In: Operations Management
Lichenstein versus University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
What are the practical implications of this case? What should the medical center have done differently? Would the FMLA permit extension of her probationary period?
Answer:-
The offended party Jamie Litchtensein was contracted as a full time worker in University of Pittsburg Medical center. At the hour of business, the offended party was educated that her examinations would be thought of and as needs be she would be allocated the work timings however there was no concession to the equivalent. The equivalent was being followed however it was seen that the offended party was consistently taking leaves and was additionally was discovered arriving behind schedule to shifts routinely.
This had proceeded much after she was cautioned to do as such. Now and again she would apply for leave or an adjustment in plan after the cutoff time for the equivalent is finished. Therefore, the litigants needed to release her off the activity because of her non-appearance and lateness lastly accepted a call.
The medical center ought to have held up until the offended party had come back to work and afterward excuse her on grounds of non-attendance and lateness which would get them far from the court hearings.
The FMLA condition is relevant for the individuals who have finished a year of probation. Be that as it may, right now offended party hadn't finished her ideal residency of probation.
please like the answer........