PLEASE CLEAR AND PROPER ENGLISH, THANKS IN ADVANCE. I HAVE ATTACHED IMAGES WITH INFO FROM THE TEXTBOOK

Following the 3-Step Problem-Solving Approach, analyze the issues prevalent in the Problem-Solving Application, "Firefighters, 46 and 54 Sue for Age Discrimination," in Chapter 4.

Your posting should follow the 3-Step Problem-Solving Approach:

Stop 1: Problem (Define the problems in the case.)

Stop 2: Cause of the Problem (Identify the OB concepts or theories to use to solve the problem.)

Stop 3: Recommendation (Explain what you would do to correct the situation.)

Remember: In each Problem-solving Discussion, you must apply at least two outside sources (news articles, business publications, scholarly articles, etc.) of your choice to support your initial post. Additionally, you must refer to your assigned text.

FIGURE 4.6 Organizing Framework for Understanding and Applying OB INPUTS PROCESSES OUTCOMES Person Factors Individual Level Individual Level . Diversity . Perceptions . Task performance . Demographics . Attributions . Work attitudes . Stereotypes . Psychological safety . Well-being/flourishing Situation Factors Group/Team Level . Turnover . Diversity climate . Group/team dynamics . Career outcomes Organizational Level Group/Team Level . Options to manage diversity . Group/team performance . Group satisfaction Organizational Level . Employer of choice . Customer satisfaction . ReputationAPPLY THE 3-STEP PROBLEM-SOLVING APPROACH TO OB STEP 1: Dene the problem. A. Look rst at the Outcome box of the Organizing Framework in Figure 4.6 to help identify the important problem(s) in this case. Remember that a problem is a gap between a desired and current state. State your problem as a gap and be sure to consider problems at all three levels. If more than one desired outcome is not being accomplished, decide which one is most important and focus on it for steps 2 and 3. B. Cases have protagonists (key players), and problems are generally viewed from a particular protagonist's perspective. You need to identify the perspectiveemployee, manager, team, or the organizationfrom which you're dening the problem. C. Use details in the case to identify the key problem. Don't assume, infer, or create problems that are not included in the case. D. To rene your choice, ask yourself, Why is this a problem? Explaining why helps rene and focus your thinking. Focus on topics in the current chapter, because we generally select cases that illustrate concepts in the current chapter. STEP 2: Identify causes of the problem by using material from this chapter, which has been summarized in the Organizing Framework shown in Figure 4.6. Causes will appear in either the Inputs box or the Processes box. A. Start by looking at Figure 4.6 to identify which person factors, if any, are most likely causes of the dened problem. For each cause, explain why this is a cause of the problem. Asking why multiple times is more likely to lead you to root causes of the problem. For example, if you think demographicsan input in the Organizing Frameworkis a cause, ask yourself why. This might lead to the conclusion that there are not enough females and minorities who are taking STEM majors in college. In turn, this might lead to the conclusion that a poor pipeline is a root cause of demographics at technology companies. Then ask yourself why this is happening. The cause might go all the way back to elementary and high school. By following this process of asking why multiple times, you will be more likely to arrive at a more complete list of causes. B. Now consider the Processes box shown in Figure 4.6. Consider whether perception, attributions, psychological safety, group/team dynamics, or options to manage diversity are causes of the problem. For any concept that might be a cause, ask yourself, Why is this a cause? Again, do this for several iterations to arrive at root causes. C. Follow the same process for the situation factors. D. To check the accuracy or appropriateness of the causes, be sure to map them onto the dened problem. STEP 3: Make recommendations for solving the problem. Consider whether you want to resolve it, solve it, or dissolve it (see Section 1.5). Which recommendation is desirable and feasible? A. Given the causes identied in Step 2, what are your best recommendations? Use the content in Chapter 4 or one of the earlier chapters to propose a solution. B. Potential solutions may be found in the OB in Action and Applying OB boxes within the chapter. These features provide insights about how other individuals or companies are handling the topic at hand. C. Create an action plan for implementing your recommendation. W Fireghters, 46 and 54, Sue for Age Discrimination Fireghters John Guido and Dennis Rankin were only 46 and 54, respectively, when they were red by the Mount Lemmon re district, a department of the state of Arizona. Each had put in nine years of employment. The re district claimed the two were red for budget reasons, and because they had not volunteered for wildland duty. But one of the people chosen to replace them had also not served on any wildland re-ghting assignments for the last two years. Guido and Rankin then led an age discrimination suit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), charging they had been let go simply because they were the two oldest full-time members of the department. The EEOC agreed there was \"reasonable cause\" for their claim that in dismissing them Mount Lemmon had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). A federal trial judge sided with the re district's attorneys, who argued that federal anti-discrimination law applied only to private organizations with at least 20 employees. Appealing the ruling, Guido and Rankin, who had meanwhile found other employment, watched as their case nally made its way to the US. Supreme Court several years later. In its 8-0 ruling in late 2018 (newly appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not participate), the Supreme Court decided in favor of the two reghters. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg 's opinion in the case said Mount Lemmon's reading of the law was inconsistent with precedent and with EEOC rulings and that, while the ADEA does not in fact apply to private companies with fewer than 20 employees, it sets no size limit on public employers, including local government entities like the Mount Lemmon re department. Thus these entities are required to obey the Age Discrimination Act regardless of size. With that ruling, Guido and Rankin were entitled to sue their former employer for damages. While the law does not guarantee they will win their case, they plan to ask for their lost past and future wages.112