Harassment in the Workplace under Employment Law
Harassment in the Workplace: Overview
Harassment in the workplace occurs when an employee is subjected to unwelcome conduct based on protected characteristics such as race, sex, religion, or other personal attributes, which creates a hostile or offensive work environment or results in adverse employment decisions.
Types of Harassment
Quid Pro Quo Harassment:
Occurs when employment decisions (like promotions or continued employment) depend on submission to unwelcome sexual advances or other discriminatory conduct.
Example: A supervisor demands sexual favors in exchange for a raise.
Hostile Work Environment Harassment:
Happens when unwelcome conduct based on protected characteristics is so severe or pervasive that it creates an intimidating, hostile, or abusive work environment.
Example: Offensive jokes, slurs, or persistent unwanted comments.
Elements of Workplace Harassment
To establish harassment, generally the following elements must be present:
Unwelcome conduct: The behavior is not invited or solicited and is regarded as offensive by the victim.
Based on protected characteristics: Such as sex, race, religion, national origin, etc.
Severe or pervasive: The conduct is serious enough or happens frequently enough to affect the working conditions or create a hostile environment.
Employer liability: The employer is responsible if they knew or should have known about the harassment and failed to take appropriate action.
Key Case Law Illustrations
1. Quid Pro Quo Harassment
Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986)
The U.S. Supreme Court recognized for the first time that a claim of sexual harassment could arise under employment law, establishing quid pro quo and hostile work environment as grounds.
In this case, the Court held that a claim could be made if the employee was subjected to unwelcome sexual advances and suffered tangible employment consequences for refusal.
2. Hostile Work Environment
Harris v. Forklift Systems (1993)
The Court clarified the standard for hostile work environment harassment, ruling that the conduct must be “severe or pervasive enough to create an abusive working environment.”
It emphasized that a single instance might not be enough unless it’s extremely severe.
The Court rejected the need to show psychological harm; the focus is on whether a reasonable person would find the environment hostile.
Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services (1998)
This case expanded the definition of harassment by ruling that harassment can occur between members of the same sex.
It underscored that harassment is not limited to male-female interactions but applies whenever conduct is based on sex or other protected traits.
Employer Liability
Employers may be held liable if they knew or should have known about the harassment and failed to take prompt and effective remedial action.
The employer’s liability may vary depending on whether the harasser is a supervisor or coworker.
Defenses Employers May Use
If the employer took reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassment.
If the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities.
Summary Table
| Aspect | Description | Case Example |
|---|---|---|
| Quid Pro Quo Harassment | Employment benefits conditioned on submission | Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson |
| Hostile Work Environment | Severe or pervasive conduct creating hostility | Harris v. Forklift Systems |
| Same-Sex Harassment | Harassment not limited by sex of parties | Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore |
| Employer Liability | Failure to address harassment | Various cases from employer responses |
How Courts Analyze Harassment Claims
Courts typically look at:
Frequency and severity of conduct.
Whether the conduct was physically threatening or humiliating.
Impact on the victim’s work performance.
Whether a reasonable person in the victim’s position would find the environment hostile.
Conclusion
Workplace harassment undermines the dignity and rights of employees and is taken seriously under employment law principles. The law protects employees from both quid pro quo and hostile work environment harassment, holding employers accountable for maintaining a safe and respectful workplace.
RELATED Blog
0 comments