Home Depot Employee Benefits Essay

The first case is against an employee Gunderson working at JMI agency owned by Brown Corporation. It is filed by Brown on account of the defendant’s violation of the employee agreement by joining a competing company after working there continuously for seven months and soliciting and servicing Brown’s customers and disclosing confidential information. The summary judgment was made in favor of the defendant because an employment of seven months is not enough under Illinois law to support the limiting agreement. (Findlaw, 2008) The second case is against an employee Robert M. Bono working at Chicago Transit Board who was discharged from his job on account of misconduct by calling a customer while working though his job duties did not require calling any customers. The call was personal and social in nature involving a sexual joke. The court affirmed the decision of Chicago Transit Board as being reasonable and appropriate. (Findlaw, 2008) Issues:Â  The issue being discussed in the first case is the claim by the parent company of breach of contract by the employee. But since the employment period of Gunderson was only seven months so according to Illinois law no charges can be made against him In the second case, the issue discussed is of an employee misbehaving with a customer on telephone and making personal use of the phone though he is not allowed to do so. Therefore, he dismissed by the company. Implications for Home Depot:Â  At Home Depot, each employee should be clearly told of his/her duties and the consequences of not acting accordingly. Secondly, the employee contract at Home Depot should specify clearly all the terms and conditions specially the time period after which he can be accused of the violation of the contract. Conclusion: Through the analysis of the above cases, I learned that minor mistakes by an employee can result into big troubles and court procedures. Therefore, one should remain cautious every time while working on his job.