Which of the following is not a good reason for an employer to reduce its employment contracts to writing?

A. A written contract will often satisfy a legal requirement.

B. A written contract will assist the employer in resisting unfounded employee claims.

C. A written contract will typically "trump" otherwise applicable statutory law.

D. A written contract will often spell out important steps in HR's treatment of employees.

This question arises in a country with a statute detailing several specific reasons for firing that constitute permitted "good cause" for a discharge. In drafting an employment contract in that country, an IHRM practitioner inserted over 40 examples of potential reasons for termination, and the employee signed the contract. In determining what employee misconduct constitutes statutory "good cause," a court will likely

A. Use the lengthy contractual definition.

B. Tailor the 40 examples to back to what the court considers to be a more reasonable list.

C. Recognize as legitimate reasons for firing only those of the 40 examples that are among the several specific reasons permitted in the statutory definition of "good cause".

D. Construe the contract to entitle the employee to what is essentially lifetime employment.