period
attached to it. In the case of one-page employment, it is a
formal job offer that includes all of the following things, start
date, salary, job title, employee benefits, employment
relationship. As with all senior officers, the hiring process
included a written contract that clearly stipulated the criteria for
bonuses, stock options, severance packages, retirement
packages, and golden parachutes. So these the reasons why
the most executives hire companies under written contracts.

My opinion

In my book of experience, written contract is not a one-way

street. The contract binds both you and the employee, so it
limits your flexibility. This may pose a problem if you later
decide that you don't like the contract terms or the needs of
your business change. However, employment contracts can
be very useful if you want control over the employee's
ability to leave your business. For example, if finding or
training a replacement will be very costly or time-
consuming for your company, you might want a written
contract. It can lock the employee into a specific term or
require the employee to give you enough notice to find
and train a suitable replacement. While you can't force
someone to keep working for you, an employee is likely
to comply with the agreement's terms if there's a
penalty for not doing so.

Q.2- Does the president of a company have the right

to restructure a company however he or she pleases?
Ans.- well, it is true that president of the company
have the right to restructure a company. In this case, the
new president of company is created the corporate
PMO. Project managers in all divisions would no longer
report to the division vice presidents and were assigned
full time to the corporate PMO. The corporate PMO
reported directly to the new president. With most PMOs,
the project managers still report on a “solid line” to their
respective division managers but report to the PMO on a
“dotted line.”

In my opinion

In the book of my experience,president has th e right to do

anything because it belongs to him. They have the power to
change anything. For instance- The president’s decision to
have the project managers permanently assigned to the PMO
alienated the three divisions that had project managers,
however, the engineering division was particularly
displeased.

Q.3- Did the president have the right to transfer profit-

and-loss responsibility from the functional divisions to the
PMO?
Ans.- It is not true that president have the right to transfer
profit-and-loss responsibility from the functional division to
the PMO because the new president created a corporate
PMO. Project managers in all divisions would no longer
report to the division vice presidents and were assigned full
time to the corporate PMO. The corporate PMO reported
directly to the new president. With most PMOs, the project
managers still report on a “solid line” to their respective
division managers but report to the PMO on a “dotted line.”
the creation of the PMO did was to transfer profit-and-loss
responsibility on the projects to the PMO. That meant that
there would be no project profitability component as part of
Jim’s year-end bonus payout.

In my opinion

In my book of experience, transfer profit-and-loss

responsibility from the functional divisions to the PMO is not
beneficial for employers or other staff who is working on
your company. For instance, Jim’s bonus payments were
drastically reduced because the creation of the PMO did was
to transfer profit-and-loss responsibility on the projects to
the PMO. That meant that there would be no project
profitability component as part of Jim’s year-end bonus
payout. As a result, Jim resigned from the company and filed
a lawsuit against Phoenix Company for the loss of part of his
bonus payments over the previous two years. Jim and his
attorney claimed that the creation of the corporate PMO and
the transferral of profit-and-loss responsibility to the PMO in
effect violated Jim’s written agreement and affected his
bonus.

Q.4- Did Jim win or lose the lawsuit?

Ans.- In 2009 and 2010, Jim’s bonus payments were
drastically reduced. In January of 2011, Jim resigned from the
company and filed a lawsuit against Phoenix Company for the
loss of part of his bonus payments over the previous two
years. Jim and his attorney claimed that the creation of the
corporate PMO and the transferral of profit-and-loss
responsibility to the PMO in effect violated Jim’s written
agreement and affected his bonus.

In my opinion
In my book of experience, Jim won da lawsuit. There are
some reasons behind this phenomenon. Firstly, Jim had the
great knowledge of project management because of his work
experience in phoenix company. He did great job in his time
in the company and it was also beneficial for the phoenix
company. Due to change of laws in company he faced severel
losses. And finally he claimed lawsuit against the phoenix
company and I think he won the lawsuit.