One of your employees, a member of a protected class, loses his temper and assaults and injures a customer. The customer is also a member of a protected class. During the investigation, the police discover that the employee has a long history of such behavior and served jail time for assault and battery. As the employer, you are most likely:A) not liable for any injuries because the employee was a member of a protected class.

B) not liable for negligent hiring because you had an affirmative action plan.

C) liable for negligent hiring because you did not conduct a background check.

D) liable for injuries under Executive Order 11246.

Question

Dalia Daugherty

Business

22 October, 11:19

One of your employees, a member of a protected class, loses his temper and assaults and injures a customer. The customer is also a member of a protected class. During the investigation, the police discover that the employee has a long history of such behavior and served jail time for assault and battery. As the employer, you are most likely:A) not liable for any injuries because the employee was a member of a protected class.

B) not liable for negligent hiring because you had an affirmative action plan.

C) liable for negligent hiring because you did not conduct a background check.

D) liable for injuries under Executive Order 11246.

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Nicolas Porter · Answer 1

Answer: option C

Explanation:

Employer has the legal responsibility for the actions of his employees. The employer in this case has been negligent while recruiting the employee. The employer should have verified the background of the employee. If the employer had verified he would have known the history of employee behavior and his jail service details and not hired that employee.

This comes under the negligent hiring where the employer is held responsible. The customer has the right to make negligent claims from the company.