Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> California Labor and Employment Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: California Labor and Employment LawSexual Harassment in California
By Eugene Lee
It’s hard to believe that sexual harassment still occurs in the modern workplace, but it does. Luckily, Federal and California state laws offer powerful protections against workplace sexual harassment.
Under the law, there are two main types of sexual harassment:
“Sleep with me if you want to keep your job”
Quid pro quo sexual harassment is the type of harassment people are most familiar with. “Quid pro quo” is Latin for “this for that”. This form of sexual harassment involves a supervisor conditioning employee benefits, such as promotions, benefits or continuation of employment itself, on the employee’s acceptance of the supervisor’s harassing conduct, e.g., sexual advances.
There is probably not a more blatant form of employer exploitation of his superior position over a subordinate and the law is correspondingly harsh toward this type of harassment. Under California law, the employer is strictly liable for the sexual harassment of the supervisor and has no special legal defenses available to it. A successful plaintiff can recover lost wages and compensation of other economic losses, emotional distress damages, interest and attorney fees, and in cases where the employer’s officers, directors or managing agents knew of the harassment, punitive damages intended to punish or deter the employer.
Hostile work environment sexual harassment
Hostile work environment sexual harassment (HWE) consists of harassing conduct that is so severe or pervasive that it creates a hostile work environment for employees. Supervisors, co-workers, even subordinates can engage in conduct that gives rise to HWE. Harassing conduct includes slurs, taunts, intimidation, ridicule, groping, grabbing, etc.
Notice the requirement is not severe AND pervasive, but severe OR pervasive, meaning that a single instance of harassing conduct could create a hostile work environment if it is severe enough. Alternatively, a campaign of multiple acts of subtle harassment could collectively create a hostile work environment if it is pervasive enough.
The employee does not have to be the direct target of the harassing conduct in order to file a claim. For instance, a woman who witnesses her female co-workers being groped and propositioned can bring a claim for hostile work environment sexual harassment.
Recently, the California Supreme Court held that employer actions, such as termination, demotion, etc., could also constitute hostile work environment harassing conduct. See Roby v. McKesson HBOC (2009) 146 Cal.App.4th 63.
Harassment by supervisors and co-workers
If the harassment is by a supervisor, under California law, the employer will be on the hook under strict liability. If the harassment is by a co-worker, however, the employer will only be on the hook if a supervisor knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.
Federal law diverges from California law here in an unwelcome direction. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when a supervisor engages in hostile work environment harassment that does not involve tangible employer actions (e.g., termination, demotion), the employer can escape liability for HWE if the employer can show 1) employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior and 2) the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of the preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer, or to avoid harm otherwise. See Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth (1998) 524 US 742, 764?765; Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998) 524 US 775, 806. This is unfortunate in that many victims of sexual harassment do not immediately report it to their employers for fear of retaliation. Under federal law, these employees may be out of luck. This is one of the reasons why filing a sexual harassment claim under California rather than Federal law is usually the better course.
Conclusion
Sexual harassment law offer strong protections in California and victims should not be afraid to fight back. As always, it is best to talk to a lawyer as soon as possible. This is particularly true given that strict filing deadlines apply (180 days to file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and 1 year to file a charge with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing). Many lawyers offer free and confidential consultations, so don’t wait.
Print, Email, Share this post:
Related posts:
- LAPD Hit with $2.3 Mil. Sexual Harassment Jury Verdict
- Discrimination Laws in California
- Dukes v. Wal-Mart: 9th Circuit Upholds Class Certification in $11 Billion Sexual Discrimination Case
Full post as published by California Labor and Employment Law on January 14, 2010 (boomark / email).
Sexual Harassment Policy
Define harassment, outline complaint procedure
The Civil Rights Act of 1871
Law bans discrimination enacted under color of state law
Unlawful Retaliation for Sexual Harassment Claim
Title VII retaliatory discharge retaliation requires proof of participation in protected activities
Sex Offender Lists
Registries by State and County
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Sexual Harassment
(in the workplace)
Jury Awards $2 Million in Sexual Harassment Wrongful Termination Suit
Jury Awards $2 Million in Sexual Harassment Wrongful Termination Suit
California Labor Laws
alleged violations of California labor laws such as overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Student Harassment
Wichita School District pays $45,000 settlement for high school students' harassment lawsuit.
Victim of Sexual Attack Awarded $1.4 Million
Victim of Sexual Attack Awarded $1.5 Million
Catholic Archdiocese
Will Pay $12.6 Million in Sexual Abuse Settlements

The Monopoly Over Sexual Harassment
Sexual Harassment in California: A Twofer
Sexual Harassment: A Strange, Vague "Tort"
Leading California Professor Suspended Over Refusal to Take Mandatory Sexual Harassment Training








