Question

For Title VII and Sexual Harassment Amendment, you need to include sheets for the following four questions: 1. History/Background.: Why was the Law passed? What was going on in the workplace that required the law to be enacted to protect employees? 2. Components of the law: Research the law and summarize in your words (with in-text citations of the academic sources used) the major elements of the law. Do not cut and paste. 3. Observations on the law. Research the law’s effectiveness? Do you feel it is working or not working and why? 4. Lawsuit: Research a lawsuit that concerned the law you are reviewing. Include the date of the lawsuit, the plaintiffs, defendants, reason the plaintiff/s went to court, and the outcome of the case. It is important that in reading this summary a person understands why the lawsuit was initiated and who won the case.

Answer 1

Sexual harrassment refers to any action verbal or physical which may be considered as unacceptable behaviour of a sexual nature being derogatory, as well as threatening, to the person intended for. The extensive prevalence of sexual discrimination at the workplace, as well as its uncontrolled growth due to lack of a strong legal framework acting as a deterrent, led to the enactment of the sexual harrassment amendment, for protection from unwelcome sexual advances in the workplace deeply impacting the fundamental right of women to be able to work freely and attain growth and advancement in their careers. The issue of sexual harassment especially of women, was brought to light by various literary works such as Sexual Harrassment of Working Women by Catherine MacKinnon, Saturn's Rings by Mary Rowe and In our time: Memory of a Revolution by Susan Brownmiller, to name a few. At the same time a series of sexual harassment cases the focus of society upon this important issue.

The sexual harrassment liability under Title VII of the Civil rights act of 1964, prohibits discrimination on the basis of compensation, terms of employment, privileges of employment hiring and firing, work conditions awarded, on the basis of religion, sex, race, colour or national origin. Sexual harrassment is included in the discrimination on the basis of sex and is also applicable for employees of the same sex being harassed. The various forms of sexual harrassment which may exist listed under the act as Quid Pro quo sexual harrassment and hostile work environment sexual harassment. Quid Pro quo essentially refers to a form of harrassment where certain rewards due to an employee are withheld, with intention that they will only be released upon granting of certain favours. Also certain perks and benefits, may be offered on the job, in exchange for sexual favours. For taking legal action and hostile work environment it is essential for an employee to prove that they were subjected to unwelcome advances, these advances of a sexual nature, they were Syria and resulted in the employee feeling abused and the terms and conditions as well as working environment of the employment were greatly impacted and but the employer was aware of the harrassment but did not initiate any action. An employer is liable for harrassment by supervisory personnel only if they are aware of the harrassment and has refused to initiate any action against the perpetrator. The affirmative defence option is available to an employer if the employer can prove that a policy enabling protection against sexual harassment, through an available procedure for complain and subsequent action, is implemented within the organisation but not availed of by the victim. This defence is however not available to an employer if the harrassment results in the employee being demoted or their services terminated. In their article on the website isacs.org, James W Albert and Bridget A Neuson, also state that an employer can be held liable for sexual harrassment of his employees by non employees in cases where the employer should have been aware of the harrassment and taken immediate action to remedy the same. The damages that can be claimed apart from all simultaneous fees and costs incurred, are calculated on the basis of the size of the organisation, and may range from $50,000 to $300,000.

The law though offering justice to an individual facing sexual harassment at the workplace, fails to be able to tackle this is all pervasive problem effectively. Social issues such as this have the foundation in deep-rooted mindset and social norms which have been in practice and prevalent for centuries. Therefore, it is very difficult for a simple legal enactment to provide a solution to a problem as common place as sexual harrassment, as well as, discrimination. Many of the cases of sexual harrassment largely and reported due to the inability of the victim to prove charges as well as a constant fear of backlash, as well as social stigma, which may make it difficult for the victim to find another job, thereby, effectively ruining their careers. Also, the law cannot become excessively strict and stringent by according action for even minor flirtatious remarks as the law made in be extensively misused by many individuals.

In the Ani Chopourian the Plaintiff versus Catholic Healthcare West the defendant, case of February 29th 2012, the federal jury awarded Jaipuria at all of 168 million settlement which is known to be one of the largest recorded for a single victim of workplace harassment in history. The former assistant to physicians at Mercy General Hospital in Sacramento, filed in her complaint, that no action was forthcoming from management in spite of multiple complaints during a two year tenure. The complaint was regarding the behaviour of the way a surgeon treated her every morning by slapping her bottom and saying "I'm horny". After hearing arguments from both sides the judge subsequently decrease the total amount to $82,230,484, which was however vacated later due to an out of court settlement be reached by both the parties.

Information from https://www.scribd.com/document/362400688/Ani-Chopourian-Verdict.