Business Law: Employee Classification and Employment Discrimination
This paper addresses three interconnected areas of business and employment law. The first section examines how employees are categorized — as permanent, part-time, or temporary — and how the Fair Labor Standards Act further classifies workers as exempt or non-exempt, explaining why correct classification matters for benefits eligibility and employment status clarity. The second section analyzes a racial discrimination scenario in which two non-Hispanic applicants may have grounds to sue an employer under federal anti-discrimination statutes, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and discusses the elements of a prima facie case. The final section, structured as a law firm memo, applies agency law principles — including express authority, agency by estoppel, and contract ratification — to a dispute over an unauthorized contract for a rare coin.
- Employee Classification Under Federal and State Law: How employers categorize employees and why classification matters
- Race-Based Employment Discrimination: Legal analysis of racial bias claims against an employer
- Agency Law: George Gett's Case: Agency authority and unauthorized contract formation
- Agency by Estoppel: When apparent authority creates binding agency relationships
- Contract Ratification and Conclusion: Effect of ratification on unauthorized agent contracts
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper integrates statute-level knowledge (FLSA, Civil Rights Act, Equal Pay Act) with applied scenario analysis, demonstrating a practical understanding of how legal frameworks operate in real employment contexts.
- The agency law memo section is well-structured, methodically working through express authority, estoppel, and ratification before reaching a conclusion — mirroring the analytical approach used in legal practice.
- The racial discrimination section appropriately identifies the difficulty of proving discrimination without direct evidence and introduces the "prima facie case" standard, showing awareness of evidentiary requirements.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses issue-rule-application-conclusion (IRAC) reasoning throughout. Each legal question is framed around an applicable rule, applied to specific facts, and resolved with a conclusion — a standard analytical method in business law writing that strengthens argumentation and clarity.
Structure breakdown
The paper is divided into two main assignments. The first covers employee classification and employment discrimination across two separate questions. The second is presented as a professional legal memo analyzing an agency law dispute. References follow APA format and span foundational texts in agency law alongside government and HR management sources.
Employee Classification Under Federal and State Law
Employees are classified into different categories. Federal and state law does not explicitly define these categories, but employers generally categorize employees on the basis of duties performed, number of hours worked, and duration of employment. Accordingly, employees fall into three main groups: permanent (full-time), part-time, and temporary employees (PayScale, 2009). A permanent employee works a typical work week for an indefinite duration, while a part-time employee works fewer hours than the typical work week. Temporary employees may work full-time or part-time, but for a definite period of time.
Although federal law does not define the above categories, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) classifies employees as either non-exempt or exempt (Society for Human Resource Management [SHRM], 2014). Non-exempt employees are those whose work is covered by the FLSA and who are subject to overtime and minimum wage regulations, while exempt employees are those whose work is not subject to FLSA provisions on overtime and minimum wage.
Classifying employees correctly is crucial for a number of reasons. First, classification helps determine employees' eligibility for benefits, especially non-statutory benefits. For instance, part-time employees are often excluded from health insurance coverage. Additionally, correct classification ensures that employees have a clear understanding of their employment status, particularly with respect to their conditions of work (SHRM, 2014).
Race-Based Employment Discrimination
Various federal laws — including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and the Equality Act — prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of racial background, sex, gender, pregnancy, national origin, religion, bankruptcy, citizenship, age, disability, and military service. In essence, it is unlawful for employers to rely on these characteristics when making employment decisions such as hiring, firing, transfer, promotion, compensation, and fringe benefits (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC], 2009).
Lee and Larry can sue Lopez, Inc. for race-based employment discrimination under federal law. The company has historically employed Hispanics only and hired Hispanics for the recent vacancies of a salesperson and a computer programmer. In other words, the company evidently favors individuals from a certain racial background (Latin American) over others. Rather than considering skills and qualifications, the company apparently prioritizes racial background — an indication of racially motivated workplace discrimination.
It is, however, important to note that proving racial discrimination against an employer can be quite difficult, as in most cases there may be no direct evidence — such as memos instructing managers to hire candidates from a specific race. Nonetheless, this does not necessarily mean that Larry and Lee cannot claim workplace racial discrimination. Given the company's history of recruitment and the recent hiring of the salesperson and the programmer, it is apparent that they were denied employment because they are not Hispanic. This evidence notwithstanding, Larry and Lee would have to convince the court that they were qualified for or capable of performing the jobs in question and that the company's actions amount to racial discrimination. These conditions constitute what is known as a prima facie case.
Agency Law: George Gett's Case
Memo
Company Name: Gold & Gold
Subject: George Gett's Case
Agency law defines the relationship between the principal, the agent, and a third party. An agent is a person or entity authorized by the principal to act on their behalf. In other words, the agent can enter into a contractual agreement with a third party on behalf of the principal. Agency is created only when the agent is expressly or implicitly authorized by the principal to negotiate or act on their behalf (Bennett, 2014).
As per the facts of George Gett's case, Nick Wade was not authorized to be Gett's agent at the time the contract for the rare coin was made. This means that no agency was created when the agreement between Wade and Estelle Brown was formed. Therefore, Brown cannot collect any money from Gett for the rare coin.
References
Bennett, H. (2014). Principles of the law of agency. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Busch, D., Macgregor, L., & Watts, P. (2016). Agency law in commercial practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (2009). Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination: Questions and answers. Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html
Munday, R. (2010). Agency: Law and principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
PayScale. (2009). Definitions of employee classifications. Retrieved from
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). (2014). Employment classification policy: Employment categories. Retrieved from
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.