Categories
Sexual Harassment

Roger Ailes Reminds Us of the Prevalence of Sexual Harassment

Roger Ailes Reminds Us of the Prevalence of Sexual HarassmentRoger Ailes became the CEO of Fox News in October of 1996. Almost 20 years later, he resigned from that position after being named in a sexual harassment lawsuit by TV personality Gretchen Carlson, who alleged “that he had sabotaged her career in retaliation for rebuffing his sexual advances and complaining about a hostile work environment,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Multiple women have since come to make similar claims, as did Megyn Kelly, one of the channel’s most popular hosts.

Roger Ailes was one of the most powerful men in television; two of the women who accused him of harassment are well-known celebrities with power of their own. What this story shows us, perhaps more than anything, is that sexual harassment can affect anyone at any time. It is not limited to people who have entry-level jobs, or to specific types of industries: it is endemic, and it is a problem.

When these acts occur in a work environment, or are committed by a fellow employee, a supervisor/manager or an executive, the person who is harassing you is in violation of federal laws “when [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][such acts are] so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted);” this is the claim made by Gretchen Carlson against Roger Ailes – the claim that many women from Ailes’s past, it seems, are coming forth to support.

Putting an end to sexual harassment

Sexual harassment is notoriously underreported, because fear of reprisal is often stronger than a person’s need for justice. We understand: when you believe that your job and your future are on the line, it may feel easier to simply let the harassment continue rather than make waves and risk your position. But you have rights and protections under the law to protect you from retaliatory actions, and you do not need to suffer in silence because you are afraid. There are steps you can take to protect yourself from the outset:

  • Read your company’s policy on harassment. If you have questions about what constitutes harassment, or if the policy is in any way unclear, make an appointment with your H.R. manager to discuss it. Do not be afraid to take notes during the meeting.
  • See something, say something. If a person is harassing you at work, or treating you in an unfair manner, speak up. Be clear that you feel offended by the comments. It if persists, file a report with the H.R. manager. Make sure to obtain a copy of that report for yourself.
  • Keep records of communication. If the harassment comes in the form of emails, tweets, voicemails – anything that can be recorded and captured through legal channels – keep copies of those communications. If the harassment is verbal, keep a diary to write down exactly what was said to you, when and by whom.
  • Seek legal counsel. If you have been a victim of sexual harassment, or believe you have been wrongfully terminated from your job because of it, you should seek the advice of a skilled employee rights attorney.

Sexual harassment occurs at all levels of every industry in this country. It is up to all of us to put an end to it by taking action. At the Gilbert Firm, we uphold the rights of sexual harassment victims in courtrooms throughout Tennessee. To schedule a consultation with a Tennessee employee rights attorney like Justin Gilbert, Jonathan Bobbitt or Michael Russell, please call 888.996.9731 or fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville for your convenience.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Sexual Harassment

Harassment, Discrimination, and the Culture of Silence

Harassment, Discrimination, and the Culture of SilenceEvery single woman you know has been sexually harassed at some point in her life. It doesn’t always happen at work. It doesn’t always happen in school. It doesn’t always happen at parties, or in clubs, or while she’s walking to work, or purchasing fruit at the local grocery store, or doing things online, or simply sitting quietly somewhere in public. But it happens every single day, and every woman you know has been a victim of it at some point or another.

That’s where we want to start this: with the statement that every woman you know has been the victim of sexual harassment at some point or another in her life. And this is why we know it’s true: because not all forms of harassment are “vulgar.” Not every women has been subject to “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature,” as the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission defines it. Not every case of sexual harassment is sexual in nature, which is why the EEOC also includes “offensive remarks about a person’s sex. For example, it is illegal to harass a woman by making offensive comments about women in general.”

We can’t stop the entire world from being rude, but we can uphold the law. And in the U.S., the law says that all people – men and women – have the right not to be harassed at their places of employment.

When a woman is made to feel uncomfortable or unsafe because of her sex or gender in the workplace, and it affects her ability to do her job or creates a hostile work environment for her, she can make a claim for harassment (and/or potentially discrimination, depending on the circumstances). That is the law. And yet, according to the EEOC statistics compiled by Cataylst.com, “almost three in ten cases before the EEOC are sex discrimination cases,” and they include charges of sexual harassment. That’s 26,027 cases in 2014 (29.3%).

And it looks like that number could be much, much lower than it should be.

Why women don’t report sexual harassment

Research out of Vanderbilt University finds that “Victims are more likely to be younger [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][women], hold lower-position jobs, work mostly with and be supervised by members of the opposite sex, and, for female victims, work in male-dominated occupations.”

Think about that for a moment: young women and men with, perhaps, little to no real job experience outside of the position they hold, whose immediate supervisors are likely older, more experienced and members of the opposite sex. Why aren’t they saying anything? Easy. Because they:

  • Are ignorant of the laws protecting them. Young, inexperienced workers may not even realize it is against the law to fire a person simply because he or she filed a complaint for harassment. They also might not realize that simply because they have not been victims of physical violence or assault, that they still have a claim.
  • Are afraid of retaliation. Yes, retaliation is illegal – but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. If that employee is an immigrant, especially an undocumented one, then he or she could fear losing the job altogether.
  • Have never seen any real results. If you have not yet read “Elephant in the Valley,” you should. Inspired by Ellen Pao v. Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers LLC, the article focuses on women in the tech field. Their studies found that:
    • 60% of people who reported sexual harassment were dissatisfied with the outcomes of the complaint.
    • 30% didn’t even bother to report it, opting instead to try to forgot the whole incident. (Psychological trauma is a real effect.)
    • 39% did nothing at all out of fear that their career would be negatively impacted.
    • 90% witnessed some form of sexist behavior during offsite functions, like conferences.
  • Blame themselves for the entire experience. Victim-blaming/shaming is a real issue in this country. We see it every day online and in the news. An article on the site Daily Worth cites a prosecutor named Wendy Patrick, who claims that in some situations, “coworkers become friends and confidants, which breeds cooperation, collaboration — and possibly collusion in failing to report problematic behavior.” When it is your “friend” who is making you feel uncomfortable (or making someone else feel that way), you tend to let it go, because you chalk it up to a friend causing the uncomfortable experience, not the coworker – and because you believe your own relationship or behavior may be a root cause for what happened.
  • Are afraid of how they will be perceived. Men are persuasive; women are pushy – or so the story goes. (Check out this excellent commercial for Pantene to see the full effect.) Once you have that moniker, even when it is wildly inappropriate, it can be hard to get rid of it. No one wants to be perceived negatively by their coworkers or supervisors, even if those are the very people who are harassing you.

How can we fix it?

Putting an end to sexual harassment at work starts with employers, who need strong anti-discrimination and harassment policies, and need to uphold them every time. Victims must be given the same right to a safe and secure workplace. As parents, we can teach our children that harassment is a form of discrimination and bullying, and that it cannot be tolerated.

All of this is in the best interests of companies, too, as lower productivity means higher costs and decreased revenue – you know, in case simply being a decent human being who respects other people isn’t a good enough reason.

But if you are being harassed at work, you have legal options available to you. Seeking the advice of an experienced employee rights lawyer does not mean you have to file a lawsuit for harassment; it means that you are taking the next steps to see what those options are, and remembering that you have worth and value. You deserve better; you really do.

The Gilbert Firm provides comprehensive legal services for employees throughout Tennessee. If you have been a victim of sexual harassment or discrimination, you are within your legal rights to take action. To make an appointment with Tennessee employee rights attorney Jonathan Bobbitt or Justin Gilbert, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Sexual Harassment

Restaurant Workers are Especially Susceptible to Sexual Harassment

Restaurant workers, especially females servers, tend to be among the most vulnerable employees in the workplace. Because of their wages and work conditions, they are especially susceptible to workplace abuses. Tipped employees can be paid a sub-minimum wage. Either unintentionally or maliciously, employers frequently calculate these wages incorrectly. Moreover, tipped employees are frequently worked “off the clock,” which is illegal. This is often in the form of preparing the restaurant before a shift and cleaning up after a shift.

Now, a new study suggests that 90% of female restaurant workers who rely on tips are victims of sexual harassment. Follow this link for the story.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/money/business/2014/10/07/restaurant-industry-restaurants-sexual-harassment/16826065/

Categories
Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Title VII

Vance v. Ball State Part 3: What does it mean to prevent sexual harassment?

Here’s my final installment of my thoughts on the recent Supreme Court case addressing an employer’s liability for supervisor sexual harassment.  In a case of co-worker sexual harassment, the question is largely one of negligence.  The Supreme Court had some comments about establishing an employer’s negligence.  They said:

In any event, the dissent is wrong in claiming that our holding would preclude employer liability in other cases with facts similar to these. Assuming that a harasser is not a supervisor, a plaintiff could still prevail by showing that his or her employer was negligent in failing to prevent harassment from taking place. Evidence that an employer did not monitor the workplace, failed to respond to complaints, failed to provide a system for registering complaints, or effectively discouraged complaints from being filed would be relevant. Thus, it is not true, as the dissent asserts, that our holding “relieves scores of employers of responsibility” for the behavior of workers they employ.

Wow!  There’s some good stuff in there for employee rights advocates.  First, “preventative measures” has been thought of as part of the employer’s affirmative defense in a supervisor harassment case.  The Vance Court says that an employer is liable – not only if they are negligent in addressing the harassment – but also if they are negligent in preventing it.  Second, they provide a very useful list of things that an employer should do to prevent harassment:

–          Monitor the workplace for sexual harassment

–          Respond to complaints

–          Provide a system of registering sexual harassment complaints

–          Encourage (rather than discourage) complaints of sexual harassment

The first and third items on this list are noteworthy.  What if a plaintiff shows that an employer did not have a protocol in place to monitor the workplace for sexual harassment?  Is the employer liable?  Must the employer have a formal registry of all sexual harassment complaints it receives?  The Supreme Court suggests that the answer to these questions is . . . yep.

This blurs the line between co-worker harassment and supervisor harassment.  Proving that an employer did not adequately monitor the workplace for sexual harassment might now be enough to prove negligence and lack of preventative measures.  This would allow the plaintiff to prevail regardless of whether the offender is a co-worker or supervisor.  While the Vance opinion is generally thought to limit an employer’s exposure in sexual harassment cases, this language from Vance might do the exact opposite.

Categories
Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Title VII

Vance v Ball State Part 2: What to Make of Footnote 8

In our last blog post, we looked at the US Supreme Court’s decision in Vance v. Ball State. Very generally, Vance says that a “supervisor” under sexual harassment law must be someone who has the authority to hire and fire.

This was not welcome news to employee rights advocates. In my last blog post, I suggested that all of the news from Vance was not bad. This brings us to the Supreme Court’s peculiar footnote 8.

Footnote 8 addresses a situation where an alleged supervisor cannot hire and fire but does have the authority to make hiring and firing recommendations that are given weight. In footnote 8, the Supreme Court suggests that people who have such advisory authority would be “supervisors,” even though they do not personally have the authority to hire and fire.

If footnote 8 means what it says, then the Vance decision could be interpreted very differently than many commentators are now assuming.

Footnote 8 would allow lower courts to understand the term “supervisor” to include those people who have  the ear of those who make hiring and firing decisions, even if he or she does not have that authority themselves. This seems like a rational conclusion. Expect employee rights advocates to advance this interpretation.

So, what to make of footnote 8?  It suggests a more common sense reading of the Vance decision that some folks are advancing.  To take advantage of it, however, counsel for employees must do the hard work in discovery.  We must show that a “supervisor” really is a “supervisor.”  In other words, find out whether they have the ear of the upper management.  Find out whether their advise regarding “hiring” and “firing” is given weight.  Find out if they are classified as FLSA exempt.  If so, this may be probative of the fact they can cause a termination, especially if they are classified as exempt under the executive exemption.  Footnote 8 in Vance can be valuable tool, but only if it is used.

Categories
ADA & ADAA Age Discrimination (ADEA) Bankruptcy Discovery FMLA Overtime/Wage & Hour Retaliation Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Title VII Uncategorized Whistleblower Law

17th Annual TBA Labor and Employment Forum

Here’s a great CLE opportunity that will cover a ton of labor and employment topics.  The 17th Annual TBA Labor and Employment Forum is April 12 in Nashville.  I will be speaking about current developments in wage and hour law. 

This is my second year to speak at this event, and it’s an honor to be included among such great employment lawyers from across the state.  This year, the line-up of speakers includes  Judge Clifford Shirley, John Bode, Bob Boston, Stan Graham, and Mark Travis.  Register at http://tinyurl.com/azdyxcl

Categories
Sexual Harassment Title VII

Supreme Court Hears Argument in “Supervisor” Harassment Case

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a sexual harassment case, Vance v. Ball State University, that will decide who is a “supervisor” for purposes of sexual harassment law.  A day later, my good friend and Nashville lawyer J.K. Sims (who represents employers in sexual harassment cases) was sworn into the bar of the U.S. Supreme Court.  Two ground breaking events in one week.  Washington will never be the same.

Anyway, back to the sexual harassment case. As I mentioned in a previous post,  sexual harassment law is very different depending on whether the harasser is a “supervisor” or “co-worker.”  You can read more about the importance of this distinction in my other post.

One of the primary issues is whether a person must have the authority to hire and fire in order to be a “supervisor.”  The Seventh Circuit said, “yes.” Interestingly, even the lawyer for the defendant seemed to concede that this would be too restrictive of a definition.  Justice Roberts suggested that he might favor a definition of “supervisor” that was more narrow than either lawyer was advocating.  He acknowledged that a requirement that a supervisor be able to hire and fire might lead to some “harsh” results, but he suggested that such a bright line rule might nevertheless bring some certainty to the law.

Justice Kagan, who was previously dean of Harvard Law School, pointed out that professors do not have the authority to hire and fire their assistants.  Therefore, such a bright line rule would lead to a situation where a professor could make life a “living hell” for his assistant, yet not be a “supervisor” for purposes of sexual harassment law.  Such a result would seem silly.

It remains to be seen whether this opinion will drastically change sexual harassment law.  Despite the suggestions of Justice Roberts from the bench, my guess is that the Court will adopt some sort of case case-by-case test that will give great deference to the trial courts in making these decisions.

Categories
Sexual Harassment

Who’s the Boss? The Supreme Court to Define “Supervisor” for Purposes of Supervisor Sexual Harassment Liability

I am a child of the 80s.  I dated girls with big hair, heard Ronald Reagan tell me it was “morning in America,” and had a crush on Alyssa Milano. 

Milano played “Sam” on the situation comedy “Who’s the Boss.”  The show told the story of a male housekeeper from Brooklyn who worked for a successful single mother in Connecticut.  As the name suggests, viewers were never really sure who was in charge of the house.  There was great confusion concerning who the “boss” actually was.

The Courts of Appeal throughout the country can apparently relate.  In the area of sexual harassment law, an employer can certainly face liability for either co-worker harassment or supervisor harassment.  The rules, however, are very different if the perpetrator is a supervisor as compared to a co-worker.  Therefore, before a judge or lawyer can know which legal rules apply, they must know whether or not the perpetrator was the victim’s “supervisor.”

Some courts hold that a “supervisor,” for purposes of sexual harassment law, is those people who can hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline an employee. 

Other courts read the term “supervisor” more broadly.  They hold that a “supervisor” is anyone who directs or oversees the daily activities of the sexual harassment victim.

In Vance v. Ball State, the district court kicked the case out of court because the harasser was not a “supervisor.”  The Seventh Circuit agreed.  “Not so fast,” said the U.S. Supreme Court.  They decided to take a look at the issue. 

Oral argument is set before the U.S Supreme Court on November 26, 2012.  At long last, perhaps the smartest men and women in the world (those who wear black robes) will answer the question that has plagued me since Alyssa Milano first stole my heart.  Who’s the boss?