Sexual harassment is a form of employment discrimination. It involves unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature at a workplace. Victims may include individuals who are not being harassed directly but are affected by the sexual conduct. The harasser may be the victim’s supervisor or boss, a supervisor of another department, a coworker, or a nonemployee. In addition, the harasser and the victim may be of the same gender.
Sexual harassment is considered a form of gender discrimination and is prohibited by federal law under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), an independent federal agency, is empowered to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thus the EEOC is empowered to enforce laws against sexual harassment, which is also prohibited under state laws.
Sexual harassment can occur in two types of situations. The first, known as quid pro quo harassment, is sexual harassment that occurs when an individual’s employment status implicitly or explicitly depends on their submission to or rejection of sexual advances or other actions of a sexual nature. This includes situations in which decisions to hire, fire, promote, or demote an individual are dependent on whether that individual acquiesces to the harasser’s sexual requests. The second, known as hostile environment harassment, is sexual harassment that occurs when the unwelcome sexual advances or sexual actions create a hostile or intimidating work atmosphere or interfere with the victim’s work performance, even when the victim is not fired or loses any pay for failing to comply with the unwelcome advances or actions. This may include constructive discharge, which refers to the practice of making working conditions uncomfortable in an effort to cause employees to resign.
An individual who believes he or she is a victim of sexual harassment can file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC or the appropriate state agency if state or local law also covers the charge. Charges of sexual harassment must be filed with the EEOC before private lawsuits concerning sexual harassment may be pursued. Charges must be filed with the EEOC within 180 days from the date of the alleged violations. This deadline may be extended to 300 days from the date of the alleged violations if state or local laws also cover the charge. If the EEOC finds that the charges are valid, the EEOC may prosecute them on the victim’s behalf. If the EEOC decides not to prosecute the charges, then it may issue the victim a “right to sue” notice that allows the victim to file a private lawsuit in an appropriate court. The lawsuit must be filed within strict time limits, generally within 90 days of receiving a “right to use” notice from the EEOC.
If a court finds that sexual harassment occurred, the damages awarded to the victim may include back pay, hiring, promotion, reinstatement, or other remedies that would put the victim in the position he or she would have been if the sexual harassment had not occurred. A court may also order the employer to pay the victim’s attorney’s fees, expert-witness fees, and court costs. The victim may also receive punitive damages if the employer acted with malice or reckless indifference (as defined legally). In addition, a court may order the employer to take corrective or preventive measures to ensure that sexual harassment does not recur in the future.
In 1995 the EEOC prosecuted Del Laboratories, Inc. (Del), a cosmetics and pharmaceutical manufacturer, in a sexual-harassment lawsuit. Del settled the lawsuit for approximately $1.2 million dollars to be paid to the 15 victims who filed the charges against the company. As part of the settlement, the court ordered Del to provide all its employees with training for the prevention of sexual harassment and to revise its sexual-harassment policy.
In 1998 Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America (Mitsubishi) settled a sexual-harassment lawsuit (prosecuted by the EEOC) for $34 million to be paid to 350 victims. The settlement agreement required Mitsubishi to revise its sexual-harassment policy; revise its corporate policy to encourage employees to file complaints about sexual-harassment policy violations; impose substantial discipline (including termination of employment) on managers and supervisors who engage in sexual harassment; and provide mandatory sexual-harassment training for managers, supervisors, and employees. The court also appointed monitors to assess whether Mitsubishi was complying with the requirements of the settlement agreement. In 2000 the court-appointed monitors reported that Mitsubishi was in compliance and that sexual harassment was under control at the Mitsubishi plant.
Given the high costs arising out of claims of sexual harassment including litigation costs, the costs of implementing court-ordered corrective or preventative measures, possible loss of employee productivity due to a hostile work environment, and the loss of reputation if an organization is found guilty of sexual harassment, it is prudent for organizations to take steps to prevent sexual harassment. Organizations should develop an effective sexual-harassment policy and effective complaint procedures so that charges of sexual harassment are dealt with speedily and discipline is imposed on harassers. Organizations should also continually train all employees to be sensitive to issues of sexual harassment and continually remind employees of the organization’s policy and the consequences of violating it.