Sexual harassment in the workplace in US labor law has been considered a form of discrimination on the basis of sex in the United States since the mid-1970s. There are two forms of sexual harassment recognized by United States law: quid pro quo sexual harassment (requiring an employee to tolerate sexual harassment to keep their job, receive a tangible benefit, or avoid punishment) and behavior that creates a hostile work environment (persistent sexual behavior that unreasonably interferes with an employee's ability to work). It has been noted that a number of the early sexual harassment cases were brought by African American women and girls.
History The term sexual harassment was popularized following a consciousness-raising session led by Lin Farley as part of a Cornell University program on women in the workplace, and the term entered popular use in 1975. A number of the original sexual harassment cases were pursued on behalf of black women and girls. United States law recognizes two forms of sexual harassment:
Quid pro quo sexual harassment: an employee is required to tolerate sexual harassment in exchange for employment, a raise or job benefit, or promotion. Hostile work environment: sexual harassment in the workplace results in an offensive work environment or unreasonably interferes an employee's work performance.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 In the United States, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, sex, color, national origin or religion. Initially only intended to combat sex discrimination against people based on sex alone, (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2) the prohibition of sex discrimination now extends to discrimination based on sexuality and transgender identity. This discrimination occurs when the sex of the worker, the worker's sexual preference, or the worker's sex at birth, is made a condition of employment (e.g., all female waitpersons or male carpenters) or where this is a job requirement that does not mention sex but ends up preventing many more persons of one sex than the other from the job (such as height and weight limits). This act only applies to employers with 15 or more employees.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations (1980) In 1980, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued regulations defining sexual harassment and stating it was a form of sex discrimination prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Civil Rights Act of 1991 The Civil Rights Act of 1991 added provisions to Title VII protections including expanding the rights of women to sue and collect compensatory and punitive damages for sexual discrimination or harassment.
Case Law
Barnes v Train (1974) Barnes v. Train (1974) is commonly viewed as the first sexual harassment case in America, even though the term "sexual harassment" was not used. Paulette Barnes, an African American woman, was a payroll clerk who worked for the Environmental Protection Agency. She brought the case after losing her job for refusing the advances of a male supervisor. The case was dismissed, but was appealed in Barnes v Costle (1977).
Williams v. Saxbe (1976) In 1976, Williams v. Saxbe was the first case in a U.S. District Court to establish that quid pro quo sexual harassment constitutes sex discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A male supervisor was found to have retaliated against Diane R. Williams, an African American woman, by firing her after she refused to have sex with him. The court found that it was a form of sex discrimination when a condition of employment is to submit to the sexual advances of a superior. Additionally, there was evidence that other female employees had been subjected to similar conditions. Judge Charles Richey ruled that Diane Williams' supervisor, who was an employee under William B. Saxbe, had only required women to submit to his advances, which created an artificial barrier to employment for one gender but not the other. Judge Richey's decision received a lot of media attention, including stories in multiple national newspapers. A lot of this attention was critical of the decision, and focused on a footnote Judge Richey included in the Memorandum Opinion. This footnote indicated that sexual harassment from a supervisor who is bisexual cannot be considered sex discrimination under Title VII if both male and female employees are subject to the harassment. Williams' case was appealed multiple times, and it took around eight years for her to win. Judge Richey granted Williams $19,147 to make up for lost pay. Williams v Saxbe was the first U.S. District Court decision to recognize quid pro quo sexual harassment. In response to the findings of this case, several earlier decisions against sex discrimination in lower courts were reversed on appeal, including Barnes v Train.
Barnes v. Costle (1977) Although Barnes v. Train (1974) was initially dismissed, Paulette Barnes won on appeal in Barnes v. Costle (1977). During this case, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled it was sex discrimination for a woman to suffer tangible employment losses (for example losing her job) for refusing to submit to requests for sexual favors. The appeals ruling was based in part on the Williams v. Saxbe (1976) decision. The court also found that companies are liable for not stopping sexual harassment if they know it is being conducted by supervisors. As part of the ruling of Barnes v. Costle, Barnes received around $18,000 for back pay and the loss of promotions.
Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986) In the 1986 case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, the Supreme Court first recognized "sexual harassment" as a violation of Title VII, established the standards for analyzing whether the conduct was welcome and levels of employer liability, and that speech or conduct in itself can create a "hostile environment". This case filed by Mechelle Vinson ruled that the sexual conduct between the subordinate and supervisor could not be deemed voluntary due to the hierarchical relationship between the two positions in the workplace. Following the ruling of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, reported sexual harassment cases grew from 10 cases being registered by the EEOC per year before 1986 to 624 case being reported in the subsequent following year. This number of reported cases to the EEOC rose to 2,217 in 1990 and then 4,626 by 1995.
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
