Mid-Term Exam Employment Law - Case Study Example

But the final decision of Jami is to file a lawsuit before the federal or state court.
The acts committed against Jami undoubtedly falls within the context of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (Title VII), which “prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment” (Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 1991).
In the instant case, several indicators manifest forms of sexual harassment in the workplace. Her colleagues who commented on her physical attributes and the offensive gestures of Mr. Clark, who is the Vice-President of the company, by staring at her body parts in a provocative manner, constitute immoral behaviors that create a sexually hostile atmosphere from the moment she started working. The unbecoming conduct of Mr. Clark carried on as he offered Jami invitations for lunch and spent an out-of-town weekend at his cabin. Even if Jami accepted the invitations on these two instances, her refusal to give in to his sexual demands such as kissing the boss in order to maintain her present position in the company is an indication that she is being subjected to a sexually aggressive and antagonistic work atmosphere. However, her current financial situation forced her to reconsider giving in to the sexual favors of her boss in exchange for her current job, which she later on rejected, makes her a victim of a sexual harassment case. Her decision to turn down the offer of her boss resulted in her demotion, reduction of half of her pay per year, earned her a poor evaluation performance report, and was forced to resign from her job. Clearly, the actions of her employer constitute intimidation and coercion which subjected Jami to a sexually hostile and intimidating environment.

The following twin requirements shall give rise to a sexually hostile environment based on gender: First, the acts(s) must be subjectively abusive to the victim(s) affected, and; Second, the act(s) committed must be objectively severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment, that a reasonable person would find abusive.

Jami can file a tort claim based on sexual harassment. “The tort law has been recognized as a proper remedy for a sexually harassed victim(s). These causes of action have been brought under the theories of assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, tortious interference with contractual relations, and other tort theories” (Conte 646). Jami can file a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress as the basis for a tort claim in relation to the sexual harassment case. It can even be proven based on facts that might not even support a finding of sex discrimination under Title VII. Sexual harassment victims like Jami experience stress-related ailments including high blood pressure, chest pains, insomnia or a sleepless night, headaches, nausea, dizziness, and nervous tics. Due to the sexual harassment initiated by her employer, she suffered from severe emotional distress which forced her to seek medical and psychiatric treatment to help her recover from the traumatic experience.

In Retherford v. AT & T Communications, 844 P.2d 949 (1992), the Supreme Court held that “the act of the employer and co-workers who intimidated her with threatening looks and remarks, and manipulated circumstances at her work in ways that made her job markedly more stressful, all in retaliation for her good-faith complaint of sexual harassment”.
As the Judge, I will rule in favor of Jami. Under the law, she has the cause of action to file a sexual harassment case against her employer. There is clearly a violation of Title VII, (as amended in 1991) in this case based on the antagonistic and intimidating conduct employed by Jami’s boss and the company. Under the 1991 amendment, a sexual harassment victim like Jami can recover back pay, future monetary losses, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other non-monetary types of loss. She is also allowed to collect punitive damages once it can be proven that her employer acted with evident bad faith, malice, or with reckless or callous indifference to her situation.