for product assembly and piecework]. This facility also rented the necessary manufacturing space to LCP. Coast-to-Coast Prime Manufacturing {CPML a local manufacturing conglomerate with some excess capacity, provided the remaining workers and production space when more than ten disabled workers were required. Coast-to-Coast Prime Manufacturing was also paid $24,500 [inflation-adjusted: apiece for its workers plus an additional fee for the rental of equipment and space. In addition to manufacturing labor. LCP employed a clerical worker and a general manager but no sales staff. Through December 2020. sales were generated primarily by man ufacturer's representatives who received a standard 5% of sales as their commission. In January 2020. Coastto-Coast Prime Manufacturing purchased LCP. CPM's management team immediater began supplementing sales efforts by adding the LCP products to their own manufacturer's representatives lines. Otherwise. they operated LCP without signicant changes. The Coast-to-Coast Prime Manufacturing managers soon found that while sales were growing. profits were shrinking. The management responded tor the second half of 2020 by increasing the commission to their manufacturer's representatives from 5% to 6%. The sales force responded quickly. and sales boomed. By July 2021. CPM's board of directors expressed some concern to management. Even though sales were up. the deal was not proving to be protable. At the end of July 202]. the board of directors was informed that CPM's management team had decided to reduce LCP's production staff by letting go of those employees provided by the Sheltered Work Facility. It is now autumn 2022. CPM has been sued by a noted civil rights attomey claiming that closing down the Sheltered Work Facility manufacturing operation was a wrongful termination ofthe workers in the Sheltered Work Facility. Her court lings saythat there was no valid business reason for selecting the disabled workers for layoff rather than the nondisabled workers: in part' the court lings claim that the layoffwas wrongful because there was no economic justification for dismissing these workers who had been at least as productive. and protable. as their non- disabled counterparts for so many years. The attorney claimed that this was obvious discrimination against the disabled and because of the discrimination, her ten clients will be unemployed for an average of 20 years each. The attorney Is asking the court for a verdict of 511600.000 as an appropriate award to her ten clients if she prevails in her action. She esmated this gure by computing 20 years x 10 clients 1524.500 = 54.900000' doubling it to account for her fees. then doubling that to account for future in aon. Required You have been hired by CPM's board of directors to help their attorney {and the m] evaluate the claims in the lawsuit and determine whether the management team made the right decision. You have been asked to consider the following specic questions in preparing a report: (Use the guidelines for preparing a report on the course website} You remember from your Business School days the following concepts that you think might be useful here: a. adiustlng data for inflation [macroeconomics LDC concept 1} b. marginal cost vs. average cost [microeconomics LDC concept 6} c. opportunity cost vs. accounting cost [microeconomics LDC concept 1} d. present value [financial accounting LDC concept 9: e. duty to mitigate damages {business law LDC concept 5} f. compensatory E ' r 'e damages {business lawI LDC concept 9}