When Must Supervisors Or Managers Report Sexual Harassment Complaints To Human Resources?
For more than two decades, our Citrus County, Florida sexual harassment lawyers have fought for the rights of sexual harassment victims. Through their extensive experience handling sexual harassment cases, our Inverness, Florida sexual harassment attorneys have learned that the most common employer defense against sexual harassment claims is that the sexual harassment victim never complained to the person designated under the employer’s sexual harassment policy to receive sexual harassment complaints. Under such circumstances, employers argue they are not liable for any sexually harassing behavior because they never had actual notice of the harassment. In this article, our Citrus County, Florida sexual harassment attorneys explain how the decision in Graham v. Phillips Feed Service, Inc., Case No. 4:20-cv-20 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 27, 2021) illustrates the circumstances when employers have actual notice of sexual harassment in the workplace even when a sexual harassment victim does not lodge a sexual harassment complaint with the person designated under an employer’s sexual harassment policy to receive sexual harassment complaints.
Sexual Harassment Complaints
Once an employer has actual or constructive notice of sexual harassment, the employer is obligated under federal employment discrimination law to take prompt and effective remedial to stop the harassment and prevent recurrence of the harassment. When an employer with actual or constructive notice takes no remedial action, or the remedial action taken is ineffective in stopping the harassment, the employer is liable under federal employment discrimination law for creating or maintaining a sexually hostile work environment.
When an employer’s sexual harassment policy designates a specific person to whom sexual harassment complaints must be made, the employer has actual notice when the sexual harassment victim lodges a complaint with the designated person. For example, when an employer’s complaint procedure for reporting sexual harassment requires an employee to lodge a sexual harassment complaint with the human resources department, the employer has actual notice when a sexual harassment victim complains to the human resources department. Once a sexual harassment complaint is made to the human resources department, the employer’s remedial obligation under federal employment discrimination law is triggered. The employer must take prompt and effective remedial action to stop the harassment and prevent recurrence of the harassment.
Duty To Relay Sexual Harassment Complaints
In some cases, an employer’s sexual harassment policy requires employees who receive a sexual harassment complaint to relay the complaint to the person designated under the employer’s policy to receive sexual harassment complaints. In other words, the employer’s sexual harassment policy imposes a duty on employees who receive a sexual harassment complaint to pass the complaint along to the designated person. When an employer’s sexual harassment policy requires employees who receive a sexual harassment complaint to pass the complaint to the person designated under the employer’s policy to receive sexual harassment complaints, the employer has actual notice when the sexual harassment victim lodges a complaint with an employee who is obligated to relay the complaint to the designated person.
For example, an employer’s sexual harassment policy requires employees to complain to the human recourse department. However, the employer’s sexual harassment policy also requires supervisors or managers who receive a sexual harassment complaint to forward the complaint to the human recourse department. Once a sexual harassment complaint is made to a supervisor or manager, the employer has actual notice because the supervisor or manager is required by the employer’s sexual harassment policy to relay the complaint to the human resources department. Because the employer has actual notice when a sexual harassment is lodged with a supervisor or manager, the employer’s remedial obligation under federal employment discrimination law is triggered. The employer must take prompt and effective remedial action to stop the harassment and prevent recurrence of the harassment.
Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
In Graham, a woman named Graham brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against her former employer, Phillips Feed Service, Inc. (Phillips Feed), pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). Title VII makes sexual harassment an unlawful discriminatory employment practice. Graham claims that Phillips Feed violated Title VII by creating and maintaining a sexually hostile work environment.
In January 2017, Graham was hired by Phillips Feed as a Territory Sales Manager. In this position, Graham was supervised by a Regional Sales Manager named Durgan. On her first day of employment, Graham received a copy of Phillips Feed’s sexual harassment policy. The policy required employees who experienced sexual harassment to report it to their supervisor or the Human Resources Department. The policy further required a supervisor or manager who becomes aware of possible sexual harassment to immediately advise the Human Resources Department so that it can be investigated.
Graham alleges that on January 24, 2017, Durgan traveled from Michigan to Ohio, staying in a hotel in Canfield, Ohio. According to Graham, Durgan invited her to his hotel room to prepare for a “ride-along” that was to take place the next day. Graham alleges that she agreed to meet Durgan in his hotel room and that, despite repeatedly saying “no” and asking him to stop, Durgan sexually assaulted her during this meeting.
Sexual Harassment Complaints
Graham asserts that, on the same day as the alleged sexual assault, she reported the incident to another Territory Sales Manager, Casey. Casey did not communicate Graham’s report to the Human Resources Department. On the day following the alleged assault, Graham claims that Durgan apologized to her and indicated that he had overstepped his boundaries. Nonetheless, Graham alleges, Durgan again invited her to his hotel room and this time she refused. Graham claims that Durgan became rude and hostile towards her as time went on. Additionally, Graham alleges that Durgan’s inappropriate conduct and advances continued.
Graham alleges that she told another management-level employee, Wessel, in April 2017 that Durgan was treating her unfairly and that it was her belief that this was because of the initial sexual assault. Graham claims that Wessel immediately reported her concerns to the supervisor for Territory Managers, Ziegler. Although Zeigler, according to Graham, said he would handle the situation, he failed to contact the Human Resources Department.
In April 2017, Graham was reassigned to another Regional Sales Manager, Semonich. Six months later, Graham heard that Defendant was considering reorganizing its sales force. Graham contacted Semonich and told him that if the reorganization rumor was true, she could not be reassigned to Durgan’s team. Graham was not reassigned to Durgan’s team but was transferred to a new Regional Sales Manager. Graham alleges that she was told “no one wants to supervise you” because of the sexual assault allegations concerning Durgan and that she was “bad news.”
In October 2017, the Vice President of Human Resources, Daniels, launched an investigation into the matter in response to Graham’s concerns about being on Durgan’s team. On October 27, 2017, Durgan was terminated by Phillips Feed for what Daniels testified was “a violation of our values and our harassment policy, as well as just complete unprofessional behavior in a position of authority.” Graham alleges that, prior to Durgan’s termination, no disciplinary action was taken against Durgan.
Sexual Harassment Policy & Actual Notice
Phillips Feed filed a motion with the trial court seeking dismissal of Graham’s sexual harassment claim. In support of its motion for dismissal, Phillips Feed argued that it was not liable for any alleged sexually harassing behavior towards Graham because “when it first learned of Durgan’s inappropriate conduct through [ ] Semonich, it launched an investigation and subsequently terminated Durgan’s employment.” The trial court denied Phillips Feed’s motion for dismissal and ruled that Graham was entitled to proceed to a jury trial on the issue of whether Phillips Feed created and maintained a sexually hostile work environment in violation of Title VII.
In denying Phillips Feeds’ motion for dismissal, the trial court focused on language in Phillips Feed’s sexual harassment policy obligating any supervisor or manager who becomes aware of sexual harassment to immediately advise the Human Resources Department. The trial court observed that Graham alleges that “she reported Durgan’s inappropriate conduct to Casey on the same day of the alleged sexual harassment and, then, months later, also reported Durgan’s inappropriate conduct to [ ] Wessel, who communicated [Graham’s] concerns to [ ] Zeigler.” However, according to Graham, “not one of these individuals informed HR, as required by [the company’s] sexual harassment policy.”
Under Phillips Feed’s sexual harassment policy, the trial court explained, Phillips Feed had actual notice of the alleged harassment on the same day as the alleged sexual assault because Casey, a member of Phillips Feed’s management, was obligated under Phillips Feed’s sexual harassment policy to notify the Human Resources Department of the harassment. “It was not until October 2017, eight months after the alleged hotel room sexual assault, that [ ] the Vice President of Human Resources launched an investigation into [Graham’s] concerns about Durgan.” Based on this evidence, the trial court concluded that a reasonable jury could find that Phillips Feed, despite having actual notice of the harassment for eight months, failed to take prompt and effective remedial action to stop the harassment and prevent recurrence of the harassment.
Citrus County Sexual Harassment Lawyers
Based in Ocala, Florida and representing workers throughout Florida, our sexual harassment attorneys in Citrus County, Florida have dedicated their practice to fighting for the rights of sexual harassment victims. If you have been required to work in a sexually hostile work environment or have questions about your protection from sexual harassment under federal employment discrimination law, please contact our office for a free consultation with our sexual harassment lawyers in Citrus 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.
