Introduction to Law
Simulation
Prepared by
Delois Yates
DeVry University Decatur, Georgia
Professor Crowder
Simulation
Sexual Harassment Case
Yes, I agree with the Judges’ assessment of the facts within this sexual harassment case. The complaining employee did prove that:
Clarence was a supervisor because he had the authority to guide, assign, and monitor activities of the employees within his team. Clarence also had the ability to choose employees to whom he wanted on his team. As per the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), an individual qualifies as an employee’s “supervisor” if: * the individual has authority to undertake or recommend tangible employment decisions affecting the employee; or * the individual has authority to direct the employee’s daily work activities.
Clarence did commit sexual harassment through the physical touching and stating sexual slurs that the employee found offensive and became uncomfortable. He committed verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Clarence created a hostile and offensive work environment by the complainant stating that his actions resulted in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted, or when the victim decides to quit the job). Although the legal and social understanding of sexual harassment varies by culture, the company did act upon the complaint by separating the two employees’ workstations.
The Complaining employee was distraught enough to cry and complain to other supervisors.
She also requested a transfer because the supervisor’s behavior affected her job. Human Resources were informed as the last result.
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as in this case. Sexual harassment in extreme cases is torts.
