Recently in Sexual Harassment Category

May 2, 2011

Cumberland County Superior Court finds that St. Joseph's Manor is liable for sexual harassment

Justice Nancy Mills of the Cumberland County Superior Court has found that St. Joseph's Manor, now known as St. Joseph's Rehabilitation and Residence, subjected its employee Trudy Little to unlawful sexual harassment. Ms. Little worked for St. Joseph's as a cook. Her supervisor Joe Mitchell is the one who sexually harassed her. Among other things, Mr. Mitchell wrote Ms. Little sexually explicit letters. He sent her text messages two or three times per week, and some had sexual connotations. For instance, he once said that he would lay on the floor and stick a broom handle "up his butt." Mr. Mitchell also talked to Ms. Little about sex and made comments about the size of her breasts. St. Joseph's management was well aware of Mr. Mitchell's sexual harassment but all they did was tell him to "knock it off" or "stop." Consequently, the court found that St. Joseph's Manor did not do enough to stop Mr. Mitchell from sexually harassing Ms. Little.

Due to the sexual harassment she experienced, and the fact that it caused her to suffer from panic attacks, Ms. Little felt that she had no choice but to resign. While Justice Mills believed that Ms. Little experienced unlawful sexual harassment, she did not find that a reasonable person in Ms. Little's position would've felt she had no choice but to resign. This is not an uncommon result. Many courts have found that women have suffered unlawful sexual harassment while at the same time finding that a reasonable person in the woman's position would not have felt compelled to resign.

Justice Mills awarded Ms. Little $20,000 plus interest. Under the Maine Human Rights Act, St. Joseph's will likely have to pay Ms. Little's attorneys' fees and costs too. The Maine Employee Rights Group and Guy Loranger worked on behalf of Ms. Little to achieve this result.

August 30, 2010

Employer may not retaliate against employee who helps co-worker oppose sexual harassment

In Collazo v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Manufacturing, Inc., the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston held that Mr. Collazo's case against his former employer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, could go forward. (The First Circuit is the federal appellate court which serves the states of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and the territory of Puerto Rico). Mr. Collazo alleged that Bristol-Myers Squibb retaliated against him because, when a co-worker told him about sexual harassment she experienced, he helped her complain to human resources (HR) about the sexual harassment. Mr. Collazo helped by arranging a meeting with HR and accompanying the co-worker to the meeting.

The First Circuit applied the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville & Davidson County. In Crawford, the Supreme Court rejected the attempts of some federal courts to permit employers to retaliate against employees who opposed sexual harassment unless the employee was the first to initiate the complaint. The First Circuit held that, even if Mr. Collazo said nothing about the sexual harassment to HR, the company still could not retaliate against him because his actions implied that he opposed the sexual harassment.

If you experience sexual harassment or your employer retaliates against you because you have opposed sexual harassment, you should speak to a lawyer experienced in representing employees in these types of cases.