The first question requires you to read Case Study 2 on Page 528: The Arbitration Case of Jesse Stansky

Instead of the questions in the book, answer these:

1. In 5 or 6 sentences, write a standard for Professional Conduct as it might be defined in an employee handbook. Provide at least 3 examples of conduct that would be considered unprofessional.

2. Going back to the original facts of the case (ignore the standard for Professional Conduct that you wrote in Q1), if you were the arbitrator, how would you rule in this case? In at least 2 paragraphs (4-5 sentences each), explain your decision. Be sure to be specific as you explain your ruling. Imagine that you have to relay your decision to the two parties, and you want your reasoning to convince them that your ruling is sound.

please don't use someones else answers

\begin{tabular}{c|c} CASE STUDY 2 & The Arbitration Case of Jesse Stansky \end{tabular} At the arbitration hearing, both parties were ada- coworkers, and several testified on his behalf at the mant in their positions. Nancy Huang, HR manager arbitration hearing. of Phoenix Semiconductor, argued that the grievant, The termination of Stansky concerned an alterJesse Stansky, was justly terminated for arguing and cation between himself and Gary Lindekin, another hitting a coworker-a direct violation of company systems technician. According to witnesses to the incipolicy and the employee handbook. Stansky argued dent, both Stansky and Lindekin became visibly upset that he had been a good employee during his 10 years over the correct way to calibrate a sensitive piece of of employment. production equipment. The argument-one witness The submission agreement governing the case called it no more than a heated disagreement-lasted read, "It is the employer's position that just cause approximately 3 minutes and concluded when Stanexisted for the discharge of Mr. Jesse Stansky and the sky was seen forcefully placing his hand on Lindekin's penalty was appropriate for the offense committed." shoulder. Lindekin took extreme exception to StanAdditionally, the employer introduced into evidence sky's behavior and immediately reported the incident the labor agreement, which defined just cause termi- to management. After interviews with both Stansky nation as follows: and Lindekin and those who observed the incident, Just cause shall serve as the basis for disciplin- Huang, Samantha Lowry, the employee's immediate dishonesty,inefficiency,unprofessionalcon-duct,failuretoreportabsences,falsificationoffessionalconductandviolationofcompanypolicy. records, violation of company policy, destruction of property, or possession or being under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. Stansky was hired as a systems technician on November 20, 2007, a position he held until his termination on October 25, 2021. According to the testimony of Huang, Phoenix Semiconductor strived to maintain a positive and cordial work environment among its employees. Fighting on the job was strictly prohibited. Stansky's performance evaluation showed him to be an average employee, although he had received several disciplinary warnings for poor attendance and one 3-day suspension for a "systems control error." Stansky was generally liked by his All names are fictitious