STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY HRM548: DIVERSITY & GLOBAL ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE

CHAPTER 5 – CLASS CASE STUDY

Organizational Profile

Tri-Star Communications, Inc. is a public giant in the telecommunications industry. Headquartered in New York, Tri-Star offers a range of wireless communication services to consumers, businesses and government users. In addition to its headquarters campus, Tri-Star has call centers and regional operations throughout the United States. The company also has offices located in London.

Case Study Principal Individuals Samuel Jacobs – President & CEO, 70 years old, Started Tri-Star and has been CEO since beginning. He is Caucasian and resides in NY working in the Headquarters facility.

Andrew Jacobs – Executive VP, 47 years old, Started at Tri-Star right out of college. He is Caucasian and has been responsible for overseeing operations and opening up new global offices. He currently works in the NY office. Ken Waterfeld – VP of Operations, 49 years old, heads up the London office. Working for Tri-Star for 10 years. He is Caucasian and is also a global consultant to the HQ office. Samantha Philips – NY employee, Marketing Representative. 35 Years old. Has worked for Tri-Star for 5 years. The Situation For the past 10 years, Ken Waterfeld has been responsible for the London operations. He has been characterized as a brilliant strategist who understands the markets and has been responsible for unprecedented growth. He is highly visible and trusted by the President & CEO, Samuel Jacobs. One year ago, through the Company’s global mobility plan, a New York Marketing Representative, Samantha Philips, transferred to the London Office. A short while after transferring, she had a few lunch dates with Ken. They discussed her career aspirations and any mutual interests. In creating a new marketing project, Samantha would be placed on a team that Ken would oversee. Given the circumstances, Samantha informed Ken that they should no longer see each other socially. As time went on, Samantha began dating someone else in the office named Mark. This individual and Ken had a history of not getting along. When several project ideas were presented, Ken informed the team that he was disappointed they missed the goal of the project and he would need to re- assess. In an email to Andrew Jacobs, Ken stated: “Andrew, as a follow-up regarding your inquiry on the new marketing initiative. I regret to inform that the new team missed their mark. While the objectives were clearly and concisely conveyed, they are unable to achieve desired results. While there are mitigating factors, I believe the Samantha does not understand our market here in the UK. While she might have showed promise, she may be better suited to return to NY to gain some useful experience. Of course, it is your decision but it is my experience that this is best for Tri-Star.” From Andrew Jacobs: “Ken, I appreciate your experience and if you feel that this is the best decision for the Company then please do it. “ In a private meeting with a local HR Representative present, Ken informs Samantha of the Company decision. The following dialogue took place: Ken: “In the best interest of Tri-Star, you will be transferred back to NY to continue where you started your career.

This will give you another opportunity to continue developing your Marketing skills. This decision was made and confirmed with executive staff in NY. Thank you and good luck!”

Samantha: “I do not understand. If you had doubts of my ability, then why place me on the project in the first place.

Is this really because I said we should not date each other anymore or because I started dating Mark?”

Ken: “This had nothing to do with either. Changes like this are made all the time in the business world.”

HR Rep; “Ms. Philips, the Company feels it is in everyone’s best interest. We are not terminating your employment rather making a business decision. We will cover all relocation costs with your move back to NY. Of course, you can refuse the transfer and in that case, your employment with Tri-Star will be voluntarily ended”.

Samantha: “I will definitely go back to NY and see Ms. Dixon and explore options”.

On her return trip to NY, Samantha meets with HR and conveys that she believes she is the victim of Sexual Harassment. She explains her side of it. After a few days of looking into the matter and speaking with the executives of Tri-Star, Samantha is told that her allegations are unfounded. Given the decision, Samantha resigns and files suit against Tri-Star for Sexual Harassment.

STUDENT CASE STUDY RESPONSE

1. What is your overall reaction to the case study? 2. Should this have been handled locally rather than back in NY? 3. What are the legal ramifications, if any, to Tri-Star?