Readthe “Sidebar
20.6” in Ch. 20 of the text.
Write paper of 700-
to 1,050-words in which you analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in
scenario.
· Analyze each of the
elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court’s
ruling.
· Analyze the possible
liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor
versus an employee.
Cite to at least
three peer-reviewed sources.
Sidebar 20.6:
Can vulgar
language,even if it is not specifically
directed at an individual,be actionable as sexual
harassment
under Title VII? Yes—according to the
11th Circuit
Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, Ingrid
Reeves,
worked at a sales company, C.H. Robinson.
Reeves
alleged that she was subjected to hearing her
male
co-workers call other women names such as
“b***h,”
“wh**e” and “c**t” on a daily basis. She also
claimed that
there were repeated vulgar discussions
about female
body parts and a pornographic image
of a woman in
the office. Reeves complained to her
co-workers,
her supervisor, and top company executives,
but the
offensive conduct was “accepted and
tolerated.”
According to
the 11th Circuit, “if Reeves’s account
is to be
believed, C.H. Robinson’s workplace was more
than a rough
environment—indiscriminately vulgar,
profane, and
sexual. Instead, a just reasonably could
find that it
was a workplace that exposed Reeves to
disadvantageous
terms or conditions of employment
to which
members of the other sex were not exposed.”
Moreover, the
court stated that it was no defense to
assert “that
the workplace may have been vulgar and
sexually
degrading before Reeves arrived.”
For more
information, see,Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.,
07-10270
(11th Cir. Jan. 20, 2010), available at www.ca11.uscourts.gov/
opinions/ops/200710270op2.pdf.
