Answer:
a)Brett has a cause of action against Warson's Diner for retaliatory discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Explanation:
From the question, we are informed about Brett, the manager at Warson’s Diner, who plans to promote Keisha, one of the waitresses, to the position of an assistant manager. We are also told that the owner, being racially biased, prevents him from doing so and in the end , Brett gets fired
What holds true in this scenario described above is that Brett has a cause of action against Warson's Diner for retaliatory discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Is a law, of Act of 1964 that oversee any form of discrimination against employee of an organization and shield them from been discriminated because of race they belong to, their sex , their National origin an so on . The law doesn't only forbid discrimination that is intentional, but all actions that speak discrimination wether intentional or not.
Answer:
D
Explanation:
Agency conflicts arises when the objectives of managers isn't aligned with that of shareholders.
Due to the objective of maximising value for shareholders, managers might be induced to engage in aggressive accounting practices in order to present a higher profits than might actually exist. This practice is unethical. This places more emphasis on profits than cash flows.
Answer:
The primary difference between product markets and factor markets is that:
Product markets are markets related to products, goods, tangible finished items. This is where you'll get your product for sale and where people will buy it.
while
Factor markets are for the factors of production, mostly intangible, like labor, capital and entrepreneurial skills. This is what you'll use (including raw materials) to make your product.
<span>Tony did not breach a contract because it was all up to Lorene and who she wanted to go with. Lorene is not obligated to go with either. Although Bill spent most of his allowance, he could still ask someone else, sell his ticket and or even go by himself. I do not think Tony could be held liable even if he knew. It was not a nice thing to flake on Bill, but ultimately, it was Lorene's decision to make.</span>
Answer:
Crash worthiness
Explanation:
Crash worthiness is a term that depicts a vehicle's capacity to ensure its tenants during an impact.
In the event that you continue wounds in a fender bender because of the vehicle's absence of crash value, at that point you may have a case against the vehicle's producer.
It is exceptionally reliant on how the materials, development and plan of the vehicle cooperate.
