Human Resource Planning and Organizational StrategyIn a four- to five-page paper (excluding the title and references pages), discuss the relationship between human resource planning activities and the organization’s strategic development and implementation. Describe the eight elements of the staffing process. Examine the relationship between the eight elements of the staffing process and the four activities related to human resource planning.Based on the information in Chapter 9: Case: Using the Internet to Find the Best Talent, review the human resource planning process and the previous readings from Chapter 6. Explain the relationship between the four activities of human resource planning and the organization’s strategic planning, development, and implementation.Your paper should include in-text citations and references for at least three scholarly sources, in addition to the text, and be formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..Case 9: Concussions and the National Football LeaguePlaying professional football, almost by definition, is not one of the world's safer jobs, especially at the level of the NFL, where players get injured almost every week of play. Sprained ankles, torn ligaments, concussions, and broken bones are regular game occurrences.Over the past few decades, however, retired NFL players and others have registered concerns about how repetitive head injuries/concussions sustained while playing have impacted them later in life. Evidence has begun to mount that many retired NFL players face considerable neurological problems, including permanent brain damage, dementia, and much higher-thanaverage incidence of Alzheimer's disease and clinical depression. Some NFL players may have even committed suicide due to degenerative brain disease.During 2011 and 2012 various retired NFL players brought lawsuits against the NFL with respect to this issue. The players argued that the league knew or should have known the risks to players due to concussions/traumatic repetitive brain injuries suffered during the NFL games and that it did not do enough to prevent these injuries. In August 2013 the NFL agreed to settle these lawsuits by paying a total of $765 million to retired NFL players who have suffered injuries. Retired players suffering from Parkinson's or Alzheimer's diseases will receive as much as $3 million apiece, while those suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease/ALS will receive up to $5 million. All retired NFL players will be eligible for paid neurological medical monitoring and baseline testing, with $75 million allocated to pay for this. Moreover, the NFL will also give $10 million to fund brain injury research and various education/safety programs.Is this settlement fair? Certainly the $765 million number is significant, with retired players potentially receiving significant individual compensation. Also, the funds for future research could be very meaningful. Furthermore, the settlement avoided potentially years of costly litigation, with likely little remedy of the situation while the litigation was ongoing. That said, many feel that the NFL "got off cheap" with respect to the settlement deal. In 1 year, the NFL's total revenues amount to about $9.5 billion, and observers expect that to more than double to about $25 billion by 2025. Under the settlement agreement, the NFL must pay half of the $765 million over the next 3 years but then has another 17 years to pay off the remaining sum. Clearly, the league's future revenue stream should be able to support these payments.In addition, concern remains that the agreement does not really get at the more systemic issue of making the game safer. Critics feel changes will have to start at the youth, high school, and college levels—levels of football play that involve many more individuals than the 4,800 former NFL players involved in given lawsuits. Some also feel that the $765 million payment will lead folks to overlook ongoing safety concerns that continue to exist.Not all individuals or even NFL players feel this way, however. Some observers note that "football is football," and those playing it at all levels in a sense accept the inherent dangers involved in the game. NFL players are very well paid professionals, with many making millions of dollars per year. Seattle Seahawks star cornerback Richard Sherman, for example, has strongly pointed out that NFL players have chosen their profession, and thus feels that these types of concerns are to some extent overblown. Sherman says that current NFL players are aware of the risks and have decided to play anyway. He notes that football is a violent way to make a living, but that it is part of what is great about the game and shouldn't be watered down.On the other hand, quarterback Brett Favre states he has experienced memory loss, including not remembering his daughter playing youth soccer during one summer. This worries him; he believes concussions have had a negative impact on his life and fears he might develop a brain disease experienced by many other athletes who have experienced hits to the head (Belson, 2013; Brinson, 2013; Chase, 2013; Blecher, 2016; Waldron, 2013; Sherman, 2013; Wilson & Smith, 2013). To what extent should there be something of a caveat emptor/buyer beware mentality when someone chooses to play football in the NFL?Can the NFL ever really make professional football totally safe?Is playing in the NFL different from being a NASCAR driver, a police officer, or an astronaut? If so, how? If not, why not?

Case Study 1: Walmart Manages Ethics and Compliance ChallengesDue Week 3 and worth 200 pointsRead "Case Study 3: Walmart Manages Ethics and Compliance Challenges," located on page 407 of the textbook. Then, read the article titled, “The Good, the Bad, and Wal-Mart”, located at http://www.workplacefairness.org/reports/good-bad-wal-mart/wal-mart.php.Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you: Examine the manner in which Walmart’s business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Provide one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation. Determine the major effects that Walmart’s business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. Analyze two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Provide an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations. Evaluate the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Provide a rationale for your response. Recommend two (2) actions that Walmart’s Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employees’ perspectives of Walmart’s human resources policies. Provide a rationale for your recommendations. Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and other similar Websites do not qualify as academic resources. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Describe the business ethics issues and definitions, theories, and frameworks important to organizational ethical decision making and the role of a human resource professional. Determine the role of stakeholder interests, the interrelationship of ethics and social responsibility, and the role of corporate governance in ethics. Examine ethical issues and dilemmas in business. Write clearly and concisely about issues in ethics and advocacy for HR professionals using correct grammar and mechanics. Use technology and information resources to research issues in business ethics and advocacy for HR professionals.Criteria UnacceptableBelow 70% F Fair70-79% C Proficient80-89% B Exemplary90-100% A 1. Examine the manner in which Walmarts business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Provide one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation.Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely examined the manner in which Walmarts business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Did not submit or incompletely provided one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation. Partially examined the manner in which Walmarts business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Partially provided one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation. Satisfactorily examined the manner in which Walmarts business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Satisfactorily provided one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation. Thoroughly examined the manner in which Walmarts business philosophy has impacted its perception of being unethical towards supply and employee stakeholders. Thoroughly provided one (1) example of Walmart in an unethical situation. 2. Determine the major effects that Walmarts business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely determined the major effects that Walmarts business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. Partially determined the major effects that Walmarts business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. Satisfactorily determined the major effects that Walmarts business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. Thoroughly determined the major effects that Walmarts business philosophy has had on its human resource practices and policies. 3. Analyze two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Provide an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations.Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely analyzed two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Did not submit or incompletely provided an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations. Partially analyzed two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Partially provided an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations. Satisfactorily analyzed two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Satisfactorily provided an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations. Thoroughly analyzed two (2) of the legal mandates that workers and U.S. government has accused Walmart of violating. Thoroughly provided an explanation as to why these legal mandates were violated, citing specific violations. 4. Evaluate the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Provide a rationale for your response.Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response. Partially evaluated the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Partially provided a rationale for your response. Satisfactorily evaluated the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response. Thoroughly evaluated the efficiency of the structure of the ethical decision making framework that Walmart has used in making its decisions. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response. 5. Recommend two (2) actions that Walmarts Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employeesperspectives of Walmarts human resources policies. Provide a rationale for your recommendations.Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely recommended two (2) actions that Walmarts Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employees perspectives of Walmarts human resources policies. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your recommendations. Partially recommended two (2) actions that Walmarts Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employees perspectives of Walmarts human resources policies. Partially provided a rationale for your recommendations. Satisfactorily recommended two (2) actions that Walmarts Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employees perspectives of Walmarts human resources policies. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your recommendations. Thoroughly recommended two (2) actions that Walmarts Human Resources Department should take in order to improve the employees perspectives of Walmarts human resources policies. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your recommendations. 6. 3 referencesWeight: 5% No references provided. Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. 7. Writing Mechanics, Grammar, and FormattingWeight: 5% Serious and persistent errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Partially free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Mostly free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Error free or almost error free grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. 8. Appropriate use of APA in-text citations and reference sectionWeight: 5% Lack of in-text citations and / or lack of reference section. In-text citations and references are provided, but they are only partially formatted correctly in APA style. Most in-text citations and references are provided, and they are generally formatted correctly in APA style. In-text citations and references are error free or almost error free and consistently formatted correctly in APA style. 9. Information Literacy / Integration of SourcesWeight: 5% Serious errors in the integration of sources, such as intentional or accidental plagiarism, or failure to use in-text citations. Sources are partially integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. Sources are mostly integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. Sources are consistently integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. 10. Clarity and Coherence of WritingWeight: 5% Information is confusing to the reader and fails to include reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is partially clear with minimal reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is mostly clear and generally supported with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is provided in a clear, coherent, and consistent manner with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.Wal-Mart As the nation’s largest retailer, second-largest corporation, and largest private employer (with 1.3 million workers), Wal-Mart made headlines this past year at an unprecedented rate. All too often, these headlines revolved around Wal-Mart’s infamous employment practices. While Wal-Mart isn’t the only big box store criticized for its policies, it has become a symbol for much of what is wrong with employers. Wal-Mart reported a net income of over $11 billion last year—surely plenty of money to remedy some questionable workplace practices—yet stories persist about wage law violations, inadequate health care, exploitation of workers, and the retailer’s anti-union stance. Altogether, some 5,000 lawsuits are filed against Wal-Mart each year, or roughly 17 suits per working day. Here’s a look back at the year according to Wal-Mart. It’s not pretty. Wal-Mart Documentary: Public Relations Nightmare November saw the release of the film Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. Through interviews with employees and former managers, the documentary presented a critical view of Wal-Mart’s policies, particularly with respect to treatment of Wal-Mart employees. In response to the film’s release, Wal-Mart hired several former presidential advisers to establish a “rapid-response public relations team.” In December, Wal-Mart formed an advocacy group, called Working Families for Wal-Mart, which was headed by former Atlanta mayor and UN Ambassador Andrew Young. Unfortunately for Wal-Mart, this public relations campaign hit a snag in August, as Young told the Los Angeles Sentinel that Wal-Mart should displace traditional mom-and-pop stores. Young elaborated further: “You see those [small store owners] are the people who have been overcharging us, and they sold out and moved to Florida. I think they’ve ripped off our communities enough. First it was Jews, then it was Koreans and now it’s Arabs.” Young resigned hours after the interview was published. Anti-Union Stance Wal-Mart’s anti-union stance made headlines once again this year. After workers at a Wal-Mart store in Québec successfully unionized, Wal-Mart announced that it would close that store, citing “economic reasons.” Last September, Québec’s labor relations board rejected Wal-Mart’s argument and found that Wal-Mart’s firings were illegal. Wal-Mart employees had some success this past year in organizing non-union groups. In the fall of last year, Wal-Mart employees in central Florida formed a workers group, the Wal-Mart Workers Association, in an attempt to improve working conditions and air grievances against the company. By January, the group had enlisted approximately 300 employees from 40 stores. The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union is among the sponsors of the new group. So far, the group has been able to restore hours cut by the store, reinstate a fired employee, and get the company to install a bike rack—all through non-unionized collective action campaigns. In November of last year, Wake Up Wal-Mart, a UCFW-sponsored group critical of the retailer, formed a national association, called the Wal-Mart Workers of America, in an attempt to organize Wal-Mart workers, albeit without forming a union. In January, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals handed Arkansas Wal-Mart employees a victory, reinstating a lawsuit alleging that Wal-Mart engaged in anti-union activities. In August, at the same time Wal-Mart was agreeing to work with Chinese officials to establish unions for 30,000 store employees, the retailer reaffirmed its anti-union stance in North America. Wal-Mart explained that its motivation for permitting unions in China was to comply with Chinese laws, while the company's critics argued that the move was not done for the interests of workers and instead only demonstrated Wal-Mart’s desire to please its biggest trading partner. Exploitation of Workers Last September, the International Labor Rights Fund filed a class-action lawsuit against Wal-Mart for violating workers’ rights in foreign countries, alleging that Wal-Mart denied minimum wage, required overtime, and punished union activity. In some cases, workers alleged they were beaten by supervisors. If certified, 100,000 to 500,000 workers could be included. Specifically, the suit alleged that one Bangladesh worker worked seven days a week from 7:45 a.m to 10:00 p.m. without a day off in six months. In another instance, Wal-Mart was accused of failing to provide adequate safety equipment (gloves) for its fabric cutters and seamstresses overseas. According to one report, in Wal-Mart’s cost-benefit analysis, it was cheaper to wash workers’ blood from clothing before shipping the clothing overseas for sale than it was to provide gloves. In any event, Wal-Mart appeared to take notice of the public outcry over rights exploitation. In October of last year, Wal-Mart announced that it would start holding suppliers more accountable for workers’ rights violations. In March, it was reported that Wal-Mart was increasing the number of unannounced inspections at foreign factories. Critics urged the retailer to use outside experts to verify the inspections. In November, the Office of Inspector General released a report critical of the Department of Labor’s settlement agreement with Wal-Mart over child labor violations, claiming that the Department made “significant concessions” and that “serious breakdowns” in the negotiation and approval of the agreement were present. Under the agreement, Wal-Mart was fined $135,540 for child labor violations occurring between 1998 and 2002. Lawmakers and child advocate groups questioned the agreement’s provision that Wal-Mart would receive 15-day advanced notice before certain stores would be investigated. When Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf region, Wal-Mart contributed $17 million to the relief effort, in addition to more than $3 million in merchandise, which led one commentator to observe: “A company capable of operating in such a coordinated, humane way should do so not just in a disaster but every day. There is no reason Wal-Mart could not operate in an equally streamlined, well-organized manner to make sure that labor laws (on overtime, child labor, discrimination) are followed. There is no reason its impressive resources could not be marshaled to remedy the daily, ongoing disaster that so many of its workers face: low wages and inadequate healthcare.” In November, a federal agency affidavit revealed that Wal-Mart executives were aware of systematic hirings of illegal immigrants by Wal-Mart’s cleaning contractors. In 2003, immigration officials conducted a raid on 60 Wal-Mart stores in 21 states, arresting 245 workers. Wal-Mart settled the case for $11 million in March of last year, but claimed that corporate executives were unaware that illegal immigrants were hired. Wage Law Violations In California, some 116,000 Wal-Mart employees joined in a class-action lawsuit against the retailer, claiming that Wal-Mart violated a California law requiring employers to provide an unpaid 30-minute lunch break to employees who work at least six hours. In December, three days before Christmas, California Wal-Mart employees prevailed on their claims in front of a jury, collecting $57 million in compensatory damages and $115 million in punitive damages. The California verdict came on the heels of a $50 million settlement in Colorado and a separate victory in Oregon. By June, however, lawyers of Wal-Mart employees were back in court, asking for an injunction to compel Wal-Mart to follow the same state lunch-break laws. A California judge has since ordered the retailer to obey these laws and provide compliance reports for the next 3 years. Similar wage and hour class-action suits were filed in other states against Wal-Mart. In January, a Pennsylvania judge certified a class-action lawsuit against the retailer that alleged that workers were not compensated for hours worked—in one instance, one employee claimed 8 to 12 unpaid hours a month, on average. Wal-Mart denied the allegations, which could include 150,000 Pennsylvania workers, claiming that “Wal-Mart's policy is to pay associates for every minute they work.” This innovative and progressive Wal-Mart policy was first revealed when Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott made a similar statement in the documentary Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, which drew the following response from Jon Stewart, host of the television talk show "The Daily Show": “That's the best you can do? ‘If you work here, we'll pay you.’” Meanwhile, in April, Wal-Mart announced plans that it was testing a “flexible scheduling” policy, which would require workers to shift rotations instead of having steady shifts. Workers claimed that the policy was designed to force full-time workers to change to a part-time schedule, thereby saving Wal-Mart the cost of salaries and benefits. In May, California Wal-Mart managers were dealt a legal setback when a federal judge refused to certify a class-action lawsuit, saying that the managers’ claims needed to be addressed individually. The lawsuit claimed that managers were illegally exempted from overtime pay. By the end of the year, the many lawsuits and public outcry seemed to have a slight effect. In August, Wal-Mart announced that it would raise starting wages at one-third of its stores by about 6% in an effort to stay competitive with other retailers. Just weeks after this announcement of a modest pay raise, Wal-Mart was once again making headlines for all the wrong reasons—this time for a Texas class-action lawsuit alleging hour and wage law violations. After letters were sent to Wal-Mart employees inviting them to join the class-action suit, some Wal-Mart store managers allegedly pressured employees, by threat of termination, to hand over the invitations and sign a statement saying that they did not work off the clock. Lawyers for the Wal-Mart employees have requested that a federal judge order that Wal-Mart cease this practice. Health Care Last October, Wal-Mart announced that it would introduce a cheaper health insurance plan for employees, with monthly premiums as low as $11. Critics questioned whether Wal-Mart was attempting to boost its sagging image by offering health care to more workers while neglecting the quality of the health care itself. Later that month, an internal memo from a Wal-Mart executive recommending numerous ways to reduce health care spending was discovered by the New York Times. The memo noted that Wal-Mart workers were “sicker than the national population” and tended to overuse emergency rooms instead of visiting doctors. Among the memo’s recommendations to reduce health care spending: Discouraging unhealthy people from working at Wal-Mart; one way to accomplish this goal: require that all jobs involve some physical activity Hiring more part-time workers Reducing 401(k) contributions Putting health clinics in Wal-Mart stores All told, as a result of these recommendations, Wal-Mart estimated it would save more than $1 billion in health care costs by 2011. Wal-Mart was apparently so impressed by the executive’s suggestions that it promoted her to head the human-resource division the following April. In February, the New York Times also revealed several candid internal discussions between Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott and Wal-Mart managers on a private website. When one Wal-Mart manager asked the CEO why the company could not provide medical retirement benefits, Scott snapped back that the manager was disloyal and suggested that the manager quit. In April, the Change to Win labor federation staged demonstrations in 35 cities to protest Wal-Mart’s inadequate health care, with up to 350 protesters reported in Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon. Perhaps the most significant development over the last year involved attempts by state and city governments to mandate health care for Wal-Mart employees. At the beginning of 2006, the New York Times reported that lawmakers in 30 states were considering legislation that would require large corporations to increase spending on employee health insurance. Maryland would be the first to enact such laws. In January, Maryland legislators passed the Fair Share Health Care Fund bill, overriding Governor Robert Ehrlich’s veto. The law requires private companies with more than 10,000 employees to spend 8% of their payroll on one of three options for health care: spend the money on health care directly; spend the money on an improved ERISA plan; or pay the money to the state for health care costs. Maryland was the first state in the country to pass such a bill, unofficially dubbed the “Wal-Mart bill” because the company was the only one of the four employers in the state which had 10,000 employees but which was not already spending 8% on employee health care. Workers’ rights advocates hailed the bill’s passage and, in an attempt to bolster momentum for employee health care, urged other states to pass similar bills. In July, however, supports of the movement were dealt a setback when a federal judge invalidated the law, holding that it was preempted by federal law (ERISA). While the ruling only affected the Maryland law, thus preserving similar laws passed in Massachusetts and Vermont, it likely halted states' efforts to require large employers to provide employee health care. Despite its invalidation, the law did have one positive outcome, as its passage and the ensuing litigation spurred much public debate on the health care issue. Meanwhile, Chicago was the other major battlefield between Wal-Mart and its governmental critics. In July, the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance, by a 35-14 vote, that would require “big box” stores to pay a minimum wage of $10 an hour by 2010, along with $3 worth of benefits. A “big box” store is defined as a store with more than 90,000 square feet that is part of a company that grosses more than $1 billion annually. The 35 supporting votes would be enough to override a veto by Mayor Richard Daley. Daley has until September 13 to decide whether to veto the bill, which would the first veto in his 17-year tenure. Experts believe this type of bill could spread to other communities outside of Chicago, much in the same manner as the Fair Share