Sexual Harassment, Case Study Example

Teddy’s Supplies’ CEO has asked you to advise him on the facts of the case and your opinion of their potential liability. Write a memo to him that states your view of whether the company is exposed to liability on all issues you feel are in play. Include in your memo any laws that apply and any precedent cases either for or against Teddy’s case that impact liability. Include your opinion of the “worst case” of damages the company may have to pay to Virginia.

To: Teddy’s Supplies CEO

What: Memo on Case Assessment (Pollard Vs. Teddy’s)

Details:

Regarding the case of Pollard with the company Teddy’s Supplies and its policy application regarding sexual harassment and unprofessional dismissal based on the aspect of employee discrimination, there are three primary points that should be considered in relation to how the situation has spurred out to be and how they could be resolved:

• Virginia Pollard has been reported to have been experiencing sexual harassment and impolite treatment from her male coworkers ever since she has been transferred to a job position that requires guarding the film equipments in the main warehouse. These incidents were however not reported to the company’s website [as instructed in the policies of Teddy’s guidelines on sexual harassment and/or employee harassment issues] in compliance with the rules set up by the company.
• Steve King, the new supervisor, is allegedly behaving against the rules. However, his behavior has not be reprimanded at any point [as it was an acceptable behavior between him and the other workers except for Pollard].
• The final strand of the case which lead to the company being sued by Pollard relates to the putting up of a sign on a truck that says Hard hatrequired/bra optional.At this instance, it has been reported that Pollard was forced to follow through such ‘prank’ command. To just get out of the situation, Pollard lifted her shirt at the back and showed part of her bra as a proof that she was wearing one. This instance has been reported online by an anonymous co-worker. This incident lead to the termination of Pollard insisting on the misconduct relatively connected to sexual promiscuity.

Considering all three aspects of the case, Pollard was relatively able to get the attention of the New Jersey Commission on Human Rights. The only grasp to the case that Teddy’s have is that of the fact that Pollard failed to comply with the policy of reporting incidents online. While Pollard mentions how the site was down during the time she wished to file the report, it will not hold strong in court as she could have had other chances of doing so, and if she really wanted to make sure the case is reported, she would have repeatedly tried to access the online database for such cases.

Pollard, instead of being reinstated in her own job, wants payment from Teddy’s in replacement of the damages that were done to her including that of the harassments she received from her coworkers. In this case, it could be noted how weak Pollard’s presentation is since she does not have strong evidence to each accusation. Teddy’s administration could and should actually use her past record of being employed at the equipment supply store, where she was reportedly unable to complete tasks properly due to making too many personal calls. This will present to the court the attitude and behavior she has towards work and could redefine the course of presentation she has given in her statements.

The CEO asks you to review the sexual harassment policy currently in place that Virginia signed. He wants you to provide him with suggestions for changes to it. Review the policy and give three recommendations for changes, enhancements, and ideas for making the policy stronger. Include your reasons for these suggestions. If you find information online for making these changes, include citations and/or links to that information. Explain how your suggestions may have protected Teddy’s in this case. Support these recommendations with current case law.

The current policy guideline that Teddy’s [company] specifically give attention to is the compliance on how employees experiencing harassment and/or other conditions of discrimination at work is strong enough. However, the section on Behavior Banned may need some revision and adjustment. Considerably, simply stating the acts rule such as all illegal, discriminatory, or harassing behavior is prohibited could still be turned around in cases whereas the situation has been presented to court.

Stipulating specific points of consideration or instances of harassment should be noted in the guidelines. This way , the employees and even the legal representatives of the court would be able to see clearly what specific actions have been taken into account to impose a distinct refusal to follow organizational culture when it comes to morality, discrimination and harassment issues. This will make it easier for the employees to avoid particular actions as detailed in the guideline. In doing so, it is important that the administrators and the managers sit and discuss what the most common and perhaps even the unexpected occurrences their employees might be involved in while at work and create a detailed indication on how such actions should be dealt with.

References

BLR. Virginia Sexual Harassment: What you need to know. http://www.blr.com/HR-Employment/Discrimination/Sexual-Harassment-in-Virginia. (Retrieved on February 17, 2014).

Yeater, EA; O’Donohue, W (1999). “Sexual assault prevention programs: Current issues, future directions, and the potential efficacy of interventions with women“. Clinical Psychology Review 19 (7): 739–71.