When Krysten Overly, a financial advisor at a bank, told her male boss that she was resigning, Overly claims that he grabbed Overly’s arm to push her out the door. And as Overly left her boss’s office, he yelled, “Good riddance, bitch!”
What a jerk! But, as a matter of law, did he contribute to a sexually harassing hostile work environment? Find out after the jump…
* * *
Speak into a microphone and point one finger in the air if your Halloween completely sucked.
Politico has reported that the National Restaurant Association paid out a five-figure settlement to two women who accused Herman Cain of making sexually suggestive comments.
Details on the allegations and lessons that employers can learn from this after the jump…
To prove sexual harassment, a plaintiff must have been subjected to pervasive or severe behavior that would make the plaintiff (and a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s shoes) believe that the working environment are hostile or abusive.
Wait, I’m forgetting something. Oh yeah, the complained-of conduct must only be on account of the plaintiff’s gender. Seems simple enough, right? No sex-based conduct. No sexual harassment. After the break, a recent example that highlights this important element.
Frankly, Anthony Weiner ain’t got nothin’ on this Weiner.
The EEOC announced on Monday that it had sued Nu-Way Weiners, one of the oldest hot dog restaurants in the country, on behalf of two female employees. More after the jump…
* * *
Sex sells.
My most popular posts at The Employer Handbook — that’s based on you reading them (you’re all sick I tells ya, sick!!! And remember, I’m logging IP addresses) — generally involve some element of sexual behavior. You have the Brazilian self-stimulator. Actually, make that sexual behaviour — there’s the Australian hotel sex romp.
One of my readers asked if I’d heard about the recent sexual harassment lawsuit in Utah (the home of sex in a supply closet), in which a woman alleged, among other things, that her supervisor distributed a work schedule that included included “Mini-skirt Monday,” “Tube-top Tuesday,” “Wet T-shirt Wednesday,” “No bra Thursday,” and “Bikini top Friday.” Come on, now. You know me! Just this week, I read five articles (here, here, here, here, here) about it. You can find 23 more articles about “No bra Thursday” here.
“Guess my high score in Leisure Suit Larry.”
Then there’s the NY Post story (naturally) about a 23-year-old lesbian who claims that seven staff members in her real estate office groped, slapped, flashed, fondled and subjected her to racial abuse and death threats. One of the staffers allegedly offered her $60 for oral sex and told her all Puerto Rican girls are good at it.
Me? I like writing about these cases because it’s a good excuse to use stock sexual harassment photos from Google Images — like the one on the right, which, given the size of the shoulder pads in the lady’s jacket and the dimensions of that desktop computer — no doubt housing a 5.25 inch floppy disk drive — is a screencap from L.A. Law.
How about one more sexual harassment case for ya? This time, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals gets in on the act and reverses summary judgment in favor of an employer where the plaintiff alleged sexual harassment and retaliation when her boss forcibly kissed her, fondled her leg, propositioned her, asked her sexually explicit questions, described sexual activities he wished to perform, and then, after she spurned the advances and filed a harassment complaint, fired her (on the day she complained).
More on this and, of course, lessons for employers, after the jump…
* * *
At least that’s what a federal court in Utah opined.
I promise that this is not a prurient post gratuitously conceived to drive internet traffic to The Employer Handbook.
And this case has nothing directly to do with Pennsylvania, New Jersey or Delaware employers
(Ok, that last line was shameless. Google, please do not index this post).
Oh, what the heck, index away. After the jump, I’ll even throw in some good employer takeaways for all employers, including those in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.
Darn it. I did it again…
A federal court has bounced a woman’s sexual harassment claims against her former employer because the court believed that the woman was not offended by the conduct about which she complained.
Some analysis and employer lessons after the jump…
Welcome everyone to the first last edition of T&A Thursday, where I update you on all that’s going on in the world of porn and employment law.
After the jump, it’s all the news that’s barely fit to print. (At least it’s safe for work)…
There once was an employer in Racine.
With a manager whose antics were racy.
The court said, “You lose!”
Now, tell everyone the news.
And if you disobey, it’ll cost you big money.
*** Although I feel rhyming “Racine” with “racy” was pure Shakespeare, I’m fairly certain that Edward Lear’s corpse just pissed itself ***
After the jump, it’s the employer, found liable for sexual harassment, that refused to abide by a court-ordered notice requiring it to inform its employees about the verdict…
* * *
Continue reading
Beginning in October 2007, a doctor at a chiropractic practice repeatedly sent lewd and sexually offensive text messages at all hours of the day and night to his receptionist in which he requested sexual favors and made lewd comments such as:
The receptionist sued her employer for, among other things, sexual harassment…and lost!
Find out how, after the jump.
The Employer Handbook Blog