Question

What is a importan question when determining whether the agent was acting within the scope of employment?

Group of answer choices

Was the employee acting willfully and wantonly?

Was the employee wearing his/her uniform?

Was the conduct related to employment?

Answer 1

Dear Student,

Please find below answer to your questions

The actions or activities an employee might reasonably undertake as part of his or her job.

An employer is responsible for actions an employee takes within the scope of employment, which means the employer can be liable to third parties who are injured by the employee's conduct.

For example, an employer would be liable for harm to a pedestrian caused by its delivery driver while driving a route; the employer most likely would not be liable for harm the same driver caused if he or she hit a pedestrian while using the delivery van as the getaway car in a bank robbery.

Obviously, it would not be sensible to hold a contractor liable to pay for a whole load of lumber merely because a stranger wandered into the lumberyard saying,

For Example,“I’m an agent for ABC Contractors; charge this to their account.” To be liable, the principal must have authorized the agent in some manner to act in his behalf, and that authorization must be communicated to the third party by the principal.

The negligence of the agent becomes willful misconduct because the agent has willfully and knowingly chosen to act in a manner he knows may bring harm to others. It is this state of mind and element of choice that separates gross negligence from ordinary negligence.

Willful misconduct"' referred to conduct by a person who knows that he is committing, and intends to commit a breach of duty, or is reckless in the sense of not caring whether or not he commits a breach of duty. Example, not wearing his uniform, Late coming to work etc.

As per employment law "If a claimant has good cause for his or her violation of a rule, or if the violation is due to mere inefficiency, unsatisfactory conduct, failure in good performance as the result of inability or incapacity, inadvertence or ordinary negligence in isolated instances, or good faith errors in judgment or discretion, then there is no misconduct. Under such circumstances, the violation of the rule would not be a willful, deliberate, or flagrant violation"

It should be noted that if the employer has established that the employee has violated a reasonable rule, the burden shifts to the employee to show good cause for violating the rule.

To Conclude, In the workplace, employers are normally liable for the actions and mistakes of their employees. Employers subsequently need to ensure that they train their employees properly and provide guidance.

--------------

Hope my answer have cleared all your queries, I really appreciates your positive feedback !!

Thank You !!

--------------