3. This presentation is proprietary information and can’t
be copied or reproduced in any fashion without
consent from the publisher owner.
By, Richard Garrity
5. Sexual Harassment:
Areas of Discussion
This comprehensive analysis of
sexual harassment will focus
primarily on 4 areas of review
and suggestions:
1. Traditional Sexual Harassment
2. Previous case law examples
3. Cell phone, Computer, and
Electronic Harassment
4. Strategies, Training, and Prevention
7. Sexual Harassment- The Definition:
Sexual harassment is any unwelcome
sexual advance or conduct on the job
that creates an intimidating, hostile,
or offensive working environment.
Any conduct of a sexual nature that
makes an employee uncomfortable
has the potential to be sexual
harassment.
8. There are two specific
legal definitions of sexual
harassment that have been
established in employment
law: The 1st
:
9. • Quid Pro Quo Harassment:
"Something for something;" this is the
"you do something for me and I'll do
something for you" type of exchange. This
occurs when a job benefit is directly tied to an
employee submitting to unwelcome sexual
advances. For example, a supervisor
promises an employee a raise if she will go
out on a date with him, or tells an employee
she will be fired if she doesn't sleep with him.
10. • Quid Pro Quo Harassment:
Quid pro quo harassment also occurs
when an employee makes an
evaluative decision, or provides or
withholds professional opportunities
based on another employee's
submission to verbal, nonverbal or
physical conduct or a sexual nature.
Quid pro quo harassment is equally
unlawful whether the victim resists and
suffers the threatened harm or submits
and thus avoids the threatened harm.
11. Giving something to get
something, sexual in nature
or closely related, is Tangible
Sexual Harassment
12. There are two specific
legal definitions of sexual
harassment that have been
established in employment
law: The 2nd
:
13. • Hostile Environment Sexual
Harassment:
This occurs when an employee is
subjected to comments of a sexual
nature, offensive sexual materials, or
unwelcome physical contact as a regular
part of the work environment. Generally
speaking, a single isolated incident will
not be considered hostile environment
harassment unless it is extremely
outrageous and egregious conduct.
14. There are two specific legal definitions of
sexual harassment that have been
established in employment law: The 2nd
:
• Hostile Environment Sexual
Harassment:
The courts look to see whether the
conduct is both serious and frequent.
Supervisors, managers, co-workers and
even customers can be responsible for
creating a hostile environment.
15. Creating a hostile work
environment based on sexual
motives is Intangible sexual
harassment-
16. Given this broad definition, it is not
surprising that sexual harassment
comes in many forms. The following
are examples of sexual harassment:
A supervisor implies to an
employee that the employee
must sleep with him to keep
his or her job.
A sales clerk makes
demeaning comments about
female customers to his
coworkers.
17. Given this broad definition, it is not
surprising that sexual harassment
comes in many forms. The following
are examples of sexual harassment:
An office manager in a law
firm is made uncomfortable
by lawyers who regularly
tell sexually explicit jokes.
A cashier at a store pinches
and fondles a coworker
against her will.
18. Given this broad definition, it is not
surprising that sexual harassment
comes in many forms. The following
are examples of sexual harassment:
A secretary's coworkers belittle
her and refer to her by sexist or
demeaning terms.
Several employees post sexually
explicit jokes on an office intranet
bulletin board.
An employee sends emails to
coworkers that contain sexually
explicit language and jokes.
21. You have a Responsibility:
As an employer, you have a
responsibility to maintain a workplace
that is free of sexual harassment. This
is your legal obligation, but it also
makes good business sense. If you
allow sexual harassment to flourish in
your workplace, you will pay a high
price in terms of poor employee
morale, low productivity and costly
lawsuits.
22. You have a
Responsibility:
The same laws that prohibit
gender discrimination prohibit
sexual harassment. Title VII of the
1964 Civil Rights Act is the main
federal law that prohibits sexual
harassment. Title VII of the law is
widely viewed as the enforcer of
sexual and gender discrimination
in the workplace and public
facilities.
23. You have a
Responsibility:
The law was introduced in
1963 by President John F.
Kennedy which he
emulated from the original
Civil Rights Act of 1875,
and expanded upon that
legislation.
24. Signing legislation- John F. Kennedy is
responsible for the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(Title VII) and The Equal Pay Act of June 10th
,
1963.
25. You have a
Responsibility:
Sexual harassment is a gender-
neutral offense, at least in theory: Men
can sexually harass women, and
women can sexually harass men.
However, statistics show that the
overwhelming majority of sexual
harassment claims and charges are
brought by women claiming that they
were sexually harassed by men.
26. You have a
Responsibility:
People of the same sex can also
sexually harass each other, as long as
the harassment is of a heterosexual
nature. For example, if a man's
coworkers constantly bombard him
with sexually explicit photos of
women and sexually explicit jokes,
and if this makes him uncomfortable
because he is married, this behavior
can constitute sexual harassment.
27. Whether sexual harassment of
gays and lesbians is illegal under
Title VII is an open question right
now and the subject of a lot of
debate. The U.S. Supreme Court
has never addressed the issue,
and lower federal courts and state
courts are all over the map with
their decisions.
28. • Despite the lack of judicial guidance in
this area, prudent employers should
assume that this type of sexual
harassment is illegal as well. The
bottom line is, Sexual Harassment is
Sexual Harassment, no matter what the
sexual orientation of any party
involved. Any judicial grey areas in the
world of sexual harassment should not
be tested nor accepted. All are treated
equally and according to one’s
companies’ policies.
30. Sexual harassment in the American
workplace, for women, started to
become a major problem in the 1960’s.
From that time it had progressed
worse. Until, the courts started to step
in to curb it….
31. Female food servers from the 1930’s.
Sexual harassment was rare then, but
women had virtually no legal
protections.
32. Sexual harassment of men in the
American workplace, started to
become a moderate problem in the
mid 1980’s as women began breaking
barriers and entered the workforce in
droves.
33. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1964…
The Civil Rights Act of 1964
becomes law. Title VII prohibits
employment discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, and sex. There is
no mention of sexual harassment
in the law or its legislative history.
But the Title has been extended thru
litigation to combat sexual harassment.
34. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1974…
• A female employee claims she was
retaliated against for rejecting her
boss’s sexual advances. There was no
sex discrimination, a trial court
decides. The male supervisor, the
court says, merely solicited his
subordinate because he found her
“attractive” and then retaliated
because he felt “rejected.”
• Barnes v. Train, 13 FEP Cases 123 (D.D.C.)
35. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1976…
• The humiliation and termination of a
female employee by her male
supervisor because she rejected his
sexual advances, if proven, would be
sex discrimination, a court rules,
because it was an artificial barrier to
employment placed before one
gender and not the other.
Williams v. Saxbe, 413
F. Supp. 654, 12 FEP Cases 1093 (D.D.C.)
36. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1977…
• Reversing the 1974 Barnes v. Train
case, appealed under a different
name, U.S. appeals court rules that a
female employee was retaliated
against for rejecting sexual
advances of her boss; this is sex
discrimination in violation of Title
VII.
(Barnes c. Costle, 561 F.2d 983,
15 FEP Cases 345 (D.C. Cir.)
37. 1980…
The Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC), the agency that enforces
Title VII, issues guidelines interpreting the law
to forbid sexual harassment as a form of sex
discrimination.
29 C.F.R. §1604.11
38. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1981…
• For the first time a United States court
endorses the EEOC’s position that Title
VII liability can exist for sexual insults
and propositions that create a
“sexually hostile environment,” even if
the employee lost no tangible job
benefits as a result.
Bundy v. Jackson, 641 F.2d 934,
24 FEP Cases 1155 (D.C.Cir.)
39. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1983…
• An employer that forbade sexual
harassment is held liable for the
sexist name-calling of a female air
traffic controller because it failed
to take corrective action when the
employee complained.
Katz v. Dole, 709 F.2d 251,
31 FEP Cases 1521 (4th Cir.)
40. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1985…
• Physical violence can be sexual
harassment, U.S. appeals court
says, even if the conduct is not
overly sexual: all that is
necessary is that the unwelcome
conduct be on the basis of the
victim’s gender.
(McKinney v. Dole, 765 F.2d 1129,
38 FEP Cases 364 (D.C. Cir)
41. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1986…
• Addressing the sexual
harassment issue for the first
time, U.S. Supreme Court rules
that a woman who allegedly had
sex with her boss a number of
times, because she feared losing
her job if she did not, could sue
for sexual harassment.
42. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1986…
• The question is not whether the
employee’s conduct was voluntary but
whether the boss’s conduct was
unwelcome, the Court explains. An
employer can be held liable for sexual
harassment committed by supervisors
if it knew or should have known about
the conduct and did nothing to correct
it, the Court adds.
(Meritor Savings Banks v. Vinson,
477 U.S. 57, 40FEP Cases 1822)
43. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1988…
• When male construction workers
hazed three female colleagues,
even if the conduct was not
specifically sexual in nature, it
was gender-based harassment
prohibited by the law, a U.S.
appeals court finds.
(Hall v. Gus Construction Co., 842 F.2d 1010, 46
FEP Cases 57 (8th Cir.)
44. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1990…
• The Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) issues a policy
statement saying that “sexual favoritism
can be sexual harassment”. Isolated
incidents of consensual favoritism do not
violate Title VII, but sexual favoritism does
violate the law if advances are unwelcome
or favoritism is so widespread that it has
become an unspoken condition of
employment, the EEOC says.
45. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1991…
• A sexually hostile environment violating
Title VII is found where women were a
small minority of the work force and crude
language, sexual graffiti, and pornography
pervaded the workplace. Title VII is “a
sword to battle such conditions,” not a
shield to protect preexisting abusive
environments, the court declares.
(Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards,
760 F. Supp. 1486, 57 FEP Cases 971 (M.D. Fla.)
46. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1991…
• A court finds that because male and
female sensibilities differ, the appropriate
standard to use in sexual harassment
cases is that of a “reasonable women”
rather than a “reasonable person.” The
conduct in question – a man’s unsolicited
love letters and unwanted attention might
seem inoffensive to the average man, but
might be so offensive to the average
woman that creates a hostile environment,
the court rules. (Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d
872, 54 FEP Cases 1346 (9th Cir.)
48. Sexual Harassment explodes in the
national spotlight. Case in point:
The Thomas Clarence hearings 1991
• The Senate Judiciary Committee conducts
hearings on the nomination of Judge
Clarence Thomas to Associate Justice of the
United States Supreme Court. One Issue is
whether, while he was chairman of the EEOC,
that Thomas sexually harassed a female
assistant Anita Hill. The alleged conduct
occurred in private, Hill did not officially
report it, and she continued to see Thomas
even after she changed jobs.
49. Sexual Harassment explodes in the
national spotlight. Case in point:
The Thomas Clarence hearings 1991
• Although some Senator’s believed
Hill’s charges, the Senate gave Thomas
a seat on the Court. The hearings
brought the issue of workplace sexual
harassment out in the open and
sparked national debate over just what
harassment is and what should be done
about it.
50. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1993…
• In its second decision on sexual
harassment in employment, the Supreme
Court rules that a discriminatorily abusive
work environment is unlawful even if it
does not affect an employee’s
psychological well-being. It is enough if (1)
the employee subjectively perceives a
hostile work environment as a result of
gender-based conduct and (2) the conduct
was severe or pervasive enough to create
an objectively hostile environment -- one
that a reasonable person would find hostile.
(Harris v. Forklift Systems, 114 S. Ct.
367, 63 FEP Cases 225)
51. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1996…
• A federal court upholds the dismissal
of a manager who was fired for
disregarding his boss’s order not to
discuss an ongoing sexual
harassment investigation with other
employees. The court rejects the
manger, in discussing the
investigation with another employee,
had been engaged in activity
protected by the law.
(Morris v. Boston Edison Co.,
942 F. Supp. 65 (D. Mass.)
52. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1996...
• A federal court upholds the dismissal
of a female employee who made
unfounded harassment charges
against a male manager after their
romantic relationship had ended. The
court rejects her argument that the
company discriminated against her
on the basis of gender by treating her
more harshly than her ex-boyfriend.
(Cerwinski v. Insurance Services Office,
1996 WL 563988 (S.D.N.Y.)
53. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1996…
• A federal court throws out a sexual
harassment claim based on a handful
of sexually suggestive comments made
over a three-month period. This
behavior was not severe or pervasive
enough to be unlawful harassment,
even though the victimized employee
subjectively perceived the behavior as
harassing. (McKenzie v. Illinois Department
of Transportation, 92 F.3d 473, 167 Daily Lab.
Rep. (BNA) E-1 (7th Cir.)
54. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1997…
• A U.S. appeals court rules that where
an employer has an effective and well-
disseminated policy against sexual
harassment, the employer cannot be
held liable for hostile environment
harassment unless the victim reports
the harassment under the policy and
the employer fails to remedy it; the
company’s knowledge of harassment
will not be presumed even if the
harassment is pervasive.
(Farley v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co.,
74 FEP Cases 217 (11th Cir.)
55. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1998…
• In its fourth case on sexual harassment
in employment, the Supreme Court holds
that men as well as women can bring
sexual harassment claims and that
Title VII applies to “same-sex”
harassment”. An oil platform worker
alleged that male co-workers subjected
him to sexual assaults and threatened
him with rape. He quit and sued the
company for failing to stop this conduct.
56. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1998…
• The court holds that even
though Title VII does not
specifically protect men from
gender-based harassment by
other men, the general
principles of sex
discrimination and harassment
do apply to that conduct.
57. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
1998…
This does not mean that Title VII creates
a “general civility code for the American
workplace,”… for “social context,” and
“common sense” will still control whether
particular gender-based conduct is
severe enough to create a hostile
environment for a reasonable person
under the circumstances.
(Onacle v. Sundowner Offshore Services,
Inc., 76 FEP Cases 221)
58. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
2000…
• A female harassed by her male co-
worker after their consensual
sexual relationship went sour did
not suffer gender-based
harassment; rather, the
harassment showed “contempt”
as a result of the “failed
relationship.”
(Succar v. Dade County Sch. BD.,
59. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
2004…
• Female store clerks lost their case
because they failed to use
designated avenues to complain
to the designated person, and
also failed to reasonably use the
Open Door Policy because they
did not fully inform managers of
harassment or request that action
be taken. (Mandray v. Publix Supermkts., Inc.,
208
• F.3d 1290, 1300 (11th Cir.)
60. Development and evolution of
the Law of Sexual Harassment
2008…
US Supreme Court found that
school districts could not be
held liable for teachers' sexual
harassment of a student under
Title IX, unless school officials
knew about the problem and
failed to take appropriate
remedial action.
Gebser v. Lago Vista Ind. Sch. Distr.,
(Boca Raton) Docket No. 96-1866.
61. Development and evolution of the
Law of Sexual Harassment
In 1991,The United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
adopted the “reasonable woman”
standard, in lieu of a “reasonable
person” standard, explaining that
a comprehensive understanding
of a woman’s view was required,
as men’s & women’s perspectives
regarding objectionable conduct
tended to vary.
62. Development and evolution of the
Law of Sexual Harassment
The EEOC (Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission) itself in
1993 defined sexual harassment
as an experience that a
reasonable person in the same or
comparable circumstances would
find to be “intimidating, hostile, or
abusive,” although the EEOC
added that “gender needed to be
considered” as part of the
circumstances considered.
64. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
• Two months into his new job at First
Mutual Corporation in posh Cherry
Hill, NJ. things began to unravel for
Louis Oblea. That’s when Jackie
Mesinger, the Pagan Princess, as she
called herself, a woman twice his age,
began groping the young man, as he
remembers it.
65. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
Then came lobbing sexual
innuendo into their
conversations.
Oblea reported her to his boss.
His response?
”Oh, she does that to some men. She’ll
stop eventually. Until then, avoid her”.
66. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
• And so Oblea did just that, until the day
after Christmas, when he logged onto
his company computer and clicked on
his e-mail: There was the Pagan
Princess, completely nude and
performing an inappropriate act on
herself. Not two minutes later, another
company e-mail from her landed in his
in-box.
67. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
This one, of another woman, in
another inappropriate position.
Oblea complained again. He even
showed his boss the pictures.
Please, he said, just make it stop.
68. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
His complaints echoed up the chain of
command, but they were ignored, perhaps
because Jackie Mesinger was also the
company’s rainmaker, reeling in the big
clients. Young Oblea was just an entry-level
loan officer. He was expendable.
Two days later, when Mesinger heard that
Oblea was making noise, she sent him an e-
mail. “You should rethink your position”, it
read.
69. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
A few weeks after that
message, although Oblea’s
manager had recently said
that he was adapting well to
his new position, First Mutual
fired him, for poor work
performance.
70. Sexual Harassment in the
“Spotlight”. The Oblea- Mesinger
case:
That’s when Oblea turned to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.
The EEOC filed a lawsuit on his behalf,
and he received a monetary settlement
from First Mutual. Oblea then quietly
slipped away. No media blitz. After all,
who would empathize? Was it even
possible for a man to be sexually
preyed upon by a woman?
71. Sexual Harassment in the “Spotlight”.
The James Stevens- Laura Marko case:
James Stevens, a soft-spoken, devout
Christian who worked for more than 15
years at a Vons Supermarket in Simi
Valley, CA, who claims that a coworker
named Laura Marko was inappropriate
with him every day for two years. “Most
black men would love to have a white
woman sexually harass them” — that’s
what he would hear. The crude remarks
continued and repulsed the happily
married Mr. Stevens.
72. Sexual Harassment in the “Spotlight”.
The James Stevens- Laura Marko case:
Stevens finally complained, and the
company transferred him instead of
dealing with the situation. “And the first
thing out of my wife’s mouth is, ‘Why
are they transferring you if she was
harassing you?’ In the back of her mind,
she was thinking maybe I could have
been harassing this woman,” he says.
His coworkers thought that, too. The
rumor spread. And then Vons
Supermarket fired him without warning
or just cause.
74. Sexual Harassment in the “Spotlight”.
The James Stevens- Laura Marko
case:
Stevens wife eventually took their young
daughter and left him because of the
controversy. Stevens filed suit against the
company. Determining that Vons fired him in
retaliation for his complaining about being
sexually harassed, a jury awarded Stevens $18
million, one of the largest decisions of its kind.
(Vons has appealed this decision.)
76. Senior undercover drug detective Matt Floeter,
was a deeply tanned 41-year-old with bulging
muscles and piercing blue eyes. From the day
Sergeant Barbara Jones took over as the
supervisor of this hard-core, paramilitary-style
unit of the Orlando Police Department, she
could not keep her hands to herself, he stated,
grabbing and hugging him and the other male
Officers every time they passed her desk in
their big, open box of an office. “She was like a
kid in a candy shop,” he once stated.
77. Floeter did complain. Finally, after three months
of the alleged behavior and gross inappropriate
fondling, following a closed-door meeting with
Jones in which she came down on him about
his poor work ethic and threatened to subpoena
his phone records because he was using his
cell phone while on duty for calls related to his
personal business, Aqua Cops- a home water
filtrations system. He additionally reported 2
Lieutenants and 3 Officers of viewing and
disseminating porn while on duty on police
computers.
78. In another meeting, Jones detailed
changes she was set to implement that
Floeter felt would undercut his
investigative work and damage his
reputation. Floeter then drove straight to
Internal Affairs and reported her for
sexual harassment and retaliation.
80. The city settled out of court with Floeter
in December of 2005, for an undisclosed
amount. For her part, Barbara Jones was
reprimanded for conduct unbecoming of
an Officer and demoted to Public
Information Officer with no supervisory
capacity.
81. Sexual Harassment in the
corporate workplace:
• Sexual harassment of men does occur,
though there is less information about the
problem because men are less likely to
report the behavior. Sexual harassment
of men in the workplace is most often
same-sex harassment, and focused on
men who are deemed less masculine than
the others; however, neither the
perpetrators nor the victim will necessarily
be gay. Still, there are increasing reports
of men being harassed by women,
particularly female supervisors. (See Oncale
Vs. Sundowner-1991)
86. Sexual Harassment Spotlight:
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
Lois E. Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
was the first class-action sexual
harassment lawsuit in the United
States, filed in 1988 on behalf of Lois
Jenson and other female workers at the
EVTAC mine in Eveleth, Minnesota
Jenson first began working at the site in
March 1975 and along with other
women, endured a continuous stream
of abhorrent behavior from male
employees, including sexual
harassment, abusive language, threats,
stalking and intimidation.
87. Sexual Harassment Spotlight:
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
• On October 5, 1984, she mailed a
complaint to the Minnesota Department
of Human Rights outlining the
problems she experienced. In
retaliation, her car tires were slashed a
week later. In January 1987, the state
requested that Ogelbay Norton Co. a
Cleveland, Ohio-based part-owner of
the mine, pay US $6,000 in punitive
damages and $5,000 to Jenson for
mental anguish, but the company
defiantly refused.
88. Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
A liability trial began on
December 17, 1992 in front of
Judge Richard Kyle in St.
Paul, Minnesota, and six
months later, he ruled that the
company should have
prevented the misconduct.
The company was ordered to
educate all employees about
sexual harassment.
89. Sexual Harassment Spotlight:
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
The trial court found in favor of
the women, but with some
unsavory remarks and awarded
them a paltry 10,000 dollars each.
They appealed. On December 23,
1998, just before the trial was set
to begin, fifteen women settled
with Eveleth Mines for a total of
$3.5 million. The case was
documented in the 2002 book
Class Action and a 2005
fictionalized film version, North
91. Griffin v. City of Opa-Locka,
Case No. 98-1550, (S.D. Fla. 2000),
In the fall of 1995, Angelita Griffin
who worked for the City of Opa-
Locka, Florida, was repeatedly
sexually harassed by her superior
Ernie Neal. The treatment and
sexual comments made by Neal
were brutal and atrocious at best.
Griffin complained to the Vice
Mayor of Opa- Locka several
times about this abhorrent
behavior, but the Vice Mayor
simply laughed it off.
92. Griffin v. City of Opa-Locka,
Case No. 98-1550, (S.D. Fla. 2000),
The brutal and repressive sexual
harassment involved unwanted
touching, close hugs to feel Miss
Griffin’s chest, comments to other
co-workers to get the “big
breasted” woman in my office,
and constant badgering to be her
boyfriend. Miss Griffin as best as
she could, rebuffed all advances
by Mr. Neal. Mr. Neal was equally
verbally abusive.
93. Griffin v. City of Opa-Locka,
Case No. 98-1550, (S.D. Fla. 2000),
All this sexual and abusive
treatment of Miss Griffin over 4
months culminated in November
1995 when Mr. Neal coerced his
way into Miss Griffin’s apartment
after a city event and….raped her.
Griffin sued the City of Opa-Locka
for the sexual harassment & rape
and was awarded by a federal jury
500,000 dollars for the harassment
and 1.5 million dollars for the rape
incident.
96. No. The 1980 EEOC Guidelines on
Sexual Harassment do suggest
that conduct constituting sexual
harassment must be “conduct of a
sexual nature,” but it is just as
wrong and just as unlawful to
harass people with gender-based
conduct of a nonsexual nature.
Consider, for example, a man and
a woman each holding the same
kind of job in an organization. If
their supervisor gives demeaning
and inappropriate assignments
97. • (such as serving coffee,
picking up dry cleaning,
emptying a waste basket) to
the woman, but not to the
man, because of the woman’s
gender, that conduct, if
sufficiently severe or
pervasive, could amount to
harassment on the basis of
sex even though the
assignments are not sexual in
nature but whether it was
99. No. Sexual power plays by
supervisors constitute the most
widely publicized and easily
understood form of sexual
harassment. But harassment also
occurs when supervisors, co-
workers, or even non-employees
create a hostile environment
through unwelcome sexual
advances or demeaning gender-
based conduct. There have even
been cases where a subordinate
has sexually harassed a
supervisor.
100. Isn’t sexual harassment limited to
situations where supervisors make
sexual demands on subordinates?
Regarding harassment by non-
employees (clients, customers,
vendors, consultants, independent
contractors, and the like) the
employer’s ability to police unwelcome
conduct may be more limited than with
employees. For example, it is easier to
investigate and discipline an employee
than a customer. The employer still
must take reasonable steps to address
the situation once the matter comes to
its attention.
101. Can sexual harassment occur
without physical touching or
a threat to the employee’s
job?
102. • Yes. The nature of sexual
harassment may be purely verbal
or visual (pornographic photos
or graffiti on workplace walls, for
example), and it does not have to
involve any job loss. Any non-
sexual but gender-based
conduct that creates a work
environment that a reasonable
person would consider hostile
may amount to sexual
harassment in the workplace.
104. • Yes. Although sexual
harassment generally is
perpetrated by men against
women, any form of
unwelcome sexual advance
against employees of either
gender may be the basis for a
case of unlawful sexual
harassment.
(United States Supreme Court, 1998)
106. • Some courts have held that
individual employees cannot be
liable under Title VII. Some state
laws, however, do impose personal
liability on individuals for
perpetrating harassment. While
employers often provide a legal
defense for supervisors in a lawsuit,
an employer may be entitled, after a
court decision against it, to recover
damages and legal expenses from
a supervisor whose unauthorized
conduct created the problem to
begin with.
107.
108. I’m so mad at the person
who harassed me and at
my employer that I just
want to sue. Should I
even bother to complain
under my employer’s
sexual harassment
policy?
109. • Yes! You owe it to your employer
and to your co-workers to report
through the organization’s
channels to give the employer a
chance to solve the problem
promptly, before others are
affected. A prompt complaint is
also something that you owe
yourself, even if your sole
concern is to sue your employer.
If you fail to use internal
procedures, the employer’s
defense will be sure to use that
fact to argue that,
110. (1) the conduct
complained of never
occurred,
(2) the conduct was not
really unwelcome,
(3) the conduct was not
severe or pervasive
enough to create a hostile
environment, or
111. (4) the employer cannot be held
responsible for preventing or
correcting harassment that it did
not know about. Furthermore,
under the 1998 decision by the
U.S. Supreme Court in Ellerth
VS. Faragher-2002, if the
employer has an effective anti-
harassment policy that the
employee unreasonably fails to
use, the employer may win the
hostile environment lawsuit on
that ground alone.
113. The causes of sexual harassment
at work can be complex, and
steeped in socialization, politics,
and
psychology. Work relationships
can be quite intimate and intense,
and those involved share
common interests. Employee's
are dependant on each other for
teamwork and support, and are
dependant on their supervisor's
approval for opportunities and
career success.
114. Managers, Supervisors and
employers can grow
accustomed to the power
they have over their
employees. Such
closeness, influence, and
intensity can blur the
professional boundaries
and lead people to step
over the line.
115. • Politics can be a catalyst, and
problems caused by poor
management, workplace bullying,
frustration, and job/financial
insecurity, etc., can create hostile
environments that leak over into
working relationships. Personal
problems can also be a factor, and
sexual harassment can be a
symptom of the effects of life
traumas such as divorce and
other traumatic events that alter
one’s behavior and reason.
116. However, one of the most
common causes of sexual
harassment, is simple. One
gender finds the other
extremely attractive and
alluring. This tends to lead to
aggressive and unreasonable
behavior by the sexual
harasser, who normally may
not act in that manor. Often,
before the person knows it
themselves, they have gone too
far and created problems.
117. That is why when one
feels harassed, that
the problem is
immediately reported
and addressed before
it becomes a larger
issue or even a legal
case.
118. No occupation is immune from
sexual harassment; however,
reports of harassment of women
is higher in fields that have
traditionally excluded them,
including blue collar
environments, such as mining,
firefighting, law enforcement,
military, and white collar
environments, such as surgery
and technology. It has been
challenging for men in these
fields to adjust to women in the
ranks that have traditionally been
dominated by them for
119. Sexist or sexualized
environments-
Workplace environments full of sexual
joking, sexually explicit graffiti or
objects, viewing Internet
pornography, etc.--usually shape the
attitudes that male workers have
towards their female colleagues. For
example, in an work environment
where obscenities are common,
women are 3 times more likely to be
sexually harassed than in an
environment where such talk is not
tolerated. In environments where
sexual joking is common, women are
3 to 7 times more likely to be sexually
harassed. The “environment” sets the
124. Is Winking at someone sexual harassment?
In the real-time world, your body
language, including your facial
expressions, are ways to convey
your thoughts and feelings. A
wink can be flirty, friendly or an
acknowledgment of an inside joke
between two people. However, in
the virtual world, a wink typically
conveys interest. If someone winks
at you on a dating website, he's
letting you know that he likes your
profile -- or maybe just the photos
you posted. It might be up to you to
find out which it is.
125. Is Winking at someone sexual harassment?
Some people wink after making a
joke or sarcastic remark. When a
guy does this, he's making the
extra effort to establish a personal
understanding like saying, "You get
me, right?" He's likely just trying to
be friendly. To know if the wink
means more than just friendship,
pay attention to the rest of his body
language. Making eye contact and
holding your gaze indicate romantic
inclinations -- as does touching you.
This highly not recommended and
can present immediate concerns.
126. Is Winking at someone sexual harassment?
Common patterns of winking at
your fellow co-workers, especially,
a man on woman scenario can be
without question, harmless.
However, if this winking seems or
appears constant with any type of
flirty flair, then there are going to be
issues. If this type of behavior is
repetitive and the person requests
you stop and you do not, is that
sexual harassment? This is a grey
area, but, we would say No. It is
however, a nuisance and
harassment in it’s simplest form.
127. Winking can and usually is, a
signal of approval or satisfaction
130. • To create a sexually hostile
environment, unwelcome conduct
based on gender must meet two
additional requirements: (1) it must be
subjectively abusive to the person(s)
affected, and (2) it must be objectively
severe or pervasive enough to create
a work environment, that a
reasonable person would find
abusive. To determine whether
behavior is severe or pervasive
enough to create a hostile
environment, the finder of fact (a
court or jury) considers these factors:
132. The frequency of the unwelcome
discriminatory conduct;
The severity of the alleged
conduct
Whether the conduct was
physically threatening or
humiliating, or a mere offensive
utterance;
Whether the conduct
unreasonably interfered with work
performance;
The effect on the employee’s
psychological well-being; and
Whether the harasser was a
133. Respond Appropriately When
You Encounter Sexual
Harassment:
If you experience sexual harassment or
witness it, you should make a report to the
appropriate official. You do not have to report
the incident to your supervisor first, especially
if that is the person doing the harassing.
Before you report a problem, you might want
to try some self-help techniques, using the
DO’s and DON’Ts listed next.
134. Respond Appropriately When
You Encounter Sexual
Harassment:
If you do follow these self-help
suggestions, remember that sexual
harassment is an organizational
problem, and the employer wants to
know about it so it can take prompt and
appropriate action to ensure that no
further incidents occur, with the present
victim or other employees, in the future.
135. Respond Appropriately When
You Encounter Sexual
Harassment:
Report incidents immediately,
especially if they are recurring.
Employees who promptly report
harassing conduct can help their
organization as well as
themselves.
136. Do:
Admit that a problem
exists
Tell the offender
specifically what you
find offensive
Tell the offender that
his or her behavior is
bothering you
137. Do:
Say specifically what
you want or don’t
want to happen, such
as “please call me by
my name not Honey,”
or “please don’t tell
that kind of joke in
front of me.”
138. Don't:
Blame yourself for someone
else’s behavior, unless it truly
is in-offensive
Choose to ignore the
behavior, unless it is truly
inoffensive
Try to handle any severe or
recurring harassment
problem by yourself - get
help.
139. Be careful before your stupid. Maybe,
just maybe, fellow co-workers and the
HR Dept. may not take her complaints
seriously, but her husband certainly
will.
140. Saying NO to Sexual Harassment
and Inappropriate Behavior:
142. Turn Flirty into Professional:
If you should receive a flirty
cell text from your supervisor,
turn it around on the sender. If
a superior texts something like,
"You looked pretty in that dress
today," or “Your perfume really
caught my attention”… respond
with:
143. Turn Flirty into Professional:
"The meeting went well. Thanks for
your professional leadership”…
Specifically, you want to acknowledge
that you received the text, and at the
same time show that you will not engage
in personal matters….with finesse.
145. Sexual Harassment in our
High Tech Age: E-Mails:
• EMPLOYEES who send lewd jokes
around the office by e-mail could land
their companies with unlimited
compensation payments for sexual
harassment. Even when an offensive e-
mail is not sent directly to a colleague,
but is circulated to others in the same
workplace, it can constitute harassment.
So too can viewing pornographic images
on a computer screen next to a
colleague who finds them offensive and
or inappropriate.
146. Sexual Harassment in our
High Tech Age: E-Mails:
Electronic sexual harassment
is “a significant new issue”
for employers in the 2000’s. At
every stage, as technology has
the potential to improve lives, it
has the potential to have a
negative impact in other ways. It
would be quite possible for an
offensive e-mail to be part of an
environment that constituted
sexual harassment.
147. Sexual Harassment in our
High Tech Age: E-Mails:
Because sexual harassment by e-
mail is silent, immediate and
almost indistinguishable from
proper work, it can be difficult for
employers to detect perpetrators.
Today’s world makes it harder
for employers to guard against
sexual harassment because it
could be conducted below their
radar. You can’t always tell what
people are sending on their
computers.
148. Maybe this is an indicator that
she doesn't like your messages..
150. Using “Common Sense”..
The Swire Effect:
• Sending lewd messages via the office e-mail
system can be highly dangerous, as Claire Swire
knows only too well. In London, in December
2000, the Public Relations executive sent an e-
mail & lewd picture of herself to her lawyer
boyfriend Bradly Chait, congratulating him on his
sexual prowess.
• Mr. Chait forwarded the e-mail to six friends, and
by the end of the week an estimated 2 million
people had seen it. The lawyer was disciplined for
his indiscretion and, six years later, the
phenomenon is still known as the “Swire
effect”.
152. Appropriate and In-Appropriate
office attire are always
personal decisions that can
influence others workplace
behavior…Attire can be
directly linked to sexual
harassment conduct.
153. A lawsuit just waiting to happen...
Prevent it before it happens..
154. However risqué a woman’s attire
maybe, she still has a presumed right
not to be sexually harassed. So, if you
do get hit with a complaint, don’t blame
her for your behavior.
160. The Office Romance:
Avoiding the temptation
9 out of 10 workplace
relationships or "office
romances" don't work and
end up in disaster, which in
most cases usually end up in
in some type of litigation that
is always costly to the
company and reputations.
161. The Office Romance:
These office flings usually are
born of heavy mutual attraction
or desire to advance and often
end in ugliness as one party does
not want to commit further than
the other, or one party did not
receive the anticipated promotion
or pay raise they were led to
believe they would receive.
This is a recipe for disaster.
162. The Office Romance:
Mangers and subordinates
must refrain the desire or
temptation to become
romantically involved.
These situations
statistically always end up
ugly and nobody wins in
the long run.
163. The Office Romance:
If a manager or supervisor
becomes seriously involved with
a subordinate- and vice versus,
both parties should meet with
their perspective Human
Resource departments to discuss
viable options and the best
course of action to insure that
company regulations are being
followed and to avoid potential
future problems down the road.
164. Office Romance: The 3 Critical Factors
1. Danger of perceived or actual
compromise at work.
When in an office romance, your life will
go under a microscope. Members of the
team will be watching to see if your ‘love’
will get special breaks and concessions,
awards and privileges. The temptation
may be there to turn a blind eye to
infractions by your love interest, creating
conflict among the team.
165. Office Romance: The 3 Critical Factors
1. Danger of perceived or actual
compromise at work.
There may be perceived loss of trust,
respect, and confidentiality as co-
workers may be concerned about
company business becoming
‘pillow talk’.
166. Office Romance: The 3 Critical Factors
2. Danger of nasty public breakup and
the consequences
Breaking up under any circumstances is
hardly pleasant business; imagine
breaking up under the scrutiny of your
workplace. Worse yet, if the love interest
fallen from grace is a direct part of your
work team or department, it can be
awkward and uncomfortable for all
concerned and in some cases, there can
be rudeness, snide remarks, insults,
unveiled resentment, and even open
arguments. Not good business
167. Office Romance: The 3 Critical Factors
3. Danger of having to transfer,
quit or lose your job
• Finally, you can stand to lose it all in an
office romance. Everything you know at
work can change, just to keep the peace.
Depending on company policy, office
romance can present a conflict of interest
or violation of what that company allows,
causing one party to either transfer to
another department or location or leave
the job altogether.
168. Office Romance: The 3 Critical Factors
3. Danger of having to transfer,
quit or lose your job
• Worse yet, your love interest may be
the one to determine that you should
leave because the romance did not
work out; then you might have a
wrongful termination to defend,
costing time, money, and more
emotional energy, not to mention a
tarnished professional reputation.
178. The consequences of
Sexual Harassment:
• As the picture in the previous
slide illustrates, a man is in
handcuffs. Although this image
may appear to be symbolic to the
subject at hand, it is very real.
Although it is almost unheard of
to be actually cuffed and charged
with sexual harassment in the
workplace, the reality of being
actually charged, is real.
179. The consequences of
Sexual Harassment:
• Although most cases do play out in
the courtroom or conference room,
some forms of sexual harassment
involve actual unwanted touching or a
sexual battery. Simply touching,
grabbing, or fondling another person
and or employee can constitute a
sexual battery if that action was
unwanted or consent to do so, was
clearly not given.
180. Sexual Harassment can take a
heavy toll on a person, their
performance, and their
families…
182. Demeaning a woman in the
corporate workplace is not
necessarily sexual
harassment nor is it such
illegal behavior. However,
demeaning or berating
behavior toward any
employee is, absolutely,
unequivocally,
unacceptable
183. Workplace bullying is not isolated
to male on male nor is it soley
female on female or female to male
or vice versa. It is unacceptable
conduct.
185. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
There are a number of steps
that you can take to reduce
the risk of sexual
harassment occurring in
your workplace. Although
you may not be able to take
all of the steps listed below,
you should take as many of
them as you can.
186. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
The number one key
for companies
fighting claims, is
that they made
legitimate efforts to
confront and correct
187. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
• Adopt a clear sexual
harassment policy. In your
employee handbook, you
should have a policy
devoted to sexual
harassment.
• That policy should:
188. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
Define sexual harassment
State in no uncertain terms that
you will not tolerate sexual
harassment
State that you will discipline or
fire any wrongdoers
Set out a clear procedure for
filing sexual harassment
complaints
189. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
State that you will
investigate fully any
complaint that you receive,
and
State that you will not tolerate
retaliation against anyone
who complains about sexual
harassment
190. Sexual Harassment-
Strategies for Prevention
–Train employees:
At least once a year, conduct
training sessions for employees.
These sessions should teach
employees what sexual
harassment is, explain that
employees have a right to a
workplace free of sexual
harassment, review your
complaint procedure, and
191. Strategies for
Prevention:
Train supervisors and managers:
At least once a year, conduct training
sessions for supervisors and
managers that are separate from the
employee sessions. The sessions
should educate the managers and
supervisors about sexual harassment
and explain how to deal with
complaints. Dealing with complaints
quickly and responsively is important.
Let your employees know they have a
right to work in an environment that is
free of sexual harassment.
192. This type of strategy
prevention is highly not
recommended.
194. Sexual- Suggestive comments do not require
patterns or a continuum. Although it may not
meet the legal criteria for “harassment”, just
one sexual in nature comment is in-
appropriate and cause for termination.
195. Men and woman make
unwanted sexual comments
about each other all the time.
Sometimes these comments
are made about them without
their knowledge. Even if these
comments are made out of
their presence, it still
constitutes harassment.
196. I am who I am and I wont be
harassed under any circumstances
197. The Rights of One:
Unwanted and or unsolicited
comments directed at a
fellow employee concerning
his/her physical anatomy is
strictly prohibited. Even
“subtle” comments that you
may think are harmless, are
forbidden. Any comment or
suggestive remarks aimed at
one’s anatomy is sexual in
198. All corporate personnel, regardless of
gender or preference, deserve to be
treated with dignity and
professionalism.
201. Sexual Harassment:
When the line is crossed:
There are many ways that sexual
harassment develops. Different
people have different definitions
of what constitutes sexual
harassment as well as
appropriate counter measures to
such behavior. That is why this
training presentation is so vital
to the corporate office
environment so that all
concerned will be “educated” on
202. Sexual Harassment:
Defining the process:
Sexual harassment of an
individual begins and ends like
this:
1. A male or female employee
finds someone attractive or
alluring.
2. The male or female employee
makes gestures that they are
interested in them personally.
3. The male or female employee
203. Defining the process:
4. The employee makes it clear
they are not interested in
anything personal or sexual to
the other.
5. The offending employee begins
to make “unwanted” advances
either by continued touching, e-
mails, texting, hand written
notes, verbal gestures, or
sexual images, etc.
6. The employee makes it clear
they are not interested and to
204. Defining the process:
7. This is where, technically,
sexual harassment begins,
when the employee has stated
that you must STOP with your
current behavior and personal
inquiries.
8. If the continued pattern of
unacceptable behavior
continues and the offended
employee makes “multiple”
requests to stop and it does
not, this is sexual harassment
205. Defining the process:
9. At this point, the employee being
allegedly harassed must make a
formal complaint against the
offender to HR for proper follow
up, correction, and resolution.
10. If the HR dept. fails to properly
correct the inappropriate
behavior or document said
incident and the harassment
continues, then the company is
now liable for damages.
206. Defining the process:
This is where many people
not fully educated on sexual
harassment guidelines and
definitions make the common
misperceptions.
A company is not legally
liable by the sexual
harassment behavior in itself
or the length of time that said
harassment has transpired.
207. Defining the process:
They are “liable” and
culpable when they have
been informed of said
unacceptable behavior,
the unacceptable
behavior continues, and
the unacceptable
behavior is not
“corrected”.
215. Spotlight- False Accusations
made by a woman:
False allegations of sexual
harassment can occur by both
genders. But previous case studies
and retractions unequivocally show
that these claims are made by the
female gender. False claims (knowing
full well that the claim is bogus) of
sexual harassment are a serious
issue and can be devastating to the
person it is leveled against. In some
instances, people have actually taken
their own life due to the painful
216. False Accusations:
Making false claims of sexual harassment can
destroy one’s career and even their marriage.
(Disclaimer: This presentation and the Instructor does not
endorse nor defend the Herman Cain accusations)
217. Spotlight- False Accusations
made by a woman:
The real issue with women
making a false allegation of
sexual harassment, is not
so much the accusation
itself, but rather the way
such an accusation is
treated.
218. Spotlight- False Accusations
made by a woman:
For example, if a man and a woman
are in an elevator together and the
woman subsequently makes a claim
that she was groped by the man, what
happens? The ugly truth of the matter
is that the man is guilty until proven
innocent. However, as there is no way
to prove innocence, the man
becomes permanently guilty by
default. This is a very dangerous
culture to foster and ripe for abuse.
219. Spotlight- False Accusations
made by a woman:
The negative associations that
have become attached to men in
our minds are very, very strong
indeed, and the simultaneous
victimhood and virtue of women
is equally as strong. What this
means is that we as a society are
instantly primed and ready to
believe the very worst of men or
at a minimum, the core element
of the allegation without a
220. Spotlight- False Accusations
made by a woman:
This is what makes it so
easy for a woman to make
false claims of abuse and
be instantly believed
regardless of the good
character of the accused
man. But, if it is shown
that the allegation was
clearly untrue:
222. –Rising or more frequent cases
of false accusations relevant to
sexual harassment can dilute or
weaken legitimate claims of
sexual harassment. This can be
harmful to many women when
trying to convey or prove their
complaint of inappropriate
conduct.
False allegations and
ruined reputations…
223. “Crying Wolf” only serves to
sabotage the very systems
and mechanisms in place to
combat and deal with sexual
harassment. So…Don’t do
it….
False allegations and
ruined reputations…
225. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) has issued a new
Compliance Manual section on Threshold
Issues. This new section replaces Section 605:
Jurisdiction and nine other Commission policy
statements. It is part of an ongoing EEOC
project to update and streamline its
Compliance Manual, the basic policy document
for its investigators.
226. What are Threshold Issues? Threshold
issues are requirements that an
individual must satisfy in order to have a
legal claim under the EEO statutes.
When a charge is filed with the EEOC,
the investigator determines whether
threshold requirements are satisfied
before considering the substantive
claim of discrimination.
227. The new section discusses the threshold
requirements under all of the statutes
enforced by the EEOC: Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act of 1967, Title I of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the
Equal Pay Act of 1963, and section 501 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Many
threshold requirements are the same under
all of the statutes.
246. Footnotes and disclosure:
– Portions of this presentation were researched
and compiled from the following resources:
– Marie Claire Magazine, May 2005 Issue
– U.S. EEOC Commission
– Jill Spiegel, author of How to Talk to Anyone
About Anything! The Secrets to Connecting
– The Reg, June 2006
– United States Supreme Court Reports
– Sexual Harassment Support- Online
– Equal Rights.Org
