NewCorp hired Pat as manager of real property in Vermont. This position is responsible for activities related to maintaining leased office space. Pat supervised 51 employees and lower-level supervisors, and he dealt with tenants who leased commercial space. Pat relocated from another city 300 miles away, moved his family, and sold and bought a home. His wife quit her job to seek employment in Vermont.

After Pat worked for three months with NewCorp, his supervisor explained that things were not working out and that Pat would be discharged with 30 days of severance pay. Pat was surprised because his employer gave no previous indication of any problem. NewCorp's personnel manual, which had been provided to Pat upon his acceptance of employment, outlined the process for dealing with unsatisfactory employees:

Notice of Unsatisfactory Performance/Corrective Action Plan

If the job performance of an employee is unsatisfactory, the employee will be notified of the deficiency and placed on a corrective action plan. If the employee's performance does not improve to a satisfactory level in the specified time period, termination will follow.

Pat acknowledged that he signed a document to show his understanding that the company observed employment at will with respect to discharge, but he believed the provision limited NewCorp's freedom to discharge him at will. Pat also stated that NewCorp's senior management was noticeably unfriendly after Pat had been vocal at a local school board meeting. His position on an issue in the meeting was unpopular, and although no one at the meeting identified Pat as a NewCorp employee, he believed this contributed to the decision to discharge him.

a. What liabilities and rights do NewCorp and Pat have in this situation? What legal principles, such as statutory or case law, support those liabilities and rights?

NewCorp employed Sam as a supervisor of electrical manufacturing for automotive under-dash wiring harnesses. Sam's department employed about 100 men and women to create the wiring and connect it to different universal couplings so that speedometers, oil gauges, and other instruments would work. The final product, an under-dash wiring harness, was sent to the assembly plant for installation.

Sam developed a relationship with one of his employees, Paula, and they began dating. Paula later ended the relationship with Sam. Sam wanted to continue dating Paula, and he began exhibiting unwelcome behaviors, even after she told him to stop. Sam suggested that Paula's work might be suffering from a lack of interest.

Paula decided she could no longer work with Sam and applied for a transfer to the wire-coating department, which was not under his control. Sam blocked the transfer, citing evidence that chemicals used in wire coatings could harm an early-state fetus. Because Paula could become pregnant, Sam argued, NewCorp could not take the chance of being liable for causing a child to be born with a birth defect. Paula believed this was Sam's way of controlling her and that, even if it was not, it was illegal discrimination.

b. What liability does NewCorp have in this situation? What actions might NewCorp take? Identify which legal principles, such as statutory or case law, support your responses.