In today’s workplace sexual harassment has become
somewhat of a buzzword. It is a word that employers,
supervisors and even fellow employees fear. Courts have
defined what constitutes a sexually-hostile work
environment under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act. Singleton v. Department of Corr. Educ., 4th Cir.,
No. 03-2160, (BNA Employment and Labor Law Homepage,
Vol. 23) gives us an example of how the Courts have
treated sexual harassment claims.
Internal investigatory findings
and other evidence that a librarian at Keen Mountain
Correctional Center was harassed by an assistant warden
roughly four times a week for 15 months, including
references to spanking and the installation of a camera
in her personal office, did not establish a
sexually-hostile work environment under Title VII of the
1964 Civil Rights Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit has affirmed.
Under Title VII, the standard for
establishing that the offending behavior constituted
sexual harassment is rather high," the court wrote in an
unpublished opinion. "After careful review, we conclude
that [Mary Ann] Singleton's allegations that [Assistant
Warden Elmer] Shinault made offensive comments, showed
her unwanted attention that made her uncomfortable, and
continuously expressed a sexual interest in her do not
meet the high standard."
Mrs. Singleton does not allege
that Shinault ever requested a sexual act, touched her
inappropriately, discussed sexual subjects, showed her
obscene materials, told her vulgar jokes, or threatened
her," noted visiting Judge David R. Hansen of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. "Nor does Mrs.
Singleton allege that his behavior interfered with her
ability to perform her job," he said. Thus, "her showing
is insufficient to meet the 'severe and pervasive'
standard."
She alleged that almost from the
beginning, Shinault, the prison's assistant warden for
operations and a DOC employee, began sexually harassing
her. The harassment, she claimed, occurred approximately
four times a week from July 2000 until October 2001 and
included, among other things:
• Shinault saying to her
DCE supervisor, George Erps, in her presence, "Look at
her. I bet you have to spank her every day," Erps
laughing and saying, "No. I probably should, but I
don't," and Shinault replying, "Well, I know I would."
• Shinault staring at her
breasts and insistently complimenting her and telling
her how attractive she was;
• Shinault measuring the
length of her skirt to judge its compliance with the
prison's dress code and telling her that it looked "real
good"; and
• Shinault repeatedly
commenting that if he had a wife as attractive as her he
would forbid her to work in a prison facility around so
many inmates.
Singleton reported Shinault's conduct to Erps, but
Erps did nothing to stop it and once responded to her
complaints by remarking, "Boys will be boys." She did
not file a formal allegation of sexual harassment,
because she mistakenly believed that as a probationary
employee she was not permitted to do so during her first
year, the court noted.
To establish an actionable sexual harassment claim
under Title VII, Hansen explained, an employee must show
that he or she (a) experienced unwelcome, offensive
conduct, (b) based on sex, (c) that was sufficiently
severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of
employment and create an abusive work environment, and
(d) that can be imputed to the employer. "Conduct that
is not severe or pervasive enough to create an
objectively hostile or abusive work environment--an
environment that a reasonable person would find hostile
or abusive--is beyond Title VII's purview," he stressed,
quoting Harris v. Forklift Sys. Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 63
FEP Cases 225 (1993).
It should be noted that most employers have standing
sexual harassment policies that are more stringent than
the standard needed for a Title VII claim. Employers
commonly institute a zero tolerance order. In most
workplaces the actions described above would likely
result in disciplinary action towards the offending
party. It is important to remember that while employees
may have worked with each other for years, and even
established friendly relationships, professionalism must
be maintained in the workplace.
