solution

Jill was employed as a full-time marketing consultant at ABC Electronics. She has worked at ABC Electronics from the spring of 2019 to her termination in early October 2021. Jill worked between 9am and 5:00 PM. On occasion (once or twice a month) she would be required to attend strategic planning meetings with ABC Electronics’ executives in the evening (from 5-8 pm). She was considered a full-time employee and participated in the Company’s retirement program. Since June 2021 Jill was also employed as a marketing consultant at a local medical office. She worked at the medical office 20 hours per week on an irregular schedule.

ABC Electronics has a policy discouraging employment outside of ABC Electronics by full-time employees. Jill was the only full-time female employee with an outside job. However, Sam (male) and James (male) other full-time employees also had outside positions. Sam and James worked between 9AM and 5PM and had no evening meetings related to Company business. In the middle of September 2021 ABC Electronics learned that Jill had another position outside of WNE Electronics. Jill was informed of the policy against outside employment, and she was told to decide which job she wanted to keep. Jill asked management the reason the male employees were allowed to have outside work. She was told they have jobs that have a set workday and she did not.

Jill wants to know if she has a valid legal claim against WNE Electronics. What legal theory applies? Fully define the legal principle relevant to the problem. Apply the facts of the problem to the legal theory and explain to Jill if she has the potential to prevail if she brings a lawsuit

NEED ANSWER ASAP