WWW.ABSTRACT.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Abstract, dissertation, book
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 4 | 5 || 7 | 8 |   ...   | 22 |

«ARTICLES What's Wrong With Sexual Harassment? Katherine M. Franke* In this article, Professor Franke asks and answers a seemingly simple question: ...»

-- [ Page 6 ] --

Pullman-Standard, 539 F.2d 77, 89-90 (5th Cir. 1976) (discriminatory job assignments, even absent salary discrimination or economic harm); Steadman v. Hundley, 421 F. Supp. 53, 57 (N.D. IlL 1976) (supervisor's racial slurs and unfairly adverse recommendations may lead to Title VII violation); cf United States v. City of Buffalo, 457 F. Supp. 612, 631-35 (W.D.N.Y. 1978) (hostile work environment for racial minorities constituted a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for people of color employed by city police and fire departments), affd as modified, 633 F.2d 643 (2d Cir. 1980); Murry v. American Standard, Inc., 373 F. Supp. 716, 717 (E.D. La. 1973) (black employee called "boy"), aff'd, 428 F.2d 529 (5th Cir.

1973); Johnson v. Lillie Rubin Affiliates, Inc., 5 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 8542, at 7558 (M.D. Tenn.

1973) (black women referred to by first names, while white women were called "Miss" or "Mrs.");

EEOC Dec. No. 72-1561, 4 Fair EmpI. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 852, 852 (May 12, 1972) (racially derogatory graffiti); EEOC Dec. No. 72-0957, 4 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 837, 837-38 (Feb. 2, 1972) (racial joke using "nigger" in training program); EEOC Dec. No. 72-0779, 4 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 317, 317-18 (Dec. 30, 1971) (black employee called "nigger"); EEOC Dec. No. 71-720, 3 Fair Empl. Prac.

Cas. (BNA) 142, 142 (Dec. 17, 1970) (black employee called "little black Sambo").

77. See, e.g., Compston v. Borden, Inc., 424 F. Supp. 157, 160-61 (S.D. Ohio 1976) (supervisor's demeaning religious slurs); Ratmer v. Trans World Airlines, N.Y. Comm'n on Human Rts., Decision No. 4135-J, Sept. 11, 1973 (antisemitic graffiti).

78. See Harassment on the Basis of Sex and Related Conduct Not Constituting Sexual Harassment, E.E.O.C. Comp. Man. (CCH) § 615.6, q 3105, at 3217 (Jan. 1982) ("Sexual harassment is one type of harassment based on sex. However, it is not the only type of unlawful harassment which is sexbased or which stems from sex discrimination. For proper processing and investigation of harassment charges, it is important to correctly distinguish sexual harassment from other forms of sex-based harassment and related conduct.").

79. EEOC Dec. No. 72-0679, 4 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 441, 441-42 (Dec. 27, 1971).

80. See Lipsett v. University of P.R., 864 F.2d 881, 906 (1st Cir. 1988) (comments that women should not be surgeons).

81. Fox v. Southeast Transp., Inc., Nos. CIV.A. 89-1442-WF & CIV.A. 89-1449-WF, 1993 WL 543203, at 1'2 (D. Mass. Dec. 9, 1993), aft'd, 25 F.3d 1037 (1st Cir. 1994).

82. See Parton v. GTE North, Inc., 802 F. Supp. 241, 245-46 (W.D. Mo. 1991) (female employee asked repeatedly when she would quit and get married), aff'd, 971 F.2d 150 (8th Cir. 1992).

83. Fox, 1993 WL 543203, at *2.

84. See Parton, 802 F. Supp. at 247 (female employees issued yellow safety strap for climbing ladders that male employees not required to use).

85. Courts and theorists alike have drawn heavily from race discrimination jurisprudence in order to show that sexual harassment violates Title VII. However, while sexual harassment is similar to, it is not the same as, racial harassment. Many authorities might say that Title VII proscribes all, or virtually all, conduct of a racial nature in the workplace, but few would argue that Title VII renders actionable all sexual conduct in the workplace. Indeed, the EEOC has stated quite clearly that "Title VII does not HeinOnline -- 49 Stan. L. Rev. 709 1996-1997 [Vol. 49:691

STANFORD LAW REVIEW

the harassment either conveyed the harasser's subjective discriminatory mental state (e.g., women should stay home and have babies or are not fit for certain types of work), or took a form that could have been motivated by a number of reasons, including86sexist or misogynist attitudes (e.g., denying female workers adequate breaks).

In the first kind of cases, the discriminatory nature of the harassment was transparent from the substance of the harassing conduct-its sexism spoke for itself. These cases factually echoed early race-based harassment cases in which African Americans were harassed for being "uppity"87 or "trouble-makers." 88 In both contexts, the harassment was undertaken because women and/or people of color had violated gender and race norms. In the second kind of cases, however, further evidence was necessary to prove that the harassing conduct was undertaken "because of the target's sex." This additional evidence put the harassment in a context that revealed its discriminatory nature by showing that similarly situated male workers were not treated similarly. In either case, the underlying notion was that a person should not suffer harassment, sexual or otherwise, in the workplace because of his or her sex.

Based upon these precedents, feminists argued that Title VII's proscriptions against sex discrimination should be understood to prohibit not only sex harassment, but sexual harassment-that is, conduct of a sexual nature. 89 While it may seem self-evident today that one can legitimately infer discriminatory moproscribe all conduct of a sexual nature in the workplace. Thus it is crucial to clearly define sexual harassment.... EEOC: Policy Guidance on Sexual Harassment,8 Fair Empl. Prac. Man. (BNA) 9j405, at 6681 (Mar. 19, 1990).

86. See EEOC Dec. No. 71-2046, 1973 EEOC Dec. (CCH) q 6242, at 4428 (May 12, 1971) (female employees as a class placed in shifts that did not qualify for breaks).





87. See, e.g., Robertson v. Granite Sch. Dist., No. 90-4164, 1992 WL 2883, at *2 (10th Cir. Jan 7, 1992) (African-American male school coach terminated in part because he was "an uppity nigger");

Williams v. Cerberonics, 871 F.2d 452, 456 (4th Cir. 1989) (former African-American woman referred to as that "black uppity female"); Marable v. H. Walker & Assoc., 644 F.2d 390, 396 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981) (finding that a landlord refused to rent to African-American man because, inter alia, he was "uppity"); EEOC Dec. No. 70-198, 1973 EEOC Dec. (CCH) 6087, at 4133 (OcL 9, 1969) (black employee discharged because his self-confident manner caused resentment among white employees).

88. See, e.g., Daugherty v. City of Danville, No. 87-5850, 1988 VL 90892, at *4 (6th Cir. Sept. 1, 1988) (former African-American police officer alleged chief of police said he wanted to weed out "nigger troublemakers"); Thomas v. Daniel Parker, CIV.A. No. 76-1852, 1979 WL 149, at *7 (D.D.C. Feb.

8, 1979) (black Foreign Service officer denied tenure because he was "greatly concerned with minority rights" which made him a "trouble-maker."); EEOC Dec. No. 71-1677, 3 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1242, 1243 (Apr. 12, 1971) (black female employee called "trouble-maker").

89. In 1993 the EEOC issued proposed guidelines that provided standards by which to evaluate all kinds of harassment whether based on race, color, religion, disability, national origin, or gender. Guidelines on Harassment Based on Race, Color, Religion, Gender, National Origin, Age, or Disability, 58 Fed. Reg. 51,266-69 (1993) (to be codified at 29 C.F.R. pt. 1609) (proposed Oct. 1, 1993). The proposed guidelines emphasized that they "cover[ed] sex-based harassment that is non-sexual in nature" because "[s]exual harassment is covered by the Commission's Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex." la- 51,268 n.l. A year later however, responding to political pressure, the EEOC withdrew the at proposed guidelines. See Withdrawal of the Proposed Guidelines, 59 Fed. Reg. 51,396 (1994); see also Sarah E. Bums, Evidence of A Sexually Hostile Workplace: What Is It and How Should It Be Assessed After Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.?, 21 N.Y.U. REv. L. & Soc. CHANGE 357, 401 n.310 (1994-95) (noting that political pressure from "conservative Christian groups" lead to the EEOC's "reopening of the issue"). As a result, the only EEOC guidelines addressing the problem of sex-based harassment in the workplace concern workplace sexual harassment. See Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, Sexual Harassment, 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11(a)-(g) (1996).

HeinOnline -- 49 Stan. L. Rev. 710 1996-1997

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

April 1997] fives when a man engages in unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature toward a woman, why is this so? In the individual case of hostile environment sexual harassment, why should we conclude that sex discrimination has occurred, rather than wholly inappropriate workplace sexual misconduct actionable under appropriate state tort or contract laws? Is sexual harassment transparently sexist, thereby amounting to a kind of per se violation of Title VII? Does it violate Title VII because it targets female and not male employees? Or does it inflict a kind of harm that is discriminatory in its impact on women workers? To pose these sorts of questions is to examine the significance of the sexually explicit content of sexual harassment: Is sexual harassment more like telling women they should stay home and have babies or more like disabling their safety equipment? Or is it neither? The answers to these questions have serious implications for the scope and meaning of "discrimination because of sex," gender-role stereotyping, and ultimately, male and female agency.

In Bundy v. Jackson,90 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals accepted the paradigm shift urged by MacKinnon and other feminists with respect to the sexually discriminatory nature of sexually hostile work environments. In Bundy, a female employee alleged that her immediate male supervisor had propositioned her numerous times and had frequently engaged in offensive sexual conversations with her. To make matters worse, when she reported the incidents to her supervisor's male superior, he asked her to go to a motel to have sex with him, and remarked that "any man in his right mind would want to rape you." 9 1 Relying on their 1977 decision in Barnes v. Costle,92 the D.C. Circuit held that this conduct amounted to discrimination because of Sandra Bundy's sex. The Bundy court noted that "the question is one of but-for causation: Would the complaining employee have suffered the harassment had he or she been of a different gender?" 93 Noting that Barnes acknowledged the problem of quid pro quo harassment, the Bundy court extended the Barnes holding to instances of hostile environment, or "condition of employment" harassment. In so doing, the Bundy court relied heavily upon both the Rogers v. EEOC theory of racial harassment 94 and Catharine MacKinnon's then-new book on sexual harassment.

The "hostile environment" interpretation of Title VII, which began with Bundy in 1981, culminated in the Supreme Court's statement in Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson 96 that discriminatory employment practices reached not only a "tangible loss" of "an economic character" because of a person's seX, 97 but that "a plaintiff may establish a violation of Title VII by proving that discrimination based on sex has created a hostile or abusive environment. 9 8

90. 641 F.2d 934 (D.C. Cir. 1981).

91. Id at 940.

92. 561 F.2d 983 (D.C. Cir. 1977) 93. 641 F.2d at 942 n.7.

94. See id. at 944-45.

95. See id. at 945-46.

96. 477 U.S. 57 (1986).

97. Id at 64.

98. Id at 66.

HeinOnline -- 49 Stan. L. Rev. 711 1996-1997 [Vol. 49:691

STANFORD LAW REVIEW

While the Supreme Court provided no reasoning to support this conclusion, many courts have since adopted the D.C. Circuit's approach, determining that a person has been discriminated against on the basis of her sex if she has been subjected to sexual overtures, conduct, or behavior from a supervisor that would not have been forthcoming "butfor" her sex, meaning biological sex. 99 Such was the Supreme Court's construction of the wrong of sex discrimination in City of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power v. Manhart.0 0 There, the Court held that the department's policy which required female employees to make larger contributions to the pension fund than male employees amounted to sex discrimination because "[s]uch a practice does not pass the simple test of whether the evidence shows 'treatment of a person in a manner which but for that person's sex would be different.'"101 Construed according to formal equality principles, the wrong of sex discrimination amounts to the dissimilar treatment of otherwise similarly situated workers. Thus, where women are treated differently than men in the workplace, they are being discriminated against because of their sex: "The critical issue, Title VII's text indicates, is whether members of one sex are exposed to disadvantageous terms or conditions of employment to which members of the other sex are not exposed." 10 2 This oft-cited language mirrors the EEOC's interpretation of the meaning of sexual harassment,' 03 and is repeated time and again in EEOC briefs.

99. See, e.g., Hall v. Gus Constr. Co., 842 F.2d 1010, 1014 (8th Cir. 1988) (holding that "the district court correctly considered incidents of harassment and unequal treatment that would not have occurred but for the fact that [plaintiffs] were women"); Rabidue v. Osceola Ref. Co., 805 F.2d 611,620 (6th Cir. 1986) (noting that "a plaintiff must demonstrate that she would not have been the object of harassment but for her sex"); Jones v. Flagship Int'l., 793 F.2d 714, 719 (5th Cir. 1986) (listing the "but for" requirement as one of five factors which must be satisfied in order to establish a hostile work environment claim); Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897,904 (11th Cir. 1982) ("In proving a claim for a hostile work environment due to sexual harassment, therefore, the plaintiff must show that but for the fact of her sex, she would not have been the object of harassment."); Tomkins v. Public Serv. Elec.

is only necessary to show that & Gas Co., 568 F.2d 1044, 1047 n.4 (3d Cir. 1977) (noting that "[ilt gender is a substantial factor in the discrimination, and that if the plaintiff 'had been a man she would not have been treated in the same manner"') (quoting Skelton v. Blazano, 424 F. Supp. 1231, 1235 (D.D.C. 1976)). See also Developments in the Law-Employment Discriminationand Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 84 HARv.L. REv. 1109, 1170 (1971) [hereinafter Developments in the Law] (reporting that "treatment of a person in a manner which but for that person's sex would be different is a prima facie unlawful employment practice as defined in section 703(a) [of Title VII]").

100. 435 U.S. 702 (1978).



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 4 | 5 || 7 | 8 |   ...   | 22 |


Similar works:

«УДК 347.453.6 Тарасенко Леонид Леонидович Tarasenko Leonid Leonidovich преподаватель кафедры гражданского права Lecturer of the Civil Law и процесса юридического факультета and Civil Procedure Subdepartment, Львовского национального университета Law Department, имени Ивана Франко Ivan Franko National University of Lviv dom-hors@mail.ru...»

«ZUCKERT SCOUTT & RASENBERGER, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Transportation Antitrust Cases (2010) [reprinted from The Transportation Lawyer (April 2011)] This report summarizes reported antitrust decisions in 2010 that involved transportation companies. It updates the TLA Antitrust and Unfair Practices Committee report issued in April 2010 that included antitrust related transportation decisions for 2009. This report is submitted as a report of the Antitrust Committee Andrew M. Danas, Grove,...»

«All praise and thanks be to Allah, and peace and blessings of Allah be upon the Messenger of Allah. These are words about intercession, foreboding, asking blessing and amulets. First: words about intercession The definition of intercession: intercession in Arabic (as-shafâ’ah) is derived from the word shaf’ (which means even) that is contrary to the word witr (which means odd), as the interceded person becomes even by interceding.Its definition in custom and Islamic law is: 1 The asking of...»

«R. Eugene Jackson Big Dog Publishing The Emperor’s Hot New Duds! Copyright © 2015, R. Eugene Jackson ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Emperor’s Hot New Duds! is fully protected under the copyright laws of the United States of America, and all of the countries covered by the Universal Copyright Convention and countries with which the United States has bilateral copyright relations including Canada, Mexico, Australia, and all nations of the United Kingdom. Copying or reproducing all or any part of...»

«Bernard Hogan-Howe Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis New Scotland Yard Broadway London SW1H 0BG By post and e-mail URGENT Re: complaint against British officials for aiding and abetting the torture and rendition of Yunus Rahmatullah Dear Mr Hogan-Howe: I am Director of Reprieve, a British charity that acts for prisoners held beyond the law and tortured in the ‘war on terror’. Along with the solicitors’ firm Leigh Day, we are the legal representatives for Yunus Rahmatullah, a...»

«Benjamin Rink Matrikelnr.: 6044305 Hopfenstrasse 32 20359 Hamburg Benjamin.Rink@gmx.de Zusammenfassung der Bachelorabschlussarbeit vom 18.10.2012 an der Universität Hamburg Fachbereich Sozialökonomie: Mediation – Herkunft, Darstellung, Auswirkungen: Eine politisch soziologische Analyse. Ziele Diese Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit Mediationsverfahren. Darunter versteht man ein durchaus kontrovers diskutiertes Kommunikationsverfahren zur Lösung von Konflikten, das in unterschiedlichen Bereichen...»

«Anglo-Catholicism in Antebellum North Carolina: Levi Silliman Ives and the Society of the Holy Cross By Lewis Wright He has instituted at Valle Crucis a monastic order... composed of persons bound to him by a vow of celibacy, poverty and obedience.... He has given to the members, as their peculiar dress, a black cassock extending from the throat to the ankle.... He allows to be placed on the altar a pyx, in which are reserved the remaining consecrated elements after a communion......»

«COLORADO HUNTER EDUCATION FAQs Who needs hunter education? Colorado law requires that anyone born on or after January 1, 1949, complete an approved hunter education course before applying for or buying a Colorado hunting license. Colorado accepts approved hunter education certificates from all US states and Canadian provinces, and from many foreign countries. Hunter education in Colorado became mandatory in 1970, and hunters who were 21 or older that year were exempt. NEW FOR 2016: Starting...»

«Tilburg University Understanding how to improve chronic care Drewes, H.W.Document version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Drewes, H. W. (2012). Understanding how to improve chronic care: Using variation to gain insight Enschede: Gildeprint Drukkerijen General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright...»

«Anleitung zur sozialmedizinischen Beratung und Begutachtung bei Arbeitsunfähigkeit (ABBA 2004) Die vorstehende Begutachtungsanleitung wurde auf Empfehlung des Vorstandes des MDS vom Beschlussgremium nach § 213 SGB V am 27. Arpil 2004 als Richtlinie nach § 282 Satz 3 SGB V beschlossen. Anleitung zur sozialmedizinischen Beratung und Begutachtung bei Arbeitsunfähigkeit (ABBA 2004) Medizinischer Dienst der Spitzenverbände der Krankenkassen e.V. Lützowstraße 53 45141 Essen www.mds-ev.de...»

«Tournament-9 Round 5 Tossups 1. This author wrote of a successful lawyer who loses his sense of meaning in life, Omar, in The Beggar. A bureaucrat accused of taking bribes, Isa, appears in his Autumn Quail. A more controversial work by him analyzed the three Abrahamic religions and was called The Children of Gebelawi. Such religious controversies led to the near-fatal 1994 stabbing of this author, whose magnum opus features Yasin witnessing Ahmad with his mistress. This author's major (*)...»

«THE HAMLYN LECTURES TWENTY-SECOND SERIES THE ENGLISH JUDGE AUSTRALIA The Law Book Company Ltd. Sydney : Melbourne : Brisbane CANADA AND U.S.A. The Carswell Company Ltd. Agincourt, Ontario INDIA N. M. Tripathi Private Ltd. Bombay ISRAEL Steimatzky's Agency Ltd. Jerusalem : Tel Aviv : Haifa MALAYSIA : SINGAPORE : BRUNEI Malayan Law Journal (Pte) Ltd. Singapore NEW ZEALAND Sweet & Maxwell (N.Z.) Ltd. Wellington PAKISTAN Pakistan Law House Karachi THE ENGLISH JUDGE BY HENRY CECIL His Honour H. C....»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.abstract.xlibx.info - Free e-library - Abstract, dissertation, book

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.