Boss doesn't hit on you? It's okay, you can still sue

[DFWdem]

A manager who has affairs with subordinates can create a work climate that constitutes sexual harassment even for uninvolved employees, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday.

"It tells employers that having an anti-nepotism policy is not enough. You need to do more to make sure that you have a hostility-free work environment even when employees are having consensual sexual relationships," Barankin said.

The case involves former employees at the Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla who complained about then-warden Lewis Kuykendall, who was sexually involved with at least three women at the same time.

The plaintiffs, Edna Miller and Frances Mackey, sued the Department of Corrections for sexual harassment in 1999. A lower court ruled against the women, saying they "were not themselves subjected to sexual advances and were not treated any differently than male employees." The state Supreme Court overturned that decision Monday.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/19/sexual.harassment.ap/index.html

Can you say "can of worms"?

[bryant69]

1. Yes

But the other side is that this sort of activity really could create a hostile atmosphere.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Bunny]

3. Yep, and here's why"

From the link (emphasis is mine):

SNIP
"But when it is so widespread that "the demeaning message is conveyed to female employees that they are viewed by management as 'sexual playthings' or that the way required for women to get ahead in the workplace is by engaging in sexual conduct," it constitutes harassment, he wrote."
SNIP

[DFWdem]

4. Yes, but the court agreed that...

...they "were not themselves subjected to sexual advances and were not treated any differently than male employees."

[Bunny]

17. Did you read what I posted?

That was the lower court. The higher court ruled that they don't HAVE to be personally subjected to sexual advances in order for it to be harassment.

[DFWdem]

27. I know

It was in the articel I posted :) My point is that it's going to open a huge can of worms. I remember a few years back when a court in WA state ruled that you don't have to be injured in a car wreck to sue for pain and suffering. Being in the car with a loved one who was hurt in the accident entitled you to sue for pain and suffering.

[redqueen]

5. Seems pretty straightforward.

Thanks for posting that snippet.

[Darwins Finch]

14. Makes sense to me

Thanks!

[knitter4democracy]

15. That's what I thought, too.

It's the real message being sent through the workplace--that the women are merely there for sexual gratification, not to actually be full-fledged members of the work community.

[LoZoccolo]

18. I have not gotten a promotion in almost six years.

For over four of those years, my manager was a woman, whom I've never slept with. The message that's sent there is that I will not get a promotion if I do not sleep with my manager, and so I am entitled to sue.

[Bunny]

24. Have other male co-workers slept with your manager, and then

received subsequent perks, such as promotions, raises, bonuses, extra time off, etc.? If so, you may very well have a case. You should contact a lawyer.

Edited to remove a possibly unnecessary snarky comment.

[LoZoccolo]

26. No.

But if they had, I'd probably find some way to prove it before I dragged her into court.

[stopbush]

2. No boss should ever be involved with subordinates in the office.

Period.

As one of my former bosses once said, "There's two hundred million people in this country. If the best you can do is to look right outside your office door for sex, then you're pathetic."

[JuniperLea]

6. great quote from your boss!

i don't think it's healthy to date a coworker, let alone a supervisor/subordinate!

can you imagine if there was a break up and you have to see that person every day? that is the least of it! i can think of dozens of reasons this could spell trouble.

[Divameow77]

10. I met my husband because we worked together

we dated off and on for awhile while working together, I quit when we got married.

[madinmaryland]

7. Absolutely right.

And you could modify that to say that anyone (not just bosses), should be involved with subordinates (i.e. teacher/student, doctor/patient, minister/parishioner, etc.)

[DFWdem]

8. I agree

Opens one up to too much liability. That said, when someone works 60-70 hours a week, the office is often the only place they get social interaction. Sticky situation regardless.

[Johonny]

36. You're not pathetic

You are just being human. I seems perfectly natural given that people spend a majority of the week with their fellow employees.

[blondeatlast]

39. Exactly. Kudos to your boss. nt

[mzteris]

9. the problem is

disparate treatment. Did those employees who were engaging in the affair receiving better performance reviews, duties, wages, etc.

The hostile environment can be extended to anyone who is not involved directly.

[DFWdem]

13. Article does not say

But it doesn't seem like there would be enough promotions to go around to all the people this guy was sleeping with.

[MindPilot]

11. Unfortunately they never listened to Tom Lykis

Right from the 101 rules: Never EVER play with anyone at the workplace under any circumstances. And that goes double for managers and supervisors.

Edit for spelling

[redqueen]

29. Don't you mean *fortunately*?

Uck... where am I?!

[barbaraann]

12. Oh, the bosses I could sue!

I could be a multimilltionaire! Wow! Maybe I'll go back to work just so I can sue someone. ;-) And what about bosses who are going to prostitutes and strip clubs? Talk about a gold mine for employees!

The stories I could tell....

[LoZoccolo]

20. If the boss goes to a strip club and gives more money to the stripper...

...than they give to the female employees for working the same amount of time, that sends a message to the female employees and creates a hostile work environment, and therefore they can sue.

[barbaraann]

21. Oh, my.

Don't strippers get more in tips than minimum wage workers for the same amount of time? Isn't that why so many women work at strip clubs?

[LoZoccolo]

23. Strippers get more in tips than most of us for any work!

Ten dollars for a private dance is considered cheap. Let's say one song is five minutes for the sake of figuring this out, and the stripper spends one song working and the next looking for the next dance...that's $60/hour!

Think of all the messages being sent here that you could sue for.

[barbaraann]

25. Well, well, well.

A lot of minimum wage workers could be making $60 an hour.

[TorchTheWitch]

30. WHERE IS THIS CLUB????

Please, tell me where I can work in a club where I can do a lap dance every other song for my entire shift!

Get a clue.

[LoZoccolo]

37. Let's not fight.

What should I get a clue about? The original post or stripper wages?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. How about playing golf with subordinates? Or, boozing with them?

The question should be about favoritism not sex.

[MindPilot]

19. In a way it is -- sex is the ultimate favoritism

I work in place where there are a lot of married couples. It's a big company and they are all in different departments, but I can't help but see potential problems. Say the wife is a manager and good friends with the supervisor in the husband's department...

[geek tragedy]

22. Rule #1: Don't piss where you drink. eom

[patcox2]

28. not new, thats settled title VII law.

nt

[DFWdem]

31. Sorry, I don't follow

"not new, thats settled title VII law" didn't make much sense. What do you mean?

[patcox2]

33. You could always make a claim based on boss sleeping with others.

Under federal law, which most states base their state laws on, this has been the case for years. Thus this decision by the California court does not set forth a new rule.

[DFWdem]

34. The lawyers called it "groundbreaking"

Phil Horowitz, of the California Employment Lawyers Association, who submitted a brief to the court in support of a lawsuit filed by two women, called the decision "groundbreaking."

I figured it must be something new.

[patcox2]

35. Hmm, not new to me.

Lawyers like to exxagerate their accomplishments. The California Supreme Court maybe just never ruled on it before, but it doesn't seem to me to be any kind of doubt about how they would rule.

[DistressedAmerican]

32. I Have No Problem With That Ruling.

Harrassment can be overt or it can be implied.

[LoZoccolo]

38. Just wait until someone thinks /you're/ implying something.

With no evidence to refute, you'd be screwed.