Reference no: EM132219571

Frank works 25 hours per week for a mail order firm in the packaging department. He received no benefits other than those required by law. Frank does the same type of work as three other employees, all of whom work full time. These employees qualify for pensions, medical care, long-term disability, child care, etc. Is this a good business practice? Assume that Frank would like to work full time, really wants to receive benefits, and feels harmed because of his shortfall. On the other hand, the firm is not legally required to pay Frank benefits, Frank only works part time, and it would be expensive to pay benefits to all part-time employees, including Frank.

Two firms in the chemical solvent industry decide to merge. Employees in the testing department of Firm A have enjoyed high pay for many years. However, Firm A is purchased by Firm B, which has a history of paying low wages. As a result, employees in Firm A’s testing department earn on average $2.00 more per hour than those at Firm B. Upon completion of the merger, what wage levels should prevail? Should wages be cut for those who worked for Firm A? Or, should wages be increased for those in Firm B?

Sue is a 55- year old employee of Company A. Her children are out of college and her parents have both died. Company A offers a child care program to all employees along with an elder care program. However, Sue, like many other employees , has no need for these services, neither now or in the future. Should the company retain these programs? Should alternative benefits for employees who have no use for such services be offered?