When it comes to rooting out sexual harassment, employers and employees have responsibilities
A recent appeals court ruling out of the Fifth Circuit should serve as a lesson to employers that providing training and responding quickly to sexual harassment allegations can minimize troubles down the road.
The case, however, also shows that employees have a responsibility to act when they are the victims of harassment.
Delayed complaint was employee’s downfall
In this case, a supervisor verbally and physically harassed a subordinate for 10 months. Then the employee requested, and was granted, a transfer away from this supervisor. The transfer was not a “tangible employment action,” however, which the U.S. Supreme Court has defined as, “a significant change in employment status, such as hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment with significantly different responsibilities, or a decision causing a significant change in benefits.”
Only after the harassment stopped did the employee file a complaint, citing fear of retaliation as the reason for the delay.
The circuit court dismissed the claim, and the appeals court affirmed that decision. The circuit court’s opinion said that all harassment victims risk retaliation when they complain. But without evidence to support these fears, which the plaintiff did not have, the delay in complaining was unreasonable.
Further, after a complaint was made, the employer began investigating the next day, and the employee had no further interaction with the harassing supervisor. This, the court said, satisfied the “reasonable care” argument in the employer’s defense.
“Reasonable care” in this context means the employer demonstrates that:
- It exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct any sexual harassment promptly, and
- The employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative or corrective opportunities the defendant had provided to avoid the harm otherwise.
It was the employee’s job to understand sexual harassment
How did the courts know the employee in this case was aware of “preventive or corrective opportunities?” The court knew because some of the employee’s job duties were to receive and acknowledge internal memoranda and policies about reporting sexual harassment. The employee also was responsible for instructing other employees on how to file sexual harassment claims and teach them about the employer’s firm 45-day deadline for filing such claims.
Key to remember: If employees are thoroughly trained in recognizing and reporting harassment, AND swift action is taken to investigate claims and remedy harassment situations, the chances of an employer being held liable may be decreased.
Candace E. Taylor, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Denis McDonough, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, Defendant—Appellee.