U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Administrative Dilemma: Sexual Harassment and Liability

NCJ Number
181018
Journal
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Volume: 14 Issue: 1 Dated: Spring 1999 Pages: 19-27
Author(s)
Ferris R. Byxbe; Philip E. Carlan
Date Published
1999
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This is a guide to the legislation and case law that regulates sexual harassment in the workplace; recommendations for policy formulation and implementation in police agencies are offered.
Abstract
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under Federal law (Katz v. Dole, 1983) there are two legal avenues for claiming sexual harassment. The first is quid pro quo. Under this form of harassment, a person in authority, usually a supervisor, demands sexual favors from a subordinate as a condition of getting or keeping employment benefits. The challenged conduct must be unwelcome in the sense that the employee did not solicit or incite it, as well as in the sense that the employee regarded the conduct as undesirable or offensive. The second legal avenue for claiming sexual harassment is sexually oriented abuse that results from a hostile work environment. A hostile working environment arises when a co-worker or supervisor engages in unwelcome and inappropriate sexually based behavior, such that the workplace atmosphere is intimidating, hostile, or offensive. Under Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines on this issue, employers are liable when their supervisors or agents create a hostile environment, or if the employer knew or should have known of the sexual harassment and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. It is imperative that law enforcement agencies establish and implement sexual harassment policies to protect agencies from liability risk. This article provides guidelines to use as a checklist. These guidelines can be best understood as a four-pronged test that consists of understanding, communicating, establishing, and enforcing. 17 references