How Sexual Harassment can create a Hostile Work Environment
1466 - 7porthat level where theThe law prohibits a hostile and abusive work environment that prevents proper performance and loss of job benefit at a work place. Sexual harassment includes showing pornographic cartoons or pictures, grabbing and touching, sexual jokes or remarks and physical disruption with the movement. Quid pro quo sexual harassment happens if an employer demands sexual favors from a worker on condition of job welfares, evade adverse employment actions, or gain employment advancement. In the case Bihun V. AT&T, the defendant made undesirable sexual proposition in exchange of promotion at workplaces. Bihun Oksana was an assistant director working under Fellows. After refusing sexual demands from him, she was fired but she won the case against the company. In the case Christopher/EEOC v. National Education association, three female workers pressed charges against the company for screaming and yelling from their male supervisor. The Supreme Court case in the United States involving Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson demonstrates instances of accepting sexual intercourse with the supervisor following repeated demands for favors emanating from sex. Vinson, a female worker was coerced to engage in intercourse with her senior because she was afraid of losing her job.
Some workplaces create an abusive and hostile environment that facilitates sexual harassment prohibited under the law. For instance, harassing that can establish an abusive and hostile environment includes: showing pornographic cartoons or pictures, grabbing and touching, sexual jokes or remarks and the physical disruption with movement. Studies have noted that workers, especially women can suffer from psychological damage from sexual harassment (Achampong, 1999, p.1). The results are poor performance in workplace and loss of job benefits. The behaviors of senior staffs, supervisors, non-employees and coworkers can create a hostile and abuse working environment (Broderick, 2013, p.1). Sexual harassment leads to poor performance, fear, stress and depression among workers.
Besides, sexual harassment victims do not necessarily need to be in contact. However, a single instance of sexual harassment does not warrant a lawsuit, but if the incident is severe or it is very offensive. Quid pro quo sexual harassment happens if an employer makes sexual attempts to a worker on condition of job benefits, evade adverse employment actions or gain employment advancement (Achampong, 1999, p.1). Adverse employment actions involve reviews for poor performance and increase in salaries, or preclusion from advancement.
A victim of sexual harassment must have evidence that the employer did unwarranted sexual actions. Similarly, he or she directed behavior of sexual acts to her or him on demand to receive employee benefits or evading hostile actions at work (Broderick, 2013, p.2). For instance, in California Judicial Council Jury Instructions, for an employee to prove sexual harassment against his or her supervisor, a victim must show that the accused employer did undesired sexual attempts to the victim or involved in other physical or verbal behaviors of a sexual deeds (Achampong, 1999, p.3). In addition, she or he must show that the employee received conditioned job benefits by conducts or words, or the plaintiff received or failed to get job benefits based on his or her rejection or acceptance of sexual acts. The employee must also show that she or he was harmed and harasser’s acts were substantial cause of these harms.
Bihun V. AT&T: Unwanted Sexual demands In Exchange of Promotion in work place
In the case Bihun v. AT& T Information Systems, Inc., Ms. Oksana Bihun, the victim, pressed charges of sexual harassment conducted by her senior, Mr. Peter Fellows. During the first meeting of Oksana and Fellow, he twinkled at her and jokily fleecy his hands against hers (Law Link, 19