Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court once again reviewed the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace. Its unanimous decision in favor of the woman who claimed to be a victim of sexual harassment at work, in Harris v. Forklift Systems, guaranteed that the issue will remain a high priority in labor-management relations. This research examines the development of sexual harassment and employer liability and responsibility. The difficulties of a legal definition are explored, along with the rights for victims that have thus far been established. There is a widespread consensus that sexual harassment is a serious problem. The sheer specter of risking or losing one's livelihood because of sexual harassment by an employer or supervisor is abhorrent to most people. Not only is sexual harassment at the workplace morally reprehensible, it can also be emotionally stressful and economically costly to employee and employer alike. Surveys of the extent of incidences of workplace harassment vary widely. One survey by Redbook magazine in 1976 found that 90 percent of women respondents had been sexually harassed at least once; more recent surveys in the late 1980s and early 1990s reported rates of harassment affecting between 50 percent and 80 percent of working women. Clearly, the problem is pervasive. Given the special status of this problem in the workplace, much of the responsibility for curtailing sexual harassment has been placed upon employers. It is a burden that employers should
. . .
ore prevalent and every bit as serious as quid pro quo offenses. In a critical turning point of defining sexual harassment, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1986 decision of Meritor Savings Banks v. Vinson that any form of sexual harassment violates Title VII if it is "sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the condition's of [the victim's] employment and create an abusive working environment," even if the victim loses no tangible or economic job benefits because of the harassment.
The courts have been struggling to define exactly what constitutes a hostile work environment ever since. Some sex-related conduct in the workplace, like romantic overtures, dirty jokes or dirty language, are tolerable to some employees while deeply offensive to other employees. Since this is the type of behavior most frequently reported by female employees in surveys of sexual harassment cited above (persistent pressure for unwanted dates, sexual innuendoes, and so forth), the issue of when this behavior crosses over into harassment and creates a hostile work environment is the center of civil rights policy and litigation.
Many cases of sexual harassment leading to a hostile work environment have been relatively simple for the courts to defi
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Title VII, Rights Act, Forklift Systems, Freada Klein, sexual harassment, Supreme Court, Law Journal, Supreme Court's, hostile environment, title vii, Banks Vinson, Law Review, Systems Inc, pro quo, civil rights, sexual harassment workplace, legal definition, quid pro, employer liability, employers held, supervisors co-workers, quid pro quo, sexual harassment harris, harris forklift systems, liability sexual harassment,
Approximate Word count = 1640
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
|