Sexual Harassment Prevention Training Now Mandatory for California Employers
Christopher E. Cobey and David N. Goldman of Littler Mendelson, P.C.
Prudent employers have trained managers and employees on preventing unlawful discrimination and harassment in the workplace for years. Such training helps employers avoid conflicts that result in litigation and can also help defend against lawsuits if they arise. This wise course of action has become a legal responsibility since Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 1825 on September 29, 2004.
Labor & Employment: May 1999
Brobeck Phleger & Harrison LLP
This update reviews Kohler v. Inter-Tel Technologies's recent decision extending the Title VII Sexual Harassment affirmative defense claim to California FEHA claims.
California Supreme Court Affirms Strict Liability for Supervisor Sexual Harassment But Applies "Avoidable Consequences" Doctrine to Limit Damages
Catherine L. Dehlin of Quarles & Brady LLP
In a highly anticipated decision for employment lawyers and their clients, on November 24, 2003, the California Supreme Court ruled in State Department of Health Services v. McGinnis that California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) imposes strict liability on employers for all acts of sexual harassment by a supervisor. However, the Court also gave some hope to employers having to defend such cases.
Retaliatory Harassment Actionable under Title VII
Bodman LLP
In a case of first impression, the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that retaliatory harassment b.
U.S. Supreme Court Issues Important Rulings on Employer Liability for Sexual Harassment
Duff, White & Turner, LLC
On June 26, 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two rulings that will make it easier for employees who are sexuall.
New California Law Requires Sexual Harassment Training For All Supervisory Employees
Catherine L. Dehlin of Quarles & Brady LLP
On September 29, 2004, California's Governor approved legislation that requires California employers that regularly employ 50 or more employees (including independent contractors, temporary employees, and employees located outside of California) to provide all supervisory employees with two hours of classroom or other effective interactive sexual harassment training. Under the new law simply watching a video is probably not enough.
January 1999 Civil Rights Alert
Brown Schwartz & Patterson
SEXUAL HARASSMENT-UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT-EMPLOYER LIABLE EVEN ABSENT ADVERSE JOB CONSEQUENCES: The United S.
Supreme Court Finds Employers Liable for Sexual Harassment for Supervisors, but Creates Affirmative Defense
Mary Anne Ackourey of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP
The United States Supreme Court in two landmark decisions has outlined the circumstances in whi.
Complaints To Wrong Managers
Sandra K. Weeks of Parsons Behle & Latimer
A recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit demonstrates the importance of having a well-drafted and enforced anti-harassment policy. The employees in the case claimed that the store manager at a Publix Supermarket created a hostile work environment through inappropriate touching and comments.
Complaint Procedures to Limit Employee Liability
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
Watch For . . . Faragher v. Boca Raton,111 F.3d 1530 (11th Cir.), cert.granted, __U.S.__, 118 S.Ct. .
Outside Employee Investigations Must Comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act
Momkus McCluskey, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission has determined that an employer who hires an outside firm to conduct an employee.
Sexual Harassment--Employer's Liability for Supervisor's Conduct Clarified By U.S. Supreme Court
Cooley Godward Kronish LLP
This alert discusses the impact of the United States Supreme Court decision regarding vicarious liability of the employer towards the actions of their supervisors in a sexual harassment context.
Sexual Harassment and Vicarious Liability after FARAGHER and ELLERTH
McLain & Merritt, P.C.
BACKGROUND For sometime now, different standards have been applied by the various federal circuit appellate courts.
Hostile Work Claim Without Tangible Employment Action
Fargarson & Brooke
Employers can be held liable for the illegal conduct of supervisors if the conduct creates a hostile work.
Supreme Court Clarifies Employer Liability For Sexual Harassment By Supervisors--Client Alert: July 1998
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
In 1998, the US Supreme Court decided two long awaited employment discrimination cases, clarifying the law with respect to employer liability for acts of sexual harassment by supervisors. This Client Alert summarizes the Court's decisions and focuses on their practical effect, both on litigation and sexual harassment prevention.
Supreme Court Clarifies Application of Faragher/Ellerth Defense Where Employees Claim Constructive Discharge
Joel W. Rice of Fisher & Phillips LLP
In a significant percentage of sexual harassment cases, the employer's first notice of any problem is after the complaining employee has quit and filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or a state agency. Typically, the employee claims that the very same supervisory conduct that amounted to a hostile environment (and, hence, actionable sexual harassment) also forced the employee to resign. The employee then complains that his or her constructive discharge was a "tangible employment action" that prevents the employer from asserting the now familiar Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense to liability in instances of supervisory sexual harassment.
The Likelihood of Employer Liability for Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Has Increased Based upon Recent Supreme Court Decisions
Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP
The United States Supreme Court recently issued two decisions in the area of sexual harassment. These cases discus.
Landmark Rulings Regarding Sexual Harassment
Loeb & Loeb LLP
Two major decisions published by the Supreme Court last week, Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth and Faragher v.
Raising an Affirmative Defense to Constructive-Discharge Claims in Hostile-Work-Environment Cases
Athena M. Papachronis Herman of Benassi & Benassi, P.C.
The United States Supreme Court has issued a "must read" regarding Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Pennsylvania State Police v Suders, the Court established under what circumstances an employer may assert an affirmative defense to a claim of a hostile work environment created by a supervisor that culminates in a constructive discharge.
Sexual Harassment-The Roadmap to Avoid Liability
Michelle E. Coburn of Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP
This article outlines the path an employer must travel to sustain the affirmative defense in sexual harassment lawsuits.
Supreme Court Issues New Rules on Sexual Harassment
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
In two decisions issued on Friday, June 26, 1998, the United States Supreme Court has reworked the legal standards .
Recent California Supreme Court Ruling on the Scope of the FEHA
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
This article summarizes the Carrisales v. Department of Corrections decision whereby the Court held that coworkers who are not in a "supervisory relationship" with the victim cannot be held personally liable for harassment under the FEHA.
ELLERTH And FARAGHER: Applying The Supreme Court's "Delphic Pronouncement" On Employers' Vicarious Liability For Sexual Harassment
Bodman LLP
Last summer, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions, Burlington Industries, Inc v Ellerth and Faragher v City .
U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Employer Liability for Sexual Harassment by Supervisors
Bodman LLP
In two opinions issued on June 26, 1998, Burlington Industries Inc v Ellerth and Faragher v City of Boca Raton, the.
Employers Liable for Supervisors' Sexual Harrassment Even if No Adverse Action Taken
While everyone in Washington was focusing on sexual harassment as a political issue, the U.S. Supreme Court was qui.
The ROI from Employee Training
Renee Inomata of Burns & Levinson LLP
To train or not to train. Because most companies are driven by return on investment (ROI), training employees on proper workplace behavior is often not a priority, since it means dedicating financial resources to the training and having employees spend work hours in training and not producing a product or service. Many companies, however, have learned the need for and value of such training the hard way.
You've Heard About the Supreme Court's Decisions on Sexual Harassment. Now What?
DLA Piper LLP
This alert provides specific steps to help prevent workplace sexual harassment claims.
Employers May Be Responsible for Sexual Harassment Committed by Their Supervisors, Even if the Employers Had No Knowledge of the Supervisors' Misconduct
Thomas L. McCally of Carr Maloney P.C.
On June 26, 1998, the Supreme Court held, by 7-to-2 votes in two separate cases, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton and.
Training About Sexual Harassment Can Make All The Difference
David A. Anderson of Parsons Behle & Latimer
In real estate, the saying goes, it's all about location. In the law governing workplace sexual harassment, it's turning out to be all about training.
Sexual Harassment Law Clarified by Supreme Court
Partridge Snow & Hahn LLP
On June 26, 1998, the United States Supreme Court issued two opinions which clarify the law on sexual harassment cl.
Remedial Action for Sexual Harassment
Eskridge Law
Our last Bulletin (Vol. 00, No. 7) discussed what an employer should do upon receiving a complaint of sexual harass.
Identifying and Investigating Sexual Harassment Complaints
Nixon Peabody LLP
This article discusses how a company should have the appropriate strategies in place to investigate both the undocumented sexual harassment complaint and the complaint made to the lower-level individual.
Sexual Harassment is in the Headlines
Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti LLP
This article explains a recent Supreme Court ruling that sends the message that the Court believes litigants and lower courts are getting carried away on claims of sexual harassment.
Employer Following Complaint Procedure in Handbook Sets Forth Affirmative Defense to Sexual Harassment Claim
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California granted the employer's motion for summary judgment in this sexual harassment case because the plaintiff "unreasonably failed to take advantage of the preventive and corrective opportunities provided by AGCO or to otherwise avoid harm.
Court Interprets New Affirmative Defense to Supervisory Sexual Harassment
Lois A. Baar of Parsons Behle & Latimer
A Virginia federal district court applied the "Faragher-Burlington Industries affirmative defense" established by the Supreme Court recently and found an employer wanting in the second element of the defense.
Sexual Harassment
Connelly, Roberts & McGivney LLC
The explosion of sexual harassment litigation in the U.S. since the Senate confirmation hearings of Supreme Court J.
EEOC Guidance on Employer's Vicarious Liability for Workplace Harassment
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
On June 18, 1999, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued Guidance on an employer's vicarious liability .
Punitive Damages
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
State of mind, not egregious conduct, is determinative. In Kolstad v. American Dental Ass'n, 119 S. Ct. 2118 (199.
The Jackson Lewis Ten Step Response to the New Rules on Workplace Sexual Harassment
Jackson Lewis LLP
This article examines how employers should implement ten preventive measures to protect itself against sexual harassment in the workplace.
Labor & Employment Update--July 1998
Brobeck Phleger & Harrison LLP
This labor and employment report contains articles entitled: United States Supreme Court Frames New Rules on Sexual Harassment; California Supreme Court Finds That Supervisors Cannot Be Individually Liable For Discrimination; and Federal Court of Appeals Finds Workplace Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable.
New EEOC Policy Guidance Examines Vicarious Employer Liability for Workplace Harassment and Much More
Nixon Peabody LLP
This article reviews the recent EEOC policy guidance which addresses vicarious employer liability for supervisor harassment.
Sexual Harassment: U.S. Supreme Court Cases Hold Employers Liable
Elena L. Ostby of Briggs & Morgan
The U.S. Supreme Court has recently decided two important cases in the area of sexual harassment: Burlington Indust.
Supreme Court's Latest Sexual Harassment Rulings
Vernis & Bowling of Miami, P.A.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently handed down two decisions defining when an employer is liable under Title VII of t.
Client Alert: August 1999
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
This Client Alert discusses Punitive Damages; EEOC guidance on Employer's vicarious liability for workplace harassment; and Supreme Court cases clarify ADA obligations.
Employment Law Group Update: Supreme Court Makes it Easier for Employees to Prevail in Sexual Harassment Cases
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
This update discusses the Supreme Court's opinion in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, in which the Court held an employer may be held directly liable, i.e. "automatically liable," where a supervisor engages in quid pro quo sexual harassment, even where the employee did not submit to the alleged harasser's sexual demands or suffer any tangible adverse job effects.
Sexual Harassment Recent Developments
Frank Howard Henry of Broad and Cassel
In two companion cases, the United States Supreme Court recently announced a new framework for employer liability i.
Employers Liable for Supervisors' Sexual Harassment Even if no Adverse Action Taken
While everyone in Washington was focusing on sexual harassment as a political issue, the U.S. Supreme Court was qui.
U.S. Supreme Court Redefines Employer Liability For Sex Harassment By Supervisors: An Invitation To Employers To Launch Full Scale Preventive Efforts And Reexamine Limits Of Supervisory Authority
Katherine Cooper Franklin,Theresa L. Butler and Garry G. Mathiason of Littler Mendelson, P.C.
This article addresses recent U.S. Supreme Court holdings which focus on sexual harassment, the holdings will have broad application to anti-discrimination employment law as a whole.