The Issue of Sexual Harassment
This is an excerpt from the paper...
This paper is a study of the history of the awareness and understanding of the issue of sexual harassment as it first came to be defined in a legal case in 1977, as it had progressed when the Clarence Thomas hearings thrust it into public consciousness in 1991, and as the problem has come to be thought about in 1996, when suits against corporate giants such as Mitsubishi and Astra USA have come to routinely define harassment and emphasize the unacceptable nature of such discrimination. Although high-profile cases have arisen within the U.S. Navy (most notably in the Tailhook Convention scandal), in high schools and universities (where the problem can be harassment by a professor or by a fellow student), and in politics (the case of Senator Bob Packwood offers a significant example), this paper will concentrate specifically on the historical development of the definition of sexual harassment as a corporate problem. As more and more women have entered the workplace, particularly within fields previously dominated by men, sexual harassment has become one of the most significant issues in the societal adjustment to a changing work force. Although men have also made isolated cases of sexual harassment charges against women, women against women, and men against men, this paper will focus on the vast majority of cases, in which the accuser is a woman charging a man with harassing her sexually. In his history of social welfare in the United States, Walter I. Trattner (1979) bare
. . .
e it seem as though the problem is being dealt with through more comprehensive legislation and a more informed public. Gretchen Morgenson (1992) claims, "Sexual harassment is less prevalent today than it was in 1986. According to the EEOC, federal cases alleging harassment on the job totalled 5,694 in 1990, compared to 6,342 in 1984. Yet today there are 17 percent more women working than there were then" (p. 47). However, Catherine Yang (1996, May 13) says, "Sexual-harassment charges alone rose by 150% from 1990, to 15,549 last year" (p. 98). Morgenson's figures may have been accurate at the time, but she was recording a temporary aberration.
Richard Posner (1992) notes one effect of the 1991 Act:
The principal legal controversy [in sexual harassment cases] is over the degree to which the employer should be held liable for the unauthorized harassment of one employee by another who is not her supervisor. The current answer is that the employer is liable if it has reason to believe that there is sexual harassment in its work force and does nothing about it; in other words, if it is negligent with respect to the problem (p. 392).
Allowing claimants to sue employers risks taking blame away from the harasser himself. In many
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Mark Maremont, Shortly Thomas, Frankel Paul, Rights Act, University Professors, House Representatives, Commission EEOC, Liberation Movement, Bob Packwood, Richard Posner, sexual harassment, 1996 13, eds sexual harassment, diego greenhaven press, eds sexual, pierce eds, swisher pierce, san diego, sexual harassment pp, posner 1992, swisher pierce eds, harassment pp, san diego greenhaven, diego greenhaven, greenhaven press,
Approximate Word count = 2974
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
