- Summarize the main issue and competing perspectives.
In this section we are not looking for a simple summary of the information found in the case. You need to go a step further and identify what is causing a tension between the two parties; what two rights or legal frameworks are competing against each other? - Provide legislation-based arguments for both side of the debate.
These cases are designed such that each side has laws that support it. We want you to identify specific laws that apply to the case and explain why they’re relevant and how they support a given argument. If you don’t back up your arguments with specific laws, you won’t get full marks.
This is not an assignment that you can complete by simply working out of the textbook. Although the textbook and some websites refer to Canadian law, it is their interpretation, and can be based on outdated information. It is best to get your information directly from a law source (e.g. The Canadian Human Rights Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code, or the Employment Standards Act).
Be sure not to confuse ethics and laws. Ethics are moral principles that define what is right or wrong, while laws are regulations to govern behaviour. Although laws are created based on ethical values, ethical misconduct may not necessarily result in persecution unless such action is prohibited by the law.
If the case presented lacks a detail on a particular legal controversy topic, you are free to make reasonable assumptions that are relevant to the case. Otherwise, you should base your arguments on the facts presented in the case and avoid ambiguous claims that are not supported by the facts in the case. - Make concrete recommendations for how to address the case.
Remember, in these cases, you are acting as an HR consultant brought in by the organization to evaluate what has happened. You are to review and, based on your analysis of the two sides, recommend what actions can be taken.
Your recommendations should be concrete actions that the company can take to: a) remedy the current situation, and/or b) prevent similar issues from occurring in the future
If your recommendations aren’t specific enough, or don’t productively address the issue, you will have a hard time receiving full marks.
Formatting
- 600 to 800 words, not including title page or references
- Arial size 12 font
- 1-inch margins
- 1.5 Spaced
- Include a title page with your name, student number, the case you’ve chosen, and the date
References
- Use APA format.
- You must provide both in-text and full citations for all sources.
- Full citations should be on their own References page at the end of the document.
- You can use the textbook as a source, but it should not be your only source. To support your arguments, refer directly to Canadian laws. Note: You can refer to a Bill that isn’t law yet as something on the horizon, but you should base your legal arguments on what is currently Canadian law.
Are you new to referencing, paraphrasing, and APA citation style? Check out the Academic Integrity office’s page on Referencing and Research Skills, the Owl Purdue APA Formatting and Style Guide, or the Writing and Communication Centre's APA style citation guide.
Note: There is zero tolerance for plagiarism. Refer to the Plagiarism Policy in the Course Outline.
Other Writing Tips
- Most students find it most useful to separate each component into its own paragraph, with the exception of the legislative arguments section, where each side can take one paragraph.
- Paraphrasing is necessary.
- Double-check your work for spelling and grammar errors, so you don’t lose marks.
- If writing is something that you struggle with, get some help from the University of Waterloo Writing and Communication Centre. They have lots of resources, sessions, and support available free of charge for your writing, which are definitely worth trying if you’re having trouble!
Text matching software (Turnitin®) will be used to screen these assignments. For details, please visit the Course Outline. Deductions will be applied to papers with a Similarity report or AI Writing Detection report score higher than 20%.