Search
The Employer Handbook Blog
Articles Posted in Sexual Harassment
In the County of Yolo, 100 hugs and a painfully awkward kiss aren’t sexual harassment #YOLO
What else is there to blog about after reading a federal court opinion about Yolo (You Only Live Once) and sexual harassment?
Geez. Last night, I could have peed plutonium while flaming monkeys sprang forth from my word hole, and I still would have blogged Yolo.
More on Yolo after the jump…
* * *
Court: It’s ok to try to hit a co-worker with your car after grabbing her crotch (twice)
The opinion contains the words “fingered,” “genital area,” and “sexual assault,” plus an allegation that the assailant tried to hit the plaintiff with her car in the mall parking lot. But, the court concluded that there was no sexual harassment, because none of these events “affected the conditions of her employment.”
** napalms Washington-bound resume; shreds ashes **
Real and Spectacular! A true Seinfeld-ian claim of sexual harassment
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RvNS7JfcMM
Before law school was even on the radar for me, I knew that coitus on office furniture was a workplace no-no. And ignorance is not a defense.
But, maybe Seinfeld isn’t a thing in Indiana.
Dating app maker Tinder sued for, you guessed it, sexual harassment
I’m often asked, “Eric, where do you find this stuff?”
Why TMZ, of course. Break ’em off TMZ:
“Whitney Wolfe claims in a new lawsuit — obtained by TMZ — she was mercilessly brutalized by the other execs who wanted to remove her title because no one would take a site like Tinder seriously if they knew it was founded by a 24-year-old chick.
Court: Two butt grabs from a male boss would not offend an objectively, reasonable female
Welcome to Alabama, where they see your one-grope rule and raise you two grabs of the derriere.
Why? Because, according to this recent federal court opinion, the average female employee would not find getting her ass grabbed twice by a male supervisor to be offensive.
Now remember, that for a woman to prove sexual harassment, she must show five things:
Yes, you can have a hostile work environment based on sexual stereotyping.
We’ve talked a fair amount about sexual stereotyping at the ole Handbook.
Here I discussed the cluster created by offering crap assignments to a male employee because he fails to conform to a male stereotype.
And of course, we have my “Ravishing Rick Rude” theory of same-sex harassment, which a federal appellate court crapped all over.
Your contractor is a sexual harasser? You may still be on the hook.
Generally, a typical sexual harassment claim involves a supervisor or manager or co-worker making unwelcome sexual advances towards another employee.
But what if, instead of the harasser being one of your employees, it’s an independent contractor.
Does that absolve your company from liability? Is it a valid defense if one of your employees sues you for sexual harassment to point the finger outside of the company?
Plaintiff demands that a court order her alleged sexual harasser to photograph his penis for inspection
As an employment lawyer, part of my practice involves training employees and supervisors on employee handbooks. Most often, my training focuses on respect in the workplace.
During these sessions, I employ many techniques to discourage the workforce from engaging in behavior that could create a hostile work environment. Usually, I’ll put it like this:
“If you would feel uncomfortable sitting in a witness box while having to explain your behavior to a federal jury, then it’s not something that you should do in the workplace.”
2 million reasons to avoid the EEOC’s same-sex-harassment crosshairs
Last night, I read this press release from the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, announcing a $2 million recovery for 50 male employees of a New Mexico automobile dealership.
What happened, you say? From the press release:
“In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged a former lot manager, James Gallegos, under the direction of Charles Ratliff, Jr., then general manager, with subjecting a class of men to egregious forms of sexual harassment, including shocking sexual comments, frequent solicitations for oral sex, and regular touching, grabbing, and biting of male workers on their buttocks and genitals. The EEOC also alleged that Pitre retaliated against male employees who objected to the sexually hostile work environment. During the pendency of the lawsuit, the retaliatory actions of Pitre raised such concern that a U.S. District Court judge granted a preliminary injunction against Pitre, prohibiting the dealership and all of its agents from threatening or engaging in retaliatory actions against case participants.”