Supreme Court to consider workplace harassment rules (and U.S. workers say in unison, "Rut roh,")

[No Elephants]

Supreme Court to consider workplace harassment rules



By Terry Baynes

Fri Nov 23, 2012 12:41pm EST

(Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday will hear arguments in a case that could determine when a company is liable for harassment by its employees.

The case turns on the definition of a single word - "supervisor" - under a federal civil rights law that prohibits racial, religious or sexual harassment in the workplace.

Under previous Supreme Court rulings, an employer is automatically responsible if a supervisor harasses a subordinate. The employer is not liable if the harassment is between two equal coworkers, unless it was negligent in allowing the abuse.

Since those rulings, a rift has developed between federal appeals courts over exactly who is a supervisor. On one side, three circuits say supervisors are those with the power to hire, fire, demote, promote or discipline. Three other circuits have adopted a broader standard, one that also includes employees who direct and oversee a colleague's daily work.

In the current case, Maetta Vance was the sole black catering worker at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. After filing numerous complaints with the university over racially charged incidents at work, she sued the university in federal court in 2006. She claimed that several white coworkers used racial epithets, references to the Ku Klux Klan and veiled physical threats against her.

Read more. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/23/us-usa-court-harassment-idUSBRE8AM0JX20121123

Another misleading headline. The SCOTUS considering who is considered a "supervisor" within the meaning of a statute is very different from the SCOTUS considering workplace harassment rules.

This kind of thing is aggravating because (1) supposedly, many people read ONLY headlines; and (2) it's misleading, whether intentionally or out of carelessness or stupidity. At the very least, it is crappy journalism-- and some people are getting paid good money to write these lousy headlines while other people are getting paid good money to ok them.

[rpannier]

1. By the time this Court decides

Supervisor will be the guy only immediately above you in rank. And if he/she wasn't there that day it was just unfortunate for you. You have no case.

[Enthusiast]

2. I would never expect THIS supreme court to rule correctly.

I mean, they think corporations are people and money is free speech. This supreme court SUCKS!

[Leopolds Ghost]

3. Interesting that in Muncie, Indiana, it's still not OK to be a black kitchen worker.