Contributed by Heather Bailey
A Louisiana jury was correct when it found that a survey crew instrument man at an engineering firm was sexually harassed by his supervisor’s boss who happened to be a male as well. Cherry v. Shaw Coastal, Inc., 5th Cir., No. 11-30403, 1/19/12. The harasser started off by brushing the employee’s hair, then he would ask the employee to take his shirt off and to wear revealing clothing. The behavior escalated to inappropriate sexual text messages, repeated touching of the body and hair, and an invitation to sleep over and wear his underwear. There was one occasion where the harasser touched the employee on the buttocks. During this time, the employee repeatedly told the manager that he was uncomfortable and that the manager should keep his comments to himself.
The employee’s supervisor knew his boss was acting inappropriately and complained twice to two different managers who were overseeing the project they were all working on together. Nothing was done and the managers never informed human resources of the complaints. After the third compliant when the employee finally complained to the same management team, the manager questioned that the harasser’s conduct was probably just “horsing around.” After yet another complaint, management finally removed the employees from working on the same crew. However, the harasser was still able to make the employee feel uncomfortable so he escalated his complaint. Finally, management informed human resources, but not before questioning the conduct was just “horsing around” again.
Human resources conducted an investigation yet concluded the issue was one word against the other and took no further action. Again, the company took no further action when the employee complained the harasser was then retaliating against him for complaining. The employee then resigned because the company failed to take any action and he could no longer take the harasser’s treatment.
The court said the jury was right that there was same-sex harassment here based upon the manager’s vulgar sexual text messages which propositioned the employee, an offer to stay at his house and wear his underwear, and the repeated offensive physical touching and caressing which included a single instance on the buttock. The court said all of this conduct was “severe and pervasive,” which is a test for proving sexual harassment.
The lesson learned here is that the company was liable due to its failure to take prompt remedial action. It had a policy that required management to report any complaint to human resources, but management didn’t follow that policy here and even suggested that the inappropriate conduct was just horseplay. When management finally followed the policy, human resources – despite having documented proof and a superior as an eye witness — did nothing.
Spring Cleaning Tips:
- Update the company’s Anti-Harassment and Discrimination Policies, and if you don’t have one to update, create one immediately!
- Train all employees on the do’s and don’t’s of sexual harassment and discrimination, including management on what to do when an employee complains or when management sees inappropriate conduct taking place.
- Review the company’s complaint and investigation procedures to ensure complaints are taken seriously and investigations are conducted effectively with a focus of remedial action when necessary.
We recommend you contact your employment counsel to ensure your policies and practices are tuned up.