Employers Can Stop and Correct Harassment

If you are the victim of racially-based or other harassment at work, your employer’s hands are not tied regarding effectively handling the situation in a manner that is likely to prevent your mistreatment from occurring again. Your employer has many options available to deter and stop harassment, regardless of the impression that those in authority (supervisors, Human Resources staff, etc.) may provide you.

When it comes to claims of racially-based harassment, companies often do not like to respond even though providing an adequate response to illegal behavior is in their best interest. Instead of squashing the careers of those who would harass a coworker or subordinate, many companies go into denial mode, which they believe offers some form of protection. In other words, if they didn’t know or “believe” that harassment was taking place, companies fool themselves into believing they are not legally liable for any damage that may have occurred to an employee’s career. But, deniability doesn’t automatically hold up under the law.

A company is legally responsible for preventing and stopping harassment from occurring. If you believe you are the victim of harassment (including retaliation and experiencing a hostile work environment), you should document everything that is occurring. You must show proof as to why your company must take action.

What can your employer do (or should be doing) to your harasser? Here are some options offered by EEOC regarding harassment in the workplace:

-- oral or writing warnings/reprimands
-- transfer or reassignment
-- demotion
-- salary cut
-- suspension
-- termination
-- training or counseling of harasser
-- monitoring the harasser to ensure that harassment stops
Source: www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/harassmetn.html

As you can see there are light and hard-hitting remedies available. It’s your job to know that these options are available to deal with harassment and to suggest some stringent form of punishment is doled out to your abuser. But, you have to prove your case or your company will sleepwalk through your entire ordeal. Document mistreatment, provide the names of witnesses who can verify your accounts and save harassing email and voicemail as proof that your abuser has gone overboard. Then, demand action is taken.

NOTE: Your employer cannot force you to transfer to another department to avoid your harasser. But, you can volunteer to move to another department if it is in the best interest of your career and/or mental health.

More on Mediation

One of the strongest defenses an employer can use is to state and then prove that it undertook reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassment in the workplace. In order to do this an employer is required to establish, disseminate, and enforce an anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure and to take other reasonable steps to prevent and correct harassment.

As stated previously on this blog, simply having anti-harassment or other written policies is not good enough because there are no "safe harbors" for employers based on the written content of policies and procedures. Written policies only hold weight if the employer has implemented those policies effectively (e.g., by conducting a fair, thorough, and impartial investigation).

Just as written policies are not enough, an employer offering a complaining employee mediation/arbitration is also insufficient for an employer to prove that it exercised reasonable care. Let me write that again: A union grievance and arbitration system does not fulfill the obligation of exercising reasonable care.

Decision making under such a system addresses the collective interests of bargaining unit members, while decision making under an internal harassment complaint process should focus on the individual employee's rights under the employer's anti-harassment policy.

Again, an arbitration, mediation, or other alternative dispute resolution process does not fulfill the employer's duty of due care. The employer cannot dismiss its responsibility to investigate complaints of harassment and undertake corrective measures by providing employees with a dispute resolution process.

Source: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/harassment.html#VC

The Affirmative Defense

If you file a charge against your employer alleging some form of race discrimination (violations of the Federal statutes of The Civil Rights Act), your employer will have to determine how to respond to the allegations. Whether you have filed a complaint with an organization such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or you have sought the assistance of an attorney, your employer isn’t very likely to instantly assume full responsibility for any infractions of Federal statutes.

One option your employer has is to file an affirmative defense. With an affirmative defense, your employer won’t have to deny any charges that have been brought. However, the employer will be able to raise extenuating or mitigating circumstances in order to avoid responsibility in a civil case.

An example of an affirmative defense would be an employer arguing that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassment. Reasonable care generally requires an employer to establish, disseminate, and enforce an anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure and to take other reasonable steps to prevent and correct harassment.

Despite the attempt to rely on having written policies in place, it’s important to remember that there are no "safe harbors" for employers based on the written content of policies and procedures. However, this doesn’t stop an employer from using this argument in their defense. And, it doesn’t stop the complaining employee from proving that the employer did not take steps—or took inadequate or delayed steps—in preventing and/or correcting harassment.

Another example of the affirmative defense would be an employer arguing that a complaining employee did not take the reasonable and necessary steps to avoid harm from race-based harassment, retaliation, etc. by not reporting the abuse to management or taking advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities.

An employer who can prove they exercised reasonable care may not be liable for unlawful harassment if the complaining employee could have avoided all of the actionable harm. If some but not all of the harm could have been avoided, then an award of damages will be reduced accordingly. The complaining employee doesn’t have to prove they showed reasonable care…that burden falls on the employer. The employer must show that the employee’s failure to complain of abuse was unreasonable.

Keep in mind, even if an employee doesn’t complain the Federal statute recognizes that there may be legitimate reasons for silence on the issue. For instance, if an employee has seen other complaining employees subjected to retaliatory actions (e.g., fired, demoted, subjected to a hostile work environment, etc.), the employee would reasonably fear making a complaint. Additionally, if illegal abuse is so prevalent in the workplace that many people knew about it, the company would be liable for not addressing the problem because the abuse was so widely known that it is reasonable to expect that someone in authority knew of the problem.

Finally, if an employer files an affirmative defense, the employer must prove the validity of the defense. The employer can’t just state an affirmative defense and hope someone buys it. They must prove this defense.

Source: www.eeoc.gov

Employers Should Look for Patterns of Improper Behavior in the Workplace

Establishing patterns of prior bad acts in the workplace can help an employee demonstrate that their employer had indications that a coworker, supervisor, etc. had a history of engaging in illegal misconduct, but did nothing to prevent such behavior from happening—again. Establishing patterns of prior bad acts can also demonstrate that an employer not only ignored a problem employee or manager, but that they also may have never even attempted to correct the behavior. For instance, the harasser was never put on any warnings, placed on probation, sent to training, demoted, transferred, suspended, etc.

But, establishing patterns of negative behavior is not just the responsibility of the victim of harassment, retaliation, etc. The employer is also obligated to examine the pattern behavior of employees. When it comes to patterns of negative behavior, the EEOC says:

“Reasonable preventive measures include screening applicants for supervisory jobs to see if any have a record of engaging in harassment. If so, it may be necessary for the employer to reject a candidate on that basis or to take additional steps to prevent harassment by that individual…it is advisable for an employer to keep records of all complaints of harassment. Without such records, the employer could be unaware of a pattern of harassment by the same individual. Such a pattern would be relevant to credibility assessments and disciplinary measures.”

This all goes to show how important it is to look for prior bad acts by a harasser. But, at the same time, it shows how important it is to notify your employer/make a formal complaint of harassment, if you believe you are being subjected to a hostile and offensive work environment.

Think of it this way…if you suffer in silence, you embolden your enemies—as our President, George W. Bush, is fond of saying.

By filing a complaint against your harasser, you help to create a history of your harasser behaving in an illegal manner. If your harasser has already been on the receiving end of harassment complaints, their record of this illegal behavior will be extended to the present—as opposed to possibly years ago.

Just the fact that you made a complaint can go a long way towards helping another employee, who may find that they have the same problem with this same employee—in the future. It’s up to each of us to hold racist employees, harassers, etc. to account.

Still, even without complaints, employers are responsible for any illegal behavior that was so prevalent that members of authority/management had to have known the illegal abuse was happening!

Investigate the Perpetrator of Discrimination, Harassment, etc.

Start a similar incidences log! If you are being harassed or discriminated against at work, you should do your best to find out if your harasser or tormentor has had similar encounters with other employees or if there have been other informal or formal complaints lodged against this person. If so, you should create a log that you can use to track this similar past behavior.

If a pattern of negative behavior exists, you should use this log to demonstrate that this pattern of prior bad acts have not been adequately addressed by your employer. Your employer is legally responsible to have preventative measures in place that discourage illegal misconduct at work. Similarly, your employer is legally responsible to utilize corrective measures to put a stop to anyone engaging in illegal misconduct at work.

For instance, if a manager has been on the receiving end of several complaints from minority employees, your company should conduct a thorough investigation into this manager. While the investigation is being conducted, the manager should be subjected to heightened scrutiny to make sure he/she doesn’t attempt to retaliate against his/her subordinates. And, the manager could be removed—at least temporarily—from management responsibility/maintaining a position of authority over the complaining subordinates.

If the manager is found guilty of engaging in illegal misconduct, additional corrective actions could include firing or demoting the manager, written warnings and probation, participation in diversity and/or sensitivity training classes, salary cuts, etc.

But, the first step in fighting back is finding out what your “enemy” has been up to. If your employer has received numerous complaints from a variety of minority employees about racially-based harassment by a particular supervisor, you should definitely make note of this pattern in a log. Have conversations with anyone who has had similar experiences with the individual, even if they never filed a complaint. Find out as much specific information as you can and highlight all of the similarities with your case. Be sure to note what action, if any, was taken by your employer based on a problem pattern of behavior.

This will also have an impact on your employer’s liability in your case--especially if the past bad acts go back for a significant period of time. This would show that your employer knew it had a long-term problem with this employee, but did nothing. The inaction of your employer would demonstrate a tolerance for illegal misconduct and a lack of seriousness regarding maintaining a workplace free of discrimination, harassment, etc.

LEGAL BRIEF: Justice Department Says FDNY Hiring Practices Are Discriminatory!

The Justice Department has authorized the filing of a lawsuit against the city of NY based on the findings of an investigation that showed that the FDNY’s recruitment process discriminates against Blacks and Hispanics.

The FDNY has responded by stating they’ve made major changes in their recruitment techniques in order to attract more minority candidates. The FDNY commissioner, Nicholas Scoppetta said the FDNY isn’t looking for a fight, just a reasonable solution to the problem. Last year, City Hall gave the FDNY $1.4 million to use toward minority recruitment.

A lawsuit will be filed within 30 days, unless some sort of settlement is reached. If a judge is brought in to review the FDNY’s hiring practices, one solution could be to require one minority candidate to be hired for every three non-minority candidates.

Source: The NY Daily News, We'll Deal With Heat-FDNY, By John Marzulli and Jonathan Lemire, Wednesday, April 25, 2007

ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE: Segregation and Classification

According to the EEOC, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is violated where employees who belong to a protected group are segregated by physically isolating them from other employees or from customer contact. In addition, employers may not assign employees according to race or color.

For example, Title VII prohibits assigning primarily African-Americans to predominantly African-American establishments or geographic areas. It is also illegal to exclude members of one group from particular positions or to group or categorize employees or jobs so that certain jobs are generally held by members of a certain protected group. Coding applications/resumes to designate an applicant's race, by either an employer or employment agency, constitutes evidence of discrimination where people of a certain race or color are excluded from employment or from certain positions.

I’ve previously written about one job I had, where the darker Black employees were assigned seating in the rear of the office. Our conference room was located near the rear of the office and we had specific printers to use (in the back). Unless we were going to an external meeting, to the rest room or were visiting another department—we were out of sight.

At another job, Black workers were routinely excluded from direct client contact. White managers, mid-level staff, and junior staff would normally attend the meetings with our government clients. After all of the strategy sessions were done, Black employees would be invited to participate—on conference calls. It got so bad, that one government contracting officer asked the President and CEO of our company where the Black employees were. She said that she and other contracting officers noticed they were only meeting White employees. She said that the government was using taxpayer funds and she expected diversity. She also said that she wanted to make sure that Black and minority workers were being assigned to work on the tasks—African American and “mainstream” assignments. The contracting officer declared an expectation that minorities not just perform administrative work, but ACTUAL PROJECT WORK.

So, my employer literally held one of her “dog and pony shows.” Except, this time, she was showing off the Black and minority workers. The CEO took these government clients around our office building—only stopping at the offices of Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian employees. This was the first time many of us were introduced to our clients. We'd never seen any of these people and our contracts had been going on for years!

Another example of segregation is that some Black employees are segregated to only work on Black projects. I had a coworker, a researcher, who was only assigned to conduct research, when the interviewees were Black. This was the tactic used by a director and a mid-level manager in another department. They refused to assign her to interview Whites, Hispanics, etc.

Another issue, at some companies, is that Black workers end up in the lowest level administrative staff positions and with the lowest salaries. This can represent a segregation and classification issue because it is not inherently plausible that only Blacks are capable of working in the lowest level jobs at a company.

What can you do?

Take a look at the positions at your job. Who is working on what? What are the titles, job levels, and classifications? If you suspect a segregation and classification issue, begin to compile documentation that can support your position. If your company distributes employees lists and other demographic charts, mark them up to reflect the issue you see. Talk to other employees to see if they also notice the issue and view it as a problem. If a group of employees want to address the issue, do so as a group. Speak to someone in HR about the issue. It’s best to go in mass regarding issues like this. But, if you have to fly solo, make sure you have all the facts and can prove your point. Build a circumstantial case that is sound and easy to understand. Gather organizational charts and anything else that will demonstrate a need for investigation and change.

Source: http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html

Harassment by a Co-worker or other "Non-Employer"

Some workplace harassment is not perpetrated by someone in a position of authority over an employee. Instead, the harassment may be carried out by an employee’s coworker(s) or some other "non-employer." When this type of harassment takes place, it is often common knowledge among staff. Although we’d like to think that someone with the audacity to harass or bully a coworker would do so out of sight of other employees, often other staff will witness or overhear the harassment. Let’s not forget, one of the best parts of harassment, from the perpetrator’s point of view, is the public humiliation (among staff) that the victim must suffer through. Embarrassing the victim is a huge payoff for people who engage in this behavior. It’s the humiliation that will help to isolate the target of the harassment and that may help persuade the victim to transfer to another department or resign from their job.

Just because an employee is not being harassed by someone in authority doesn’t mean that employers aren’t liable for any damage caused by the mistreatment. So, if you’re being harassed by someone senior to you (with no authority over you), someone who’s the same level as you or even by someone that is junior to you, your employer may still be liable for damage to your career, etc.

In the decision for Faragher, 118 S. Ct. at 2289 the Supreme Court said, “When harassment is perpetrated by the plaintiff’s coworkers, an employer will be liable if the plaintiff demonstrates that ‘the employer either provided no reasonable avenue for complaint [you didn’t have a way to complain of mistreatment] or knew of the harassment but did nothing about it.’”

On top of that, the EEOC states that an employer is liable for harassment by a co-worker or non-employer if management knew or should have known of the misconduct, unless the employer can show that it took immediate and appropriate corrective action.

So, if your coworker (or any workplace “non-employer”) is harassing you, your employer may be liable for punitive and/or other damages if they knew or should have known about your mistreatment because it was so prevalent and out-in-open in your workplace, but they did nothing about it! If your employer did take the right and immediate corrective actions against the person harassing you (e.g., transferring the perpetrator, firing the perpetrator, etc.), you may not be able to convince the court that your employer is liable for any damages.

LEGAL BRIEF: Only the Mental State of the Harasser is Relevant!

When racially-based issues take place in the workplace, employers like to use a few tactics:

--Deny everything!
--Blame the complainant by turning the victim into the bad guy and by pointing out alleged deficiencies with the victim’s behavior. In other words, they will justify why the victim was targeted for mistreatment.
--When backed into a corner, lay all of the blame on the offender and declare—as loudly as possibly—that the company’s higher-ups would have never tolerated illegal misconduct and would have immediately corrected inappropriate behavior, if they had only known about it.

I’d like to focus on #3 for a moment. You see, employer’s like to put all of the blame on a coworker or supervisor, after they see there isn’t any reasonable way they can claim that illegal misconduct didn’t take place. By laying blame on one or more individuals, many employers believe they can escape liability. They will try to make the illegal misconduct look like an anomaly and something that is extremely atypical of what would normally occur in their workplace.

So, the employers will be spitting all of this venom and fire about how horrible the offender was and how they were a rogue employee that went off the rails. The employers will position themselves as rationale, fair, and helpful in the hopes they can escape liability.

But, in the Supreme Court decision for Kolstad v. American Dental Association, 119 S. Ct. 401, (1998) it says, “The test for imposition of punitive damage is the mental sate of the harasser, not of the higher-level officials…”

Therefore, it doesn’t matter how reasonably or fairly the employer may have acted or would have acted; they are still liable for the illegal behavior of their staff, supervisors, etc.

The EEOC states that:

“…an employer is liable for punitive damages if its supervisor commits unlawful harassment or other discriminatory conduct with malice or with reckless indifference to the employee’s federally protected rights.”

So, don’t let an employer sweet talk you into believing that you have no way to seek remedies outside of whatever they may or may not decide to do—in the workplace—to your harasser. Your employer may still have legal liability and may have to pay punitive damages to you, depending on the specific circumstances.

Immediate Response Doesn't Always Negate Liability!

Scenario: An employee is being harassed and subjected to a very hostile work environment due to the behavior of the employee’s supervisor. The behavior of the supervisor is so egregious that everyone knows what’s going on. The supervisor openly humiliates the employee in front of other staff, has been seen shoving and encroaching on the personal space of the employee, has falsely and intentionally accused the employee of mistakes made by other staff, has stripped the employee of many assignments, has asked the employee to perform menial and non-work related tasks, like cleaning, etc. Members of management have seen or heard about the mistreatment because the misconduct is happening out in the open. But, no one does anything!

Finally, the employee can’t take the abuse anymore and goes to HR to complain about the supervisor’s behavior. HR takes quick action against the supervisor. For instance, they demote him and require him to go to sensitivity training.

Question: Is that response good enough to resolve the situation?

Answer: Maybe not!

Even though the company quickly responded to the complaint and took action against the supervisor, the problem is that they waited for the employee to complain about mistreatment before they did anything about it.

According to a decision in Dees v. Johnson Controls World Services, Inc., 168 F. 3d 417, 422 (11th Cir. 1999):

“… [an] employer can be held liable despite its immediate and appropriate corrective action in response to a harassment complaint if it had knowledge of the harassment prior to the complaint and took no corrective action.”

The bottom line is that Federal law does not require that an employee complain about mistreatment because some employees may have a reasonable fear of complaining out of fear of retaliation, etc. For instance if they saw another employee mistreated after complaining of workplace abuse, it would be reasonable to remain quiet, while experiencing mistreatment. So, legally, there is a hope that employees complain about illegal mistreatment, but there is some flexibility on this.

Also, all members of management and authority in a company have an unwritten requirement to report workplace abuse of employees, if they have knowledge of potential misconduct (e.g., witnessing it or overhearing conversations about it, etc.).

So, an employer can’t just sit on its hands and wait for employees to complain about a problem coworker or manager before taking action against the offending person. They can fire an offending employee, but if they knew what was happening and allowed misconduct to continue, they may be legally liable for damages, etc. that occurred, while they did nothing to correct the abuse.