Answer:
A concurring opinion supports a Supreme Court ruling, while a dissenting opinion opposes it
Explanation:
Answer:
Yes, the employer misused the incentive program.
Explanation:
There are 2 important factors to consider in this case.
1. Tyra did not violate the company safety rules.
2. Tyra reported her injury directly to the employer,
Based on this facts, we can determine that the employer incurred in a violation of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 29 § 1904.35(b)(1)(iv) which states that the employer will not discriminate or discharge an employee for work-related injuries in which the employee was following safety rules.
The Occupational Safety & Health Issues agency also declared that "rate-based incentive programs are also permissible under § 1904.35(b)(1)(iv) as long as they are not implemented in a manner that discourages reporting", in this case, Tyra may be discouraged to report a future injury, because that could cause her co-workers to lose their cash prize, and maybe for loyalty to them she will prefer to remain silent.
The correct answer is C. There are no limits on debate in the United States Senate. The Senate has a tradition of unlimited debate which has developed due to its relatively small size. The "filibuster" is one such example of this. The House of Representatives DO have limits, as well as two year terms and a Speaker who leads the members.
