Sexual harassment: Here are some of the biggest cases

29 C.F.R. § 1604.11(f). An effective preventive programshould include an explicit policy against sexual harassment that isclearly and regularly communicated to employees and effectivelyimplemented. The employer should affirmatively raise the subjectwith all supervisory and non- supervisory employees, express strongdisapproval, and explain the sanctions for harassment. The employershould also have a procedure for resolving sexual harassmentcomplaints. The procedure should be designed to "encourage victimsof harassment to come forward" and should not require a victim tocomplain first to the offending supervisor. See Vinson, 106 S. Ct. at 2408. It should ensure confidentiality asmuch as possible and provide effective remedies, includingprotection of victims and witnesses against retaliation.

Gretchen Carlson on why more sexual harassment cases …

Example - Charging Party () alleges that her supervisorsubjected her to unwelcome sexual advances that created a hostilework environment. The investigation into her charge discloses thather supervisor began making intermittent sexual advances to her inJune, 1987, but she did not complain to management about theharassment. After the harassment continued and worsened, she fileda charge with in June, 1988. There is no evidence welcomedthe advances. states that she feared that complaining about theharassment would cause her to lose her job. She also states thatshe initially believed she could resolve the situation herself, butas the harassment became more frequent and severe, she said sherealized that intervention by was necessary. The investigatordetermines is credible and concludes that the delay incomplaining does not undercut claim.


Read about 6 Famous Cases of Sexual Harassment

Sexual Harassment Prevention & Awareness Seminars, Courses & Workshops are available throughout the United States:

Sexual harassment can occur in the workplace or learning environment, like a school or university. It can happen in many different scenarios, including after-hours conversations, exchanges in the hallways, and non-office settings of employees or peers.


Policy Guidance on Current Issues of Sexual Harassment

2) Lower Courts' Decisions - After trial, thedistrict court found the plaintiff was not the victim of sexualharassment and was not required to grant sexual favors as acondition of employment or promotion. Vinson v. Taylor, 22EPD ¶ 30,708 (D.D.C. 1980). Without resolving the conflictingtestimony, the district court found that if a sexual relationshiphad existed between plaintiff and her supervisor, it was "avoluntary one...having nothing to do with her continuedemployment." The district court nonetheless went on to hold thatthe employer was not liable for its supervisor's actions because ithad no notice of the alleged sexual harassment; although theemployer had a policy against discrimination and an internalgrievance procedure, the plaintiff had never lodged acomplaint.

SUBJECT: Policy Guidance on Current Issues of Sexual Harassment

3) Supreme Court's Opinion - The Supreme Courtagreed that the case should be remanded for consideration under the"hostile environment" theory and held that the proper inquiryfocuses on the "unwelcomeness" of the conduct rather than the"voluntariness" of the victim's participation. But the Court heldthat the court of appeals erred in concluding that employers arealways automatically liable for sexual harassment by theirsupervisory employees.

Casey Affleck Sexual Harassment Controversy: What ..

a) "Hostile Environment" Violates Title VII - TheCourt rejected the employer's contention that Title VII prohibitsonly discrimination that causes "economic" or "tangible" injury:"Title VII affords employees the right to work in an environmentfree from discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult whetherbased on sex, race, religion, or national origin. 106 S. Ct. at2405. Relying on the 's Guidelines definition of harassment, the court held that a plaintiffmay establish a violation of Title VII "by proving thatdiscrimination based on sex has created a hostile or abusive workenvironment." Id. The Court quoted the Eleventh Circuit'sdecision in Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897, 902, 29EPD ¶ 32,993 (11th Cir. 1982):

Sexual Harassment Law in California: Explained!

Sexual harassment which creates a hostile or offensiveenvironment for members of one sex is every bit the arbitrarybarrier to sexual equality at the workplace that racial harassmentis to racial equality. Surely, a requirement that a man or womanrun a gauntlet of sexual abuse in return for the privilege of beingallowed to work and made a living can be as demeaning anddisconcerting as the harshest of racial epithets.