If male supervisors ask a female underling to get them coffee, does such a request amount to sexual harassment? A federal court sitting in Pennsylvania recently faced that question.
What happened.A woman worked as a part-time receptionist for National Sales & Supply, of Bensalem, for 6 weeks. When two male vice presidents asked her to get coffee for them on an almost-daily basis, she complied a few times, but felt that the requests "reinforced outdated gender stereotypes" and bordered on harassment. When one of the VPs insisted via e-mail that one of her responsibilities was to make and bring him coffee, she responded that had she known this, she would never have taken the job. Nine minutes later, he sent an e-mail back to her telling her she was fired. She sued the company for sexual harassment. National asked the court to dismiss the case.
What the court said. The court interpreted the sexual harassment claim as a claim of a hostile work environment. She had to show that (1) she suffered intentional discrimination because of [her] sex; (2) the discrimination was pervasive and regular; (3) the discrimination detrimentally affected her; (4) the discrimination would detrimentally affect a reasonable person of the same sex in that position; and (5) the employer was responsible for it.
Sexual overtones aren`t necessarily required: Behavior that creates a barrier to the progress of women in the workplace may qualify as such, the court said, because it conveys the message that women do not belong, and that they are welcome in the workplace only if they will subvert their identities to the sexual stereotypes prevalent in that environment. Here, the court stated that the act of getting coffee is not, by itself, a gender-specific act, but that in the context of other indicators of sexism, getting coffee could evince a discriminatory intent.
However, comparing her evidence to that presented in support of similar successful claims of sexual harassment, the court found that there was no evidence of offensive statements or other servile acts (e.g., dropping off laundry or paying personal bills for the male superiors). "There is no evidence of spoken or written statements, demeaning or otherwise, relating even tangentially to sex or gender," the court stated, granting the motion to dismiss. Klopfenstein v. National Sales and Supply, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 07-4004 (6/5/08).
Point to remember: As the court stated, in the context of other indicators of sexism, getting coffee could evince a discriminatory intent. But with no evidence of any demeaning statements relating even tangentially to sex or gender, the request that a female employee go for coffee does not amount to sexual harassment.
What happened.A woman worked as a part-time receptionist for National Sales & Supply, of Bensalem, for 6 weeks. When two male vice presidents asked her to get coffee for them on an almost-daily basis, she complied a few times, but felt that the requests "reinforced outdated gender stereotypes" and bordered on harassment. When one of the VPs insisted via e-mail that one of her responsibilities was to make and bring him coffee, she responded that had she known this, she would never have taken the job. Nine minutes later, he sent an e-mail back to her telling her she was fired. She sued the company for sexual harassment. National asked the court to dismiss the case.
What the court said. The court interpreted the sexual harassment claim as a claim of a hostile work environment. She had to show that (1) she suffered intentional discrimination because of [her] sex; (2) the discrimination was pervasive and regular; (3) the discrimination detrimentally affected her; (4) the discrimination would detrimentally affect a reasonable person of the same sex in that position; and (5) the employer was responsible for it.
Sexual overtones aren`t necessarily required: Behavior that creates a barrier to the progress of women in the workplace may qualify as such, the court said, because it conveys the message that women do not belong, and that they are welcome in the workplace only if they will subvert their identities to the sexual stereotypes prevalent in that environment. Here, the court stated that the act of getting coffee is not, by itself, a gender-specific act, but that in the context of other indicators of sexism, getting coffee could evince a discriminatory intent.
However, comparing her evidence to that presented in support of similar successful claims of sexual harassment, the court found that there was no evidence of offensive statements or other servile acts (e.g., dropping off laundry or paying personal bills for the male superiors). "There is no evidence of spoken or written statements, demeaning or otherwise, relating even tangentially to sex or gender," the court stated, granting the motion to dismiss. Klopfenstein v. National Sales and Supply, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 07-4004 (6/5/08).
Point to remember: As the court stated, in the context of other indicators of sexism, getting coffee could evince a discriminatory intent. But with no evidence of any demeaning statements relating even tangentially to sex or gender, the request that a female employee go for coffee does not amount to sexual harassment.
No comments:
Post a Comment