2024
2023
2021
- Denial of Work-From-Home Requests: A New Era of Discrimination?
- April Showers Bring
- Restrictions on Employee Social Media
- Can Employees Be Forced to Get the Covid-19 Vaccination?
2020
- Holidays...To Pay or Not to Pay, What is Required
- EEOC Update on COVID-19
- Protection of Employee Health Information
- Civil Rights Win for LGBTQ Employees
- OSHA Recordkeeping Requirements During the COVID-19 Pandemic
- The Line Between At-Will Termination and Wrongful Termination
- Regulating Firearms in the Workplace
- Social Media Use in Hiring
2019
2018
- What Not to Wear
- Vicarious Liability for Unlawful Harrassment
- Employee Surveillance & Union Formation
- A Lesson in Retaliation
- Employers May Sometimes Judge a Book By Its Cover
- Mind Your P’s and Q’s . . . and BFOQs
- Severance Agreements
- U.S. Department of Labor "Paid" Program
- Revisiting Records Retention
- Calculating the Regular Rate
- Independent Contractor or Employee?
2017
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- DRI Membership: It’s Personal
- Is Extended Leave a Reasonable Accommodation?
- Parental Leave
- Pay Disparity
- Religious accomodation in the workplace
- Equal pay and prior salary information
- I quit! How to avoid constructive discharge
- You Can't Shred Email
- Navigating Unemployment Claims
- Considering Criminal History in Pre-Employment Decisions
- Defamation Claims from Former Employees
- Mixed Motive Causation
2016
- Requesting Accomodation: Kowitz v. Trinity Health
- Antitrust Law in Human Resources
- An Evolving Standard: Joint-Employment
- What Does At-Will Employment Mean for Employers?
- Let's Talk About Wages
- THE FLSA: CHANGES ARE COMING
- Follow Up: Obesity and the ADA
- The Importance of Social Media Policies
- Is Obesity a Qualifying Disability under the ADA?
- Retaliation on the Rise: The EEOC Responds
- What Motivates You?
2015
- "But I thought ...
- Who’s expecting? And what is he expecting?
- Are You Still Doing Annual Performance Reviews?
- Who is Your Employee?
- The unpaid intern trap Part II
- “We’ve been the victim of a cyber-attack”
- So, a Hasidic Jew, a nun in a habit and a woman wearing a headscarf walk into your office?
- The unpaid intern trap
- Pregnancy in the workplace
- Let's talk about honesty.
- "Did You Know" Series - Part I
- Conducting an Internal Investigation
- What HR can look forward to in 2015!
2014
- The chokehold of workplace technology
- Does your company have trade secrets?
- North Dakota Construction Law Compendium for 2014
- Does the North Dakota baby boom affect you?
- Ban the Box? Why?
- The end of the world as we know it
- Everybody has an opinion
- Changes, Changes, Changes!
- Nick Grant presents at North Dakota Safety Council's 41st Annual Safety and Health Conference
- Email impairment: A potentially harmful condition
Oct 08, 2018
One of my favorite shows to watch and rewatch is the popular NBC comedy The Office. The show follows the employees of the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin—a paper company. This sitcom brings us an iconic character—Michael Scott. Michael is the manager of the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin. His hijinks entertained audiences, and were the focus of the show for multiple seasons. However, Michael may have been an employer’s worst nightmare as a manager. Some of his “greatest hits” of terrible decisions include fake firing an employee, making inappropriate sexual jokes in the office, hitting an employee with his car on company property, and kissing another employee to prove that he is not homophobic. Much of his behavior could be perceived as harassment.
The Law:
An employer can be held legally responsible for the actions of its supervisory employees. This is called vicarious liability. It has been made clear that an employer can be subject to vicarious liability for unlawful harassment by a supervisor. However, there are some instances where an employer can protect themselves from such responsibility.
First, the general rule is that an employer will always be held vicariously liable where the unlawful harassment resulted in a “tangible employment action” against the employee. A tangible employment action is a significant change in employment status. So, examples include termination, failure to promote, demotion, reassignment, or change in compensation or benefits.
An employer has an affirmative defense against vicarious liability where it can show that the harassment did not result in a tangible employment action. To utilize this defense, the employer must show (1) that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct any harassing behavior; and (2) that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preemptive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to otherwise avoid harm. If these can be proven, the employer will avoid all liability for the harassment.
The Takeaway:
In the show, there was very little consequence for Michael’s ill-advised actions, though Dunder Mifflin did take some action. We see the entire office participating in sensitivity training, and in one episode, we can see that Oscar received a settlement from the company for Michael’s actions.
There are many different avenues for an employer to take in order to prevent unlawful harassment in the workplace, and to insulate itself from potential vicarious liability. Preservation of the affirmative defense discussed above is crucial. The standard here is going to be that the employer exercised reasonable care. Steps to preserve this defense include:
Our Interest in Serving You:
My law firm’s goal is to give understandable information and to foster discussion about real-life issues facing human resource professionals. If we are not achieving that goal or if you would like us to address other employment law issues, please email me at amann@ndlaw.com. We promise to take your comments and ideas to heart.
Disclaimers
(Otherwise known as “the fine print”)
I make a serious effort to be accurate in my writings. These articles are not exhaustive treatises, though, so do not consider them complete or authoritative. Providing this information to you does not create an attorney-client relationship with my firm or me. Do not act upon the contents of this or of any article on our homepage or consider it a replacement for professional advice.
Reprinted with permission from an article submitted for publication in the October, 2018 Southwest Area Human Resource Association newsletter.
Vicarious Liability for Unlawful Harrassment
By: Allison MannOne of my favorite shows to watch and rewatch is the popular NBC comedy The Office. The show follows the employees of the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin—a paper company. This sitcom brings us an iconic character—Michael Scott. Michael is the manager of the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin. His hijinks entertained audiences, and were the focus of the show for multiple seasons. However, Michael may have been an employer’s worst nightmare as a manager. Some of his “greatest hits” of terrible decisions include fake firing an employee, making inappropriate sexual jokes in the office, hitting an employee with his car on company property, and kissing another employee to prove that he is not homophobic. Much of his behavior could be perceived as harassment.
The Law:
An employer can be held legally responsible for the actions of its supervisory employees. This is called vicarious liability. It has been made clear that an employer can be subject to vicarious liability for unlawful harassment by a supervisor. However, there are some instances where an employer can protect themselves from such responsibility.
First, the general rule is that an employer will always be held vicariously liable where the unlawful harassment resulted in a “tangible employment action” against the employee. A tangible employment action is a significant change in employment status. So, examples include termination, failure to promote, demotion, reassignment, or change in compensation or benefits.
An employer has an affirmative defense against vicarious liability where it can show that the harassment did not result in a tangible employment action. To utilize this defense, the employer must show (1) that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct any harassing behavior; and (2) that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preemptive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to otherwise avoid harm. If these can be proven, the employer will avoid all liability for the harassment.
The Takeaway:
In the show, there was very little consequence for Michael’s ill-advised actions, though Dunder Mifflin did take some action. We see the entire office participating in sensitivity training, and in one episode, we can see that Oscar received a settlement from the company for Michael’s actions.
There are many different avenues for an employer to take in order to prevent unlawful harassment in the workplace, and to insulate itself from potential vicarious liability. Preservation of the affirmative defense discussed above is crucial. The standard here is going to be that the employer exercised reasonable care. Steps to preserve this defense include:
Our Interest in Serving You:
My law firm’s goal is to give understandable information and to foster discussion about real-life issues facing human resource professionals. If we are not achieving that goal or if you would like us to address other employment law issues, please email me at amann@ndlaw.com. We promise to take your comments and ideas to heart.
Disclaimers
(Otherwise known as “the fine print”)
I make a serious effort to be accurate in my writings. These articles are not exhaustive treatises, though, so do not consider them complete or authoritative. Providing this information to you does not create an attorney-client relationship with my firm or me. Do not act upon the contents of this or of any article on our homepage or consider it a replacement for professional advice.
Reprinted with permission from an article submitted for publication in the October, 2018 Southwest Area Human Resource Association newsletter.