Unit 8_LS311_Discussion response

13536Respond or elaborate on the response below:

I do believe that there is enough sufficient evidence to hold iHiker liable and that there was an agency relationship between Rhonda and iHiker at the time of the accident. Rhonda was on the job when she was involved in the accident because she stated she was looking at the GPS for her next sales call and not looking at the road. The chapter describes a principal as the party that employs another person to act on the party’s behalf and an agent as the person that is acting on the party’s behalf. The principal in this situation is iHiker while Rhonda is the agent which creates the agency relationship.

Vicarious liability is where the principal party (iHiker) holds responsibility for the actions of the agent (Rhonda) based on the relationship of the two parties, employer-employee. William Chase can hold the company of iHiker fully liable for the situation due to Rhonda being an agent on duty during the accident.

As a result of this incident, iHiker should go over the policies with Rhonda to make sure she understands that when on working hours, any action will have an impact (positive or negative) on the iHiker company since she is representing them.