Must Sexual Harassment Victims Quit To Prove That The Harassment Was Offensive To Them?
One way employers exploit and cause further harm to sexual harassment victims, our Marion County, Florida sexual harassment lawyers have learned, is by conducting bad faith investigations into their sexual harassment complaints. In many cases, employer investigations into sexual harassment complaints are not only rigged to reach a pre-determined conclusion but are also designed to obtain information that can be used against sexual harassment victims if they pursue litigation. In other words, the goal of many employer investigations is not to help the sexual harassment victim but to harm the sexual harassment victim.
In attempting to obtain information from vulnerable sexual harassment victims that can be used against them in the litigation context, employer investigators attempt to establish through argumentative and misleading questions that the sexual harassment victim was not actually offended by the sexual conduct because she did not quit. Regardless of how a vulnerable sexual harassment victim responds to an employer investigator’s argumentative and misleading questions, many employer investigations into sexual harassment complaints find that the sexual harassment victim was not actually offended by the conduct because she did not quit. Based on this self-serving and legally frivolous finding, employer investigations into sexual harassment complaints invariably conclude that no sexual harassment occurred or that the sexual harassment complaint could not be substantiated.
In this article, our sexual harassment lawyers in Marion County, Florida explain how the decision in Jackson v. Management & Training Corporation, 2024 WL 3352446 (N.D. Miss. July 8, 2024) shows that sexual harassment victims are not required to quit in order to establish that they were actually offended by the sexual conduct.
Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
In that case, a woman named Jackson brought a sexual harassment claim against her former employer, Management & Training Corporation (“MTC”), pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). Title VII protects employees from sexual harassment in the workplace. Jackson claims, that during her employment with MTC, she was sexually harassed in violation of Title VII.
In February 2021, Jackson began working for MTC as a case manager at a prison. Jackson maintains that shortly after her employment began, she was subjected to unwanted sexually harassing behavior from a co-worker named Lee. Jackson alleges, among other things, that Lee frequently made sexual comments, touched her, and propositioned her for sex. Jackson claims that although she repeatedly told Lee that his alleged sexual behavior made her uncomfortable, Lee’s behavior continued. Jackson contends that she made repeated complaints regarding Lee’s alleged sexual behavior, both written and verbal, to co-workers and supervisors, but to no avail. Jackson alleges that she continued to receive unwelcome sexual advances from Lee for months. Jackson alleges that in November 2021, she complained to her direct supervisor. In December 2021, Jackson’s employment was terminated because of her alleged failure to cooperate with an investigation into a murder committed in the prison by refusing to have her tattoos photographed as a part of the investigation.
“Blind To Realities Of Working-Class America”
MTC filed a motion with the trial court seeking dismissal of Jackson’s sexual harassment claim. In moving for dismissal, MTC argued that Jackson could not establish that the alleged sexual harassment was unwanted because “if she had actually been offended” by the behavior “she would have quit.” According to MTC, although Jackson “complains now that Lee sexually harassed her, a reasonable person who was offended by Lee’s conduct would not have stayed in the situation.” Because Jackson “stayed in the situation,” MTC declared, this “can only lead to one conclusion—namely that Jackson was not subjectively offended by Lee’s purported conduct.” In other words, MTC maintained that unless Jackson quit because of the sexual harassment, Jackson could not prove that she had actually been offended by Lee’s alleged sexual behavior.
In denying MTC’s motion for dismissal, the trial court condemned MTC’s argument as “remarkably insensitive and [ ] blind the realities of working-class America.” The trial court explained that “most individuals have families relying on them for support and, without an alternative source of income, do not have the luxury of leaving a job.” “They do, however,” the trial court pointed out, “have the right to be from harassment in the workplace, and these rights are not diminished simply because a person is not privileged enough to willingly forgo a paycheck.”
In rejecting MTC’s argument, the trial court also found that Jackson “provided ample evidence that she subjectively considered the harassment hostile and abusive.” Jackson, the trial court noted, “told Lee on many occasions that his conduct made her uncomfortable and repeatedly complained of the harassment to co-workers and supervisors.” This evidence, the trial concluded, was sufficient to establish that Jackson had actually been offended by the alleged sexual behavior and, thus, considered the alleged sexual behavior unwanted.
Free Consultation For Harassment Victims
One of the most significant decisions sexual harassment victims must make is which sexual harassment lawyers to consult with regarding their rights and remedies under employment discrimination law. As part of our dedication to helping sexual harassment victims, an experienced sexual harassment attorney will speak with you personally and you will receive the individualized attention your case deserves. We offer free confidential case evaluations for employees, and you will not have to pay to speak with our sexual harassment attorneys regarding your rights. We are available for consultation at your convenience, including scheduling telephone consultations for evenings and weekends.
Marion County Sexual Harassment Lawyers
Based in Ocala, Florida and representing workers throughout Florida, our sexual harassment lawyers in Marion County, Florida have fought for the rights of sexual harassment victims for more than two decades. If you have experienced sexual harassment at work or have questions about your rights as a sexual harassment victim, please contact our office for a free consultation with our sexual harassment lawyers in Marion County, Florida. Our employee rights law firm takes sexual harassment cases on a contingency fee basis. This means that there are no attorney’s fees incurred unless there is a recovery and our attorney’s fees come solely from the monetary award that you recover.