Sexual Harassment and Employer Liability

The second part of the paper will focus on recent cases which have defined when an employer will be held liable for sexual harassment in connection with the course and scope of a person's employment. The discussion will include an analysis of the landmark case of Lehmann v. Toys 'R Us, Inc.1 as well as show how that opinion and its predecessors defined the elements of a hostile work environment claim. Moreover, this paper will also show how this opinion set a new standard for gender discrimination or sexual harassment causes of action. Finally, the second part of this paper will discuss the various ways an employer might be held liable for the conduct of an employee as well as explore the different types of damages which a court might award to a harassed plaintiff.

During the 1990s, the issue of sexual harassment has dominated the press m

. . .
in front of other employees by her supervisor.25 Moreover, an instructor who fondles a student during the course and scope of instructing the student will be held liable for sexual harassment,26 as will construction workers who "moon, flash obscene photographs at, urinate in water canisters of, and corner and rub the body parts of their female coworkers.27 Finally, a court held that a waitress whose supervisor passed around child pornography, exposed himself to her, and who gave choice assignments to waitresses who complied with his sexual advances could maintain an action against her employer for sexual harassment.28 EMPLOYER LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY In 1980, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued Guidelines29 which recognized that sexual harassment is divided into two categories: hostile work environment3O and quid pro quo. Of these two categories, the first, hostile work environment, has provoked the most discussion in recent judicial decisions. American courts first addressed the category of the hostile work environment in 1981.31 However, not until 1986, when the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson,32 did the American justice system first address sexual harassment claims
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Supreme Court, Cornell University, Lehmann Toys, North Carolina, Justice Girabaldi, Court Lehmann, Opportunity Commission, sexual harassment, SEXUAL HARASSMENT, Hall Rev, Meritor33 Court, hostile environment, supreme court, reasonable woman, nj 587, court held, reasonable woman standard, woman standard, nj 587 1993, 587 1993, harassing conduct, jersey supreme court, american courts, lehmann toys 'r, environment sexual harassment,
Approximate Word count = 3314
Approximate Pages = 13 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Sexual Harassment and Employer Liability