Introduction:

The case of "The Firing at FastBurger: A Wrongful Dismissal Case Study" focuses on the
termination of Maria Thompson, a highly experienced and dedicated employee at FastBurger,
a prominent fast-food chain. Maria's dismissal resulted in a legal dispute as she filed a lawsuit
against the company, claiming constructive dismissal. This case study delves into the intricate
aspects of human resources management, examining performance appraisals, age
discrimination, employee training and coaching, and the challenges associated with using
incompetence as grounds for termination. FastBurger is widely recognized for its rapid
expansion and commitment to exceptional customer service. With over 2,000 stores across
North America, the company places a strong emphasis on efficiency while ensuring the
highest standards of food quality. To maintain its reputation and ensure smooth operations,
FastBurger invests significantly in employee training and development.

Maria Thompson's journey with FastBurger spans 25 years, during which she showcased her
dedication and steadily progressed through the ranks. Starting as a part-time crew member
while attending college, Maria demonstrated exceptional customer service skills and quickly
earned a reputation for her hard work and motivation. Through her relentless efforts, she rose
to the position of store manager, earning praise for her strong leadership skills and
commitment to customer satisfaction.
However, the situation took a downturn when a new district manager, Steve Johnson, was
appointed. Steve implemented a performance management system that introduced aggressive
targets for Maria's store. These targets included increased sales, improved customer
satisfaction scores, and reduced staff turnover rates. Maria struggled to meet these new
expectations, leading to increased stress levels and a decline in work-life balance.

The case raises concerns about the fairness and reasonableness of the performance
management system implemented by Steve. It also explores the validity of Maria's claims of
wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal, as she alleges that FastBurger did not provide
her with adequate support and resources to succeed. Additionally, there are indications of
potential age discrimination as Steve made comments suggesting that Maria's age might be a
factor affecting her ability to adapt to new strategies and technology. By analyzing these
issues, the research paper aims to provide insights into HR practices, legal implications, and
potential improvements in managing similar situations. The subsequent sections of the paper
will delve deeper into the specific challenges and complexities encountered in this case,
offering recommendations for better management and highlighting the lessons learned from
the FastBurger case.

Problem Statement:

The termination of Maria Thompson and the subsequent legal dispute between her and
FastBurger raise several key problems and challenges that need to be addressed. The primary
problem in this case revolves around the fairness and reasonableness of the performance
management system implemented by Steve Johnson, the district manager. This system set
aggressive targets for Maria's store, placing undue pressure on her and leading to a decline in
her work-life balance and increased stress levels. The question arises as to whether the
performance targets were realistic and achievable, considering the circumstances and
resources available to Maria.
Another critical problem is the claim of wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal made
by Maria. She argues that FastBurger did not provide her with adequate support and
resources to succeed, resulting in her failure to meet the performance targets set by Steve.
This raises concerns about the company's responsibility to support and develop its employees,
particularly when introducing new performance expectations. Additionally, there are
indications of potential age discrimination in this case. Steve's comments about Maria's age
and his comparison of her performance to that of younger managers suggest a biased
perception based on age. This raises the question of whether FastBurger engaged in
discriminatory practices and violated employment laws by treating Maria unfavorably due to
her age.

The problem statement also encompasses the issue of providing additional training and
coaching to Maria. Despite her requests for support and resources, Steve dismissed her
appeals, implying that she should have already possessed the necessary skills and knowledge.
This highlights the importance of considering an employee's continuous development and the
role of the company in providing opportunities for growth and improvement. Lastly, the case
presents the potential risks and complications of using incompetence as grounds for
termination. The incident where Maria was berated in front of her staff for a minor
cleanliness issue raises concerns about the fairness and proportionality of using isolated
incidents to label an employee as incompetent.

Addressing these problems and challenges is crucial for FastBurger to ensure fair and
equitable treatment of employees, comply with employment laws, and create a positive work
environment conducive to employee growth and success. By examining these issues and
providing recommendations, this research paper aims to shed light on the complexities of
human resources management and offer insights for effective management practices in
similar contexts.

Analysis:

a. Was the performance management system implemented by Steve fair and

reasonable?

To determine the fairness and reasonableness of the performance management system

implemented by Steve, it is essential to evaluate whether the performance targets were
achievable and whether Maria was provided with adequate support and resources to meet
those targets. The aggressive nature of the targets, combined with the limited resources and
support provided to Maria, raises concerns about the fairness of the system.

A fair performance management system should consider the specific circumstances and
challenges faced by employees. It should set realistic and attainable goals while providing the
necessary tools, training, and support to help employees succeed. In this case, the pressure
placed on Maria to meet the demanding targets without adequate support raises questions
about the fairness and reasonableness of the system.

b. Did Maria have sufficient grounds to claim wrongful dismissal and constructive
dismissal?

Maria's claim of wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal asserts that FastBurger
unjustly terminated her employment and created a hostile work environment that made
continued employment impossible. To evaluate the validity of these claims, it is necessary to
examine the circumstances surrounding her termination.

Wrongful dismissal refers to the termination of an employee in breach of the employment

contract or without just cause. Constructive dismissal occurs when an employer's actions
create a work environment that is intolerable or fundamentally changes the terms of
employment. In Maria's case, the increased pressure, unfair treatment, and lack of support
may support her claims of wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal.

c. Did FastBurger discriminate against Maria based on her age?

The comments made by Steve regarding Maria's age raise concerns about potential age
discrimination. Age discrimination occurs when an employee is treated unfavorably based on
their age, leading to adverse employment decisions. Steve's remarks suggesting that younger
managers perform better could be indicative of biased perceptions or age-related stereotypes.
To assess whether FastBurger discriminated against Maria based on her age, it is crucial to
consider the overall treatment she received compared to her younger counterparts and
whether her age played a significant role in the company's actions and decisions.

d. Was FastBurger responsible for providing Maria with additional training and
coaching?

FastBurger's responsibility to provide Maria with additional training and coaching depends
on the circumstances and the expectations placed on her. If the performance management
system required new skills or knowledge that Maria did not possess, it would be reasonable
for FastBurger to provide the necessary training and coaching to support her development.
However, if Maria's role and responsibilities remained the same, and the performance targets
were set without considering her current capabilities, FastBurger's responsibility for
additional training and coaching may be less clear. It would require an evaluation of whether
Maria had already received sufficient training and development opportunities throughout her
tenure with the company.

e. What are the potential risks and complications of using incompetence as grounds for
termination?

Using incompetence as grounds for termination carries several potential risks and
complications. Firstly, defining and measuring incompetence can be subjective and open to
interpretation. It requires clear performance standards, consistent evaluation criteria, and
documented instances of poor performance. Secondly, relying solely on incompetence as a
basis for termination without providing adequate support and development opportunities can
be seen as unfair and inconsistent with best practices in employee management. It is essential
for organizations to offer coaching, training, and guidance to help employees improve their
performance before resorting to termination.

Furthermore, using incompetence as grounds for termination without proper documentation

and evidence of ongoing performance issues may expose the company to legal risks.
Employees may challenge the termination and claim unfair treatment or wrongful dismissal if
they can demonstrate that they were not provided with adequate support or were subject to
biased evaluations. Understanding and addressing these risks and complications is crucial for
organizations to ensure fair and effective performance management practices and minimize
the potential negative consequences associated with terminating employees based on
incompetence.

Recommendations:

Based on the analysis of the case, the following recommendations are provided to FastBurger
to address the issues identified and prevent similar situations in the future:
 Review and Revise the Performance Management System: FastBurger should
review the performance management system implemented by Steve to ensure it is fair,
realistic, and aligned with the capabilities and resources available to employees. The
system should consider individual circumstances and provide adequate support and
resources for employees to meet their targets.
 Implement Training and Development Programs: FastBurger should prioritize the
implementation of training and development programs to enhance the skills and
capabilities of its employees. This includes providing coaching, mentoring, and
opportunities for skill-building to support employees in meeting performance
expectations.
 Foster an Inclusive and Non-Discriminatory Work Environment: FastBurger
should promote a culture of diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity. Training
programs should be implemented to raise awareness among managers and employees
about age-related biases and the importance of fair and unbiased treatment.
 Document Performance Issues and Provide Feedback: It is crucial for FastBurger
to establish clear performance standards, document instances of poor performance,
and provide timely feedback to employees. This documentation will ensure
transparency, fairness, and a basis for improvement discussions and corrective
actions.
 Establish Grievance and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: FastBurger should
implement effective grievance and dispute resolution mechanisms to address
employee concerns and provide a fair process for resolving issues. This will enable
employees like Maria to voice their concerns and seek resolution before resorting to
legal action.
 Continuous Evaluation and Improvement: FastBurger should regularly evaluate
and improve its HR practices, policies, and procedures. This includes conducting
regular audits of performance management systems, reviewing training and
development initiatives, and seeking feedback from employees to identify areas for
improvement.
By implementing these recommendations, FastBurger can create a more inclusive and
supportive work environment, mitigate the risks associated with wrongful dismissal,
discrimination, and incompetence-based terminations, and foster employee satisfaction and
engagement. Ultimately, these actions will contribute to a more productive and harmonious
workplace.

Conclusion:

The case of Maria Thompson's wrongful dismissal at FastBurger highlights several concerns
regarding the implementation of the performance management system, potential age
discrimination, and the lack of support provided to Maria. The analysis of the case raises
questions about the fairness and reasonableness of the system, as well as the treatment of
Maria based on her age. The potential risks and complications of using incompetence as
grounds for termination also emerged as significant considerations.

Key References:

Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2017). Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource

Management Practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Balkin, D. B., & Cardy, R. L. (2018). Managing Human Resources.
Pearson.

Mathis, R. L., Jackson, J. H., & Valentine, S. R. (2016). Human Resource Management.
Cengage Learning.

Cascio, W. F., & Boudreau, J. W. (2018). Talent Management: Cases and Commentary.
Routledge.

Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K. M., & Johnson, R. (2015). The Influence of
Technology on the Future of Human Resource Management. Human Resource Management
Review, 25(2), 216-231.

Brewster, C., Mayrhofer, W., & Farndale, E. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of Research on
Comparative Human Resource Management. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Rynes, S. L., Colbert, A. E., & Brown, K. G. (2002). HR Professionals' Beliefs About
Effective Human Resource Practices: Correspondence Between Research and Practice.
Human Resource Management, 41(2), 149-174.