Reasonable Practices Shield Employer from Charge of Sexual Harassment
May 1, 1999
A federal trial court for the Middle District of Florida recently held that,
even if illegal sexual harassment occurred with respect to one of it employees,
the employer's training of its employee regarding sexual harassment, clear
articulation of its policy against sexual harassment to its entire work force
and provision of several avenues for employees to report such illegal conduct
shielded the employer from liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
In Maddin v. GTE of Florida, Inc., (M.D.Fla. 1999), GTE progressively
disciplined one of its female employees for tardiness, rudeness to customers and
for placing customers on hold for excessive lengths of time. The employee was a
customer service representative in one of GTE's customer contact centers.
Shortly after she was disciplined, the employee went on extended leave. When her
leave expired, she failed to return to her job. After unsuccessful attempts to
contact her, GTE terminated her employment for job abandonment.
The employee sued GTE, alleging, among other things, hostile work environment
sexual harassment under Title VII. The employee alleged that her supervisor's
manager, a male, addressed her as "gorgeous," "babe,"
"doll," "good-looking," "honey," "sweety"
and "beautiful." He played with her hair and, on one occasion, told
her, "You know, in another life, you and I would have been lovers."
Once, during a heated argument, he put his hand over the employee's face and
told her to "shut up."
The court found that this type of harassment alleged was not severe and
pervasive enough to create a change in the terms and conditions of the
plaintiff's employment. The court further concluded, however, that even if the
type of conduct alleged did rise to the level of sexual harassment, GTE could
take advantage of the affirmative defense to employer liability recently
articulated in the United States Supreme Court's decision Faragher v. City of
Boca Raton (1998).
The defense is comprised of two required elements: (1) the employer exercised
reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior,
and (2) the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any
preventative or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to avoid
harm otherwise.
GTE provided comprehensive sexual harassment training to its supervisors and
employees. GTE also had a clear policy against sexual harassment. The policy was
prominently displayed on every floor of the facility in which the plaintiff
worked. GTE provided several avenues for its employees to communicate wrongful
conduct and sexual harassment to various managers. Because of this well-planned
approach to the problem of sexual harassment in the workplace, the court
concluded that GTE met the first element of the Faragher affirmative defense.
The court also found that the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take
advantage of GTE's opportunities for addressing the difficulties she allegedly
encountered. The plaintiff employee simply quit her job without complaining
about the allegedly hostile environment to anyone. As a result, the court found
that the second required element of the Faragher affirmative defense was
satisfied.
Therefore, even if the harassment alleged in plaintiff's complaint was
sufficient to create a hostile work environment under Title VII, GTE's proactive
stance against harassment and the plaintiff's failure to take advantage of GTE's
policies shielded GTE from liability altogether.
Related Practices