Business
Business, 23.11.2019 00:31, anyone9122

Nadia, the president of xyz co., and ramon orally agreed that ramon would work as a computer programmer for xyz co. for a three-year period. their oral agreement also covered other matters such as his pay and the availability of one week of paid vacation. on the day he talked with nadia, ramon signed an employee handbook including a provision that his employment was at will, meaning that at any time he could quit or the company could discharge him. a month later, ramon received a three-year contract for employment with xyz co. in the mail incorporating the amount of his salary and other issues he had discussed with nadia. ramon signed it and mailed it back, but he changed the vacation provision to three weeks instead of one week. brenden, the human resources manager for xyz co. called ramon after receiving the agreement and told ramon that the contract was only a draft for discussion purposes and that he was actually firing ramon because he seemed to focused on vacation. assuming the court follows the reasoning of the court in the dispute discussed in the text involving michael gallagher and medical research consultants, which of the following would be the most likely result in the dispute between ramon and xyz co. if ramon claims he had a three-year contract of employment?
a. as a matter of law, since the contract was sent to ramon, he received a guarantee of employment for three years; but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted
b. xyz co. will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable, ramon reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation
c. xyz co. will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made, it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing. further, the draft ramon returned was not signed by xyz co.
d. xyz co. will win because as a matter of law, no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook
e. a jury will decide if nadia orally agreed to a three-year contract; and, if so, ramon gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation

answer
Answers: 1

Other questions on the subject: Business

image
Business, 21.06.2019 14:30, divaughn1906
The government often provides goods that are nonrivalrous and nonexclusive to overcome which market failure
Answers: 1
image
Business, 21.06.2019 21:10, BABA3724
Auniversity spent $1.8 million to install solar panels atop a parking garage. these panels will have a capacity of 400 kilowatts (kw) and have a life expectancy of 20 years. suppose that the discount rate is 20%, that electricity can be purchased at $0.10 per kilowatt-hour (kwh), and that the marginal cost of electricity production using the solar panels is zero. hint: it may be easier to think of the present value of operating the solar panels for 1 hour per year first. approximately how many hours per year will the solar panels need to operate to enable this project to break even? a. a.3,696.48 b.14,785.92 c.9,241.20 if the solar panels can operate only for 8,317 hours a year at maximum, the project (would/would not)break even?
Answers: 1
image
Business, 22.06.2019 17:30, flax05
What is the sequence of events that could lead to trade surplus
Answers: 3
image
Business, 22.06.2019 20:00, jaylennkatrina929
Which of the following is a competitive benefit experienced by the first mover firm in an industry? a. the first mover will be able to achieve a less steep learning curve. b. the first mover will be able to reduce the switching costs. c. the first mover will not have to patent its products or technology. d. the first mover will be able to reduce costs through economies of scale.
Answers: 3
Do you know the correct answer?
Nadia, the president of xyz co., and ramon orally agreed that ramon would work as a computer program...

Questions in other subjects: