John is a new supervisor of Client Service, a work unit of eleven people. It’s his first supervisory position. Elaine, one of the Service Representatives in his unit, finds a note from John or her desk. It says, "I would like to have more than a professional relationship with you. Can we go out sometime soon and get to know each other better?" Elaine has no interest and says nothing to John about the note. John subsequently ceases all personal communication with Elaine. He directs verbal communication through coworkers and begins to make assignments and critique her work through written memos. He calls staff meetings when she is out of the office, so that she does not learn of policy and procedural changes. This results in error, for which she receives written reprimands. She develops migraine headaches and is given 30 days of probation because of attendance and performance problems. She files a complaint of sexual harassment and retaliation with the HRC.

Is this "quid pro quo" sexual harassment?

If you were the manager given responsibility for dealing with Elaine’s complaint, what would you do first? next? and then?

How would you conduct an investigation? How would you respond to the HRC complaint?

What, if any, would be appropriate remedy for Elaine? What, if any, would be appropriate action to take against John?

If you were Elaine, what would you have done differently?

What might this organization do to prevent a recurrence of the problem?

Case Study #2

Sally is a new maintenance worker in the equipment depot of a utility company. She is one of two women in the depot and works closely with the maintenance crews. She is engaged to marry an employee who works at another location. Sally is the subject of a lot of coworker attention - whistles, leers, comments about her figure (especially her breasts) her sex life, sexual propositions and jokes occur daily. She says nothing because she wants to be a good sport and to be accepted by the crew; however, on two occasions when driving him to a work location, Al, a crew member, had grabbed her and tried to kiss her. She asks the maintenance supervisor, Chuck, not to send her out in the truck with Al, and tells him the reason. Chuck encourages her to keep her sense of humor and tells Al to keep his hands to himself. Al vehemently denies any physical contact with Sally, complains to his coworkers that "the bitch" is trying to get him fired, and is punched in the nose at the Way-To-Go Tavern by Sally’s fiancé. Sally and her fiancé are shunned by the crew, who tell Chuck that they refuse to work with Sally. "Bitch" is scrawled on her locker and on her overalls. Sally develops an ulcer and uses all her sick leave. When she is threatened with discharge for absenteeism she files an union grievance and gives Chuck a note from her psychiatrist stating that she requires at least a 60 day leave-of-absence for job-related stress. The leave is granted. Her fiancé breaks their engagement, citing peer pressure as the cause. Both the union and management investigate her charges of sexual harassment and conclude that they are without foundation.

Does Sally have a basis for claiming "hostile environment: sexual harassment? How was she harmed?

If you were the union or Chuck, how would you investigate her grievance? If no witnesses supported Sally’s story, what would you conclude?

What, if any, would be an appropriate remedy for Sally?

If Sally returned to work after her leave-of-absence, how would you restore coworker relationships?

How might this scenario have been prevented?

Case Study #3

You are a female supervisor in a department where most of the employees are women. Although you’re generally pleased with the work environment and the productivity levels, you notice that every morning, at breaks and occasionally throughout the day the women gather around the water cooler in the kitchen area where their conversation tends to revolve around babies, breast feeding, birthing classes, menstrual cycles, and the like.

Recently, you hired Bill to work as the filing clerk. The files happen to be located around the corner from the kitchen area so Bill can hear most of the conversation taking place. Bill comes to you one day and tells you that he is becoming increasingly uncomfortable in this office environment. He says he thinks the women know he can hear their conversations, but that doesn’t seem to stop them from talking. In fact, from time to time when they can catch his attention, they occasionally tease him by saying for example, "Bill, what’s it like not to have to deal with this kind of girly stuff", or "Bill, what would the world be like if men could get pregnant, deliver babies and have menstrual cycles". Bill says he hopes you’ll keep his concern confidential. What do you do?

Case Study # 4

You’re a supervisor in a department where people have worked together for quite some time and are quite friendly towards one another. Joe, a successful, respected and long time account executive, is known for his quality back rubs and his willingness to alleviate a colleague’s stress by offering to give an occasional and quick neck rub or back massage. Everyone raves about his abilities and seems to really enjoy this added "work-place benefit".

Recently, you hired a new account assistant, Meg. Meg’s a pretty young woman, fresh out of college and obviously trying very hard to break into this tight circle and make a good impression on everyone in the office. Meg has made an especially good impression on Joe whom you’ve recently seen ask Meg out on a date. You heard Meg decline because she "had already made plans for that particular evening". Last week, you walked out of your office and saw Joe giving Meg a backrub. Although you can’t be sure, you thought Meg was a little red in the face and seemed rather embarrassed by the whole thing. What do you do?

In Gary v. Long, 59 F.3d 1391 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 116S. Ct. 569 (U.S. 1995), a female employee brought a Title VII hostile work environment claim against her employer, alleging that her supervisor had made crude references to her body, fondled her and then raped her, threatening to have her fired if she told anyone. The district court granted the employer’s motion to dismiss the law suit, relying on the employer’s well-publicized policy against sexual harassment and its swift action on the complaint. The D.C. Circuit affirmed on appeal, holding that the company’s well-known and enforced antisexual harassment policy insulated the employer: "We conclude that an employer may not be held liable for a supervisor’s hostile work environment harassment if the employer is able to establish that it has adopted policies and implemented measure such that the victimized employee either knew or should have known that the employer did not tolerate such conduct and that she could report it to the employer without fear of adverse consequences... [T]here can be no [employer] liability if the victim could not reasonably rely on the supervisor’s representations."