Sexual Harassment

Quid Pro Quo Harassment

Quid pro quo harassment typically occurs when a supervisor or other employee with higher authority than the victim requests sexual favors in exchange for employment benefits. Quid pro quo harassment was first defined in Williams v. Saxbe, which was also the first case where the courts determined that sexual harassment constitutes gender discrimination. For quid pro quo harassment to occur, the victim's reaction to unwelcome sexual advances must result in a “tangible employment action,” and the perpetrator must be in the position to affect these tangible employment actions. A tangible employment action is any significant change in the terms of employment, such as hiring, discharge, promotion, demotion, compensation and benefit changes, or reassignment. An employer is strictly liable for quid pro quo harassment by supervisors.

Hostile Work Environment Harassment

Hostile work environment harassment typically occurs when employees are repeatedly subjected to unwelcome sexual remarks, unwelcome physical contact, or offensive materials of a sexual nature at the workplace, and this unreasonably interferes with their ability to work or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. Hostile work environment harassment does not require that an employee suffer any adverse tangible employment action or that the harassment come from a supervisor or superior. The courts first defined hostile work environment harassment in Bundy v. Jackson (1981). Later, the Supreme Court, in Meritor Saving Bank, FSB v. Vinson (1986), ruled that hostile work environment harassment occurs when the conduct is unwelcome and severe or pervasive enough to significantly alter the conditions of employment or create an abusive working environment. Determining whether the conduct rises to the level of hostile work environment is subjective, and in Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993), the Supreme Court offered guidance in determining hostile work environment by applying a “reasonable person” standard for the victim and looking at all the circumstances, including the frequency and severity of the conduct. Generally, the conduct must be sufficiently pervasive or severe as to create an abusive work environment for a reasonable person.

...