The thin line between love and hate: same sex hostile environment sexual harassment

Article Abstract:

The author discusses same-sex sexual harassment in the employment context and focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court 1998 case Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services. The availability of a remedy for hatred-based same-sex harassment is discussed.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code:

Harassment law's conflicted course

Article Abstract:

Several Supreme Court cases added nuances and uncertainties to the law of sexual harassment in the workplace. The Court ruled that same-sex harassment is actionable as employment discrimination, that the threat of retaliation for rebuffing a supervisor's sexual demands is likewise actionable, and that an employer can be vicariously liable for the sexually hostile environment created by a supervisor. However, the Court limited the vicarious liability of a school for the acts of a teacher.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code:

A second generation of sexual harassment law: the Supreme Court rewrites the rules for the workplace

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court's 1998 sexual harassment rulings mark a 'second generation' of such laws. In Oncale, the Court said same-sex harassment is illegal, regardless of the harasser's sexual orientation. In Ellerth and Faragher, the Court indicated that employers may liable for harassment of subordinates by supervisors, even where no adverse employment action is taken. Employers may defend by establishing that the employee failed to take advantage of an anti-harassment policy established by the employer.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code: