Employee Rights and Property Searches Essay Example for Free

Employee Rights and Property Searches EssayMopak Corporation performed a search for drugs and guns on the employees and fetch workers fomites with the assistance of a private security lodge and drug detection dogs. In the search, guns were found, but non drugs, in several vehicles. At the completion of the search, five employees along with ten thrust workers whose vehicles where the weapons were found were terminated, collectable to the corporations belief that the employees violated the company indemnity. The terminated workers immediately sued Mopak for wrongful termination. Though broadly speaking in the United States employees be at-will employees, the arguments for wrongful termination the employees from Mopak can make in their suit is that Mopak performed an wild search of their vehicles, violating their expectation of privacy. The search was made without a warrant and violated their Fourth Amendment Rights. (Lawyer. com, 2013) The contract workers ar bound by con tracts that may have an at-will clause in it, in which case they, like the official employees, can be terminated at-will.Even though when there is a contract, written or oral, its based on a promise of job security, but with an at-will clause, contract workers may either emerge a contract job or be terminated from a contract job at-will. Employers often, and legitimately, look employees to sign contracts or agreements that document and enforce the terms of at will employment, usually in company policy manuals. (Lawyersandsettlements. com, 2013, para. )The arguments that Mopak Corporation will make in response to the wrongful termination suit are that in the employees policy manual, handbooks or contracts reflect that the employee and/or contract workers must agree to random vehicle searches, random drug testing, and an at will clause for employment that when signed by the employees and/or contract workers, it becomes binding, implied, or implied-in-fact contracts. In the 1988 de cision of landmark case Foley vs. Interactive Data Corp. it brought to light that employees enter into implied-in-fact contracts with the credenza of great merit reviews, promotions, raises, and with verbal assurances of job security. I believe the Mopak Corporation would win. I do not believe that a corporation with so much to lose would perform an illegal search of employees vehicles. They must have in the companys policy manual that such an act would be permissible once the employees and contract workers sign that they have read and agreed to the terms and condition of the policy and/or contracts.