Sexual Harassment Lawyer in Sacramento

It is unlawful to harass an employee because of their sex, California Government Code Section 12940(j)(1).

Sexually harassing behavior includes :

  • Sexual favors;
  • Unwanted sexual advances and propositions;
  • Verbal conduct, including epithets, slurs or derogatory comments, and comments about a person’s body, appearance, or sexual activity;
  • Physical conduct including assault, impeding or blocking movement, OR any physical interference with normal work or movement; or
  • Visual harassing including leering looks, offensive gestures whether or not the harassment also results in the loss of a tangible job benefit,

Your Employer Has An Obligation To Cause Sexual Harassment To Stop

Reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and harassment from occurring include : 1) affirmatively raising the issue of harassment; 2) expressing strong disapproval of harassment; 3) developing appropriate sanctions against harassment; 4) informing employees of their rights and instructing them to report harassment, 2 California Code of Regulations 7287.6(b)(2)-(3).

Appropriate corrective action is some form of discipline, however mild, that contributes or eliminates the problem at hand, Intlekofer at 778. If the employer fails to take even the mildest form of discriminatory action the remedy is insufficient, Ellison, 924 F.2d 882. Action is corrective only if it contributes to the elimination of the problem at hand. Disciplinary measures are more likely to decrease the likelihood of repeated harassment than a mere request to stop the behavior, and so discipline is what a corrective action is, Intlekofer at 778.

The mere presence of an employee who has engaged in particularly severe or pervasive harassment can create a hostile working environment…To avoid liability….for failing to remedy a hostile environment, employers may even have to remove employees from the workplace if their mere presence would render the working environment hostile…When employers cannot schedule harasser to work at another location or during different hours, employers may have to dismiss employees whose mere presence creates a hostile environment, Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872, 883 (9th Cir. 1991).

A common issue in sexual harassment cases we are involved in is the sexually harassed employee complains and receives a schedule change, but then schedule still overlaps with the sexual harasser, or the sexual harasser still in some form supervises controls the sexually harassed employee unjustly complains about their job performance thereby retaliating against the victim of sexual harassment.

Employer May Be Held Liable Sexual Harassment Lawyer Sacramento

“An employer may be held liable for ‘negligence or recklessness in failing to respond to hostile work environment sexual harassment’ Davis v. U.S.P.S., 142 F.3d 1334, 1342 (9th Cir. 1998) citing to Hirschfeld v. New Mexico Corrections Dep’t, 916 F.2d 572, 577 (10th Cir. 1990). Employers are liable for failing to remedy sexually harassing environments they knew of or should have known of, Hirschtein v. New United Motor, 92 Cal.App.4th 994, 1007 (2001); Creamer v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc., 86 F.3d 167. 170-171 (10th Cir. 1996); Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc., 112 F.3d 1437, 1444 (10th Cir. 1997). Constructive knowledge of sexual harassment is imposed on employers if the harassment is pervasive, Huddleston v. Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc., 845 F.2d 900, 904 (11th Cir. 1988); Varner v. National Super Markets, Inc., 94 F.3d 1209, 1213 (8th Cir. 1996); Farpella-Crosby v. Horizon Health Care, 97 F.3d 803 (5th Cir. 1996), and this determination is a question of fact, Reich v. Dept. of Conversation & Natural Resources, Alabama, 28 F.3d 1076, 1082 (11th Cir. 1994); Allen v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 121 F.3d 642 (11th Cir. 1997).

Failing to investigate, or repudiate the employee’s conduct by redressing the harm done and punishing or discharging can cause an employer to be liable for punitive damages if their non-managerial agent committed an act of discrimination, Roberts v. Ford Aerospace, 224 Cal.App.3d 801, 274 Cal.Rptr. 139, 144 (2nd App. Dist. 1990).

sexual harassment in the office work place Bradley v. Dept. of Corrections, 71 Cal.Rptr.3d 222 (2008) requires that the employer’s sexual harassment investigator must understand, and the investigation must ultimately, be aimed at 1) determining fault; 2) ensuring the claimant is safe from harassment; 3) to determine what steps are needed to stop the harassment, Id. Merely listening to the claimant is not enough, Id.

Employees who are fired for complaining of sexual harassment, or due to their participation in a sexual harassment investigation, may sue under the Fair Employment and Housing Act for the loss of in a their employment, California Government Code Section 12940(h).

Do not hold back facts if you are making a sexual harassment complaint. Provide as much information as possible, or you will later be accused of not mentioning a critical aspect of the sexual harassment that was perpetrated.

If you are involved sexual harassment investigation, be careful about naming witnesses. If you are not sure if somebody saw something, do not claim they are a witness. If there are witnesses who are ex-employees or family members be sure to tell the employer about these people, and offer access to any non-employees you have contact information for but your employer may not.

Our Sexual Harassment Case Results:

  • $675,000 For Sexually Harassed Employee
  • $315,000 Sexual Harassment Settlement for a Gas Attendant Worker
  • $305,000 Sexual Harassment of Pizza Delivery Lady
  • $270,000 Sexual Harassment & Employment Termination
  • $165,000 Sexually Harassed 18 Year Old
  • $160,000 Sexually Harassed Illegal Alien

Contact us, or call 1-877-525-0700 toll free to consult with an Employment Lawyers Group sexual harassment lawyer, supervised by Karl Gerber who will be the lead attorney on your case.