Making a case for clarity

0 Comments | La Crosse Tribune, Jun 27, 1998

Human resources managers are glad the U.S. Supreme Court has clarified the definition of sexual harassment and who is responsible for protecting employees from it in the workplace.

The high court ruled in two separate harassment cases Friday that will have broad impact in the workplace In both cases, the court ruled 7-2 that employers are always potentially liable for a supervisor's sexual misconduct toward an employee. In one of the cases. the court ruled that sexual harassment laws no longer will rely on the differences between "hostile environment" and "quid pro quo" cases, most obvious when a supervisor tells an employee "sleep with me or else."

"There has been a lot of disappointment in the business community with some of the court's rulings--how can you do anything about a situation that you didn't know anything about?" La Crosse County Personnel Director Robert Taunt said. "It is incumbent on someone in these cases to notify the human resources office."

Not many sexual harassment cases are as blatant as the recent ruling against Mitsubishi Motors, in which the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission won more than $30 million for female autoworkers who were grouped, fondled and called vulgar names.

Taunt said most cases come from what might have started as a joke.

"You know, someone in the office may have once found the joke funny, but they face the same kind of thing every day and pretty soon it's not so funny," Taunt said. "Pretty soon, the person starts dreading work."

And meanwhile, the person instigating the joke might not know that what they are now doing is sexually harassing the individual. If a lawsuit ensues, the company has little chance to rectify the problem before a judgment, Taunt said. La Crosse County has in place a policy that prohibits sexual harassment, he said.

"The basis of the law has changed over the years, but it is not the intent that counts, it is the way something is received that matters," said Mary Lund, human resources director for Dairyland Power Cooperative. Dairyland, like La Crosse County, has a zero tolerance policy regarding sexual harassment.

Lund said she had no "major problem" with the idea that an employer should be held responsible for their supervisory employees' actions.

"The law was created to stop inappropriate behavior by a supervisor," Lund said. "It only makes sense that the employer needs to provide a safe, harassment-free workplace."

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce took a different angle in commenting on the Supreme Court ruling, calling it a "clear, bright line standard for establishing when an employer is or is not responsible for sexual harassment in the workplace.

"Under this ruling, both the employer and the employee have clear responsibilities," said Stephen Bokat, Chamber general counsel. "The employer is responsible for setting guidelines, and the employee is responsible for following them. That's a position the Chamber has held for a long time, and finally, the Supreme Court has recognized that employees have certain obligations, too."

PAULA JONES ...

Attorneys in the Paula Corbin Jones case found another reason Friday to disagree: Whether a new Supreme Court decision will help Jones revive her sexual misconduct case against President Clinton.

An attorney for Jones pointed to the court's holding that victims do not have to suffer adverse job consequences in order to win sexual harassment lawsuits.

"It clearly gives us a better shot at winning on appeal," Jones attorney David Pyke said. "Tangible job detriment is not an issue in our case."

Clinton's attorney, Robert S. Bennett, noted that the Supreme Court case included several allegations over a long period. Jones' accusation involves a single, disputed incident.

"The Supreme Court's requirement that there be severe and pervasive conduct should be very helpful to us," Bennett said.

The St. Louis-based 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether to uphold or reverse the April 1 decision by U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright to dismiss the Jones case.