Statement–Argument — Should an employer have the right to terminate an employee on the ground of disability? Arguments: I) Yes; if a disability prevents the employee from performing essential duties, the employer’s objectives suffer and termination should be permitted. II) No; humanity and equal opportunity require accommodation and protection, and disability alone should not justify termination. Choose the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
The issue pits managerial prerogatives against equal opportunity and reasonable accommodation. A strong policy argument must weigh practicality with fairness and non-discrimination principles.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• “Disability” covers many conditions; many do not eliminate capacity to perform with adjustments.
• Workplaces can re-design roles, provide assistive devices, or reassign non-essential functions.
• Summary termination based solely on status risks unfairness and loss of talent.

Concept / Approach:
Argument II is strong: it centers accommodation and the ethical/legal expectation that disability alone should not be dispositive. Argument I is weak as phrased because it skips the duty to explore reasonable adjustments and alternative placements; only when essential functions cannot be performed even with accommodation would separation be considered, which is narrower than the broad “right to terminate.”

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Modern HR practice emphasizes reasonable accommodation and interactive processes before contemplating termination.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I” ignores accommodation; “Either/Neither” misclassify the asymmetry.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming disability equals incapacity; many roles can be redesigned effectively.

Final Answer:
if only argument II is strong.