51250 It is evidently clear from the discussion that Mary’s absences pose many problems to the organization. Under social learning theory, employees will model behaviors of those in the workplace that they witness receiving reward or punishment. Since Mary was never even given a warning for her past experience, there are risks that employees will model her behaviors. She was considered a credible role model and under social learning theory, employees might reproduce her behaviors believing they can also get away with higher absences. There is one problem, though. Mary’s excellent employment record is documented with employee appraisals. This means that in her employment file there is evidence that she is a model employee. This could make it more difficult for the organization to develop a case against her termination. It is only the opinion of the management team that she has suddenly failed to meet performance expectations. This can be easily challenged by her many merits in her employment file for performance success. From the point of view of the organization, the past employment record should not have anything to do with her being terminated today. However, legally, Mary has much support for winning an argument that she was wrongly terminated based on her track record. Due to her current negative attitude and ongoing absences, the business has the ethical right to terminate her employment. The Health and Safety Executive warns that it is not good practice for companies to make assumptions about what causes an employee to be absent. This is because there are many laws established that protect her. Mary is a protected class employee under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and this makes the situation even more sensitive. However, from the organizational view, the business requires individuals who are team-focused and ready to contribute to meeting performance standards and strategic goals.