Comparing Perspectives, english assignment help

Refer to the NPR piece by Nina Totenberg and the Supreme Court transcript “Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk” in the required readings.Discuss one of the following aspects:Briefly identify two or more perspectives represented in this debate.Identify one concept that is central to the conversation.Identify one or more rhetorical strategies of development (review Chapter 13) at work in the discussion.Remember to compose a substantive initial post and two response posts.Peer Post 1:The concept that is central to the conversation is fair compensation for time spent at work. The problem in regard to this issue is that Amazon employees are not being compensated for the time they spend at work during the anti-theft screening process. The cause of the problem is Amazon's decision to screen for theft while keeping their labor costs low. Some of the possible solutions offered by the employees' legal representation were to search employees at workstations, hire more screeners or use security cameras to prevent theft.It is unclear what Chief Justice Roberts' opinion is on the matter but it seems as though he doesn't believe Amazon should compensate their employees for the screening time. He tries to shrug the issue off as something that should be handled by the union. He clarifies the employees' attorney, Mark Thierman's, position on the matter in a somewhat condescending way by saying, "It seems to me you're saying anything required for the benefit of the employer is an activity that has to be compensated." (Totenburg, 2014) The tone of this statement makes it seem as though Roberts has doubts about the necessity of compensating employees for employer mandated activities.Personally I believe that employers should be required to compensate their employees for any and all required activities. The essence of the issue in my opinion is that during the time that employees are engaged in employer mandated activities, the employees time is not their own. Employees should be compensated for the entirety of the time they spend doing what is required of them by their employer. If the employees were given the choice of going through screening or not, then it would be different. But, as the case is, I would agree with Thierman's opinion on the issue.ReferenceTotenburg, N. (2014). Supreme Court Takes Up Case On Overtime For Standing In Line. National Public Radio Retrieved September 20, 2016, from http://www.npr.org/2014/10/08/354639714/supreme-court-takes-up-case-on-overtime-for-standing-in-linePeer Post 2:One central concept: is a security check considered part of an employees "work"? and one statement, stated by Justice Kennedy, I believed answered this question is, "isn't it for the benefit of the employer"? This means that anything an employee does during their pay time should be benefiting the company or employer. Out side of this pay period if hourly means the employee does not need to benefit their employer because they are not getting paid for it. Going through a security check, is benefiting to an employer because they are preventing internal theft to their organization. If this is a required part of the job, especially daily operations, then the employer must compensate for their time and effort. At my work we do the same thing, however, on a much lower scale, after we clock out we return our keys and open our backpacks if we are carrying one to the security guard in the gate house on the way out. This normally takes less then 10 seconds so it has never come to an employees attention that we are technically in the same boat as amazon. If our security check took as long as 25 minutes then I would also like to be compensated for my time. Amazons maximum quality profit margin in the last 5 years was only 2.82% (Ycharts). Our company is not a company with a thin profit margin, so they do not have to manage every cent like amazon would, so my company is more lenient when it comes to clocking in and out, so the compensation is technically there in my opinion. Totenberg, N. (2014). Supreme Court takes up case on overtime for standing in line. National Public Radio. Retrieved fromhttp://www.npr.org/2014/10/08/354639714/supreme-court-takes-up-case-on-overtime-for-standing-in-linehttps://ycharts.com/companies/AMZN/profit_margin