Why Did Lionel Take Legal Action against Estate Agents Firm - Case Study Example

 LAW FOR BUSINESS ASSIGNMENT Table of Contents Introduction … 3 Workplace harassment … 3 Lionel’s choice … 4 Prevention better than cure … 6 Final options … 7 Conclusion … 10 Sources … 11 LAW FOR BUSINESS ASSIGNMENT Introduction Obviously, Lionel has a good work record for the eighteen months of service he has behind him in the Estate Agents firm where he is employed as promotional personnel. However, he has started experiencing physical pain in his back believed to be the result of the chair which is non-adjustable that his employers have supplied him. Lionel has also begun to suffer mental agony as a result of constant sniggering behind the back by some of his colleagues. Lionel is an openly gay male and likes to wear brightly colored ties. His sexual preference as well as the manner of his dress has become the constant source of irritable sniggering by his colleagues and Lionel is bothered his Line Manager is doing nothing to alleviate his agonies. On the contrary, she has openly snubbed Lionel on a number of occasions that he complained telling him to do his work and pay no attention to his colleagues’ taunts. Workplace harassment Workplace harassment is a serious legal offence. First of all, it is important to determine whether what Lionel is going through could be termed as harassment. Lionel is a sensitive person and does not like being teased. Had he laughed away the incident with his colleagues, the situation might have changed and Lionel could have made friends with his colleagues. However, his sexual orientation as well as his hurt attitude has compounded his woes. The crux of the issue is his sexual orientation. To others in the office Lionel is a sexual deviant. That is why they poke fun at him. Had Lionel kept quiet about his sexual preference, no one would have known and probably he would not have been treated as such a hot topic. Now there are not one but two issues to consider for remedial action. First, Lionel is suffering back pain ostensibly because of the type of chair he has been given in his office. The second issue is the difficult situation created by his colleagues’ taunts and jokes (Harassment). These issues are not beyond cure. With some diplomacy and sensitivity, the management is in a position to capably address these issues and close them so that everyone in the office forgets the issues and continue with their work. Lionel’s choice Lionel has two choices before him. The first choice is talk to the higher authorities in the firm. The higher authorities may be one or more people above his Line Manager. He is mentally and physically in pain because of the goings on in the office. He is also alone. However, he must take the initiative of taking up the issues with the top management. First, he must sort out the issue about his chair. He can then impress upon the top management that he is not amused by his colleagues’ antics and they can stop making fun of him. He can also request the top management to tell the Line Manager to be more forthcoming with his complaints. Having made his point with the top management, Lionel must also consider his position in the firm. He is one of the employees and it is necessary to keep open communication with others in the firm. If he does not pay attention to their taunts, his colleagues will tire of making him the butt of their torments. Lionel must also continue to pay attention to his work which could suffer if he gets preoccupied with his colleagues jibes. The firm’s case could get stronger if his output becomes low because of his dispute with his colleagues. The firm must tread the issue carefully because there is the possibility that Lionel could take legal recourse in case his complaints are not addressed appropriately and also because it is the firm’s policy to treat all its employees with fairness and equity. The firm must call the employees who are accused of sniggering behind Lionel’s back and warn them to behave. The firm is aware that the issue is one of banter among the employees, but it could get overblown if not corrected at once. The firm is also aware that with proper handling of the issue, the firm will be able to deal with the case if Lionel decides to file a legal suit. The firm can also ask Lionel to go for treatment for his back pain and provide him with a comfortable chair. These actions not only will help restore Lionel’s confidence but also keep the firm insulated against any legal liability. The question of liability in this case is debatable (Advice leaflet). “The question of liability arises only after there is a determination that unlawful harassment occurred. Harassment does not violate federal law unless it involves discriminatory treatment on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age of 40 or older, disability, or protected activity under the anti-discrimination statutes. Furthermore, the anti-discrimination statutes are not a “general civility code.” Thus federal law does not prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not “extremely serious.” Rather, the conduct must be “so objectively offensive as to alter the ‘conditions’ of the victim’s employment.” The conditions of employment are altered only if the harassment culminated in a tangible employment action or was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment. Existing Commission guidance on the standards for determining whether challenged conduct rises to the level of unlawful harassment remains in effect” (Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors, 1999). Prevention better than cure A good firm understands it is better to have proper employees’ policies in place so that there is little chance for sorting any issues through the courts. No information is available on the actual recourse Lionel takes or the firm is taking. We can only discuss probabilities. There is no information on the full staff strength of the firm and the powers of the Line Manager. The Line Manager would have been more careful had she been aware of any specific policy guiding her actions on the issue of Lionel. In the absence of any such policy, the Line Manager can only think about the work that has got to be done. The Line Manager’s action has the potential to aggravate the situation. The firm’s top management must pull up the Line Manager and impress upon her to act with more sensitivity in such cases (Understanding Workplace Harassment, 2008). The Line Manager is basically not wrong in telling off Lionel. As a matter of fact, his colleagues have only resorted to sniggering behind his back which progresses to their referring him as a “big girl” later on. The whole case points to the fact that Lionel is cracking under pressure. It also does appear that he has nowhere else to turn to and the only alternative facing him is legal action. Lionel is a responsible member of the firm. His duties include preparing property details, driving to properties to show around prospective buyers and liaising with solicitors and other professionals regarding sale of properties. He also deals with administration and has his own computer console in the open planned office. It is difficult to understand how a person vested with so much authority finds himself in such precarious condition. No details are available about Lionel’s tormentors. One can surmise that they are either equals or below Lionel’s rank. Why does Lionel not directly confront them and sort out matters? He will win better respect this way. His preference to take the matter to the Line Manager makes matters worse for him. The unsympathetic and insensitive approach of the Line Manager is the biggest culprit in the whole episode. Even if the Line Manager had just called the employees who sniggered at Lionel and given them a brief snub, matters would not have come to such a pass where Lionel has to contemplate legal action. The final straw comes in the form of non-action to Lionel’s complaint to the Line Manager the second time when the Line Manager tells him to just get out and do his job and stop behaving like a big fairy. Lionel feels like walking out then and there. Final options If circumstances do not improve, Lionel has two options. Option number one is to quit the job and find another job where his sexual preferences are not made known. Or even in case they are made known, he is given the benefit of doubt and he continues working without any mental trauma. On the issue of job, Lionel does not face any problem. On the contrary, his enormous job responsibilities make it difficult to believe Lionel is throwing such a fuss over simple thing like sniggering. He could have got better respect just walking up to the offending employees and asking them what was funny. A person who is adept at showing customers around properties, convincing them, and even managing administration for 18 months must have better nerves! Could it be that his back pain is pulling him down and making him irrational? If this is the case it is necessary for him to go for medical check up. He can also consult a lawyer to see if he can take legal recourse on the firm’s decision to provide him a chair that has been the cause of his back ache. The firm can land in serious trouble if medical experts certify that his chair is indeed the cause of his back ache. The firm has to take all possible care to ensure none of its employees suffer hardship because of any faulty furniture or equipment. The firm must also exercise due care to protect employees who complain of harassment. “An employer should make clear that it will not tolerate adverse treatment of employees because they report harassment or provide information related to such complaints. An anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure will not be effective without such an assurance. “Management should undertake whatever measures are necessary to ensure that retaliation does not occur. For example, when management investigates a complaint of harassment, the official who interviews the parties and witnesses should remind these individuals about the prohibition against retaliation. Management also should scrutinize employment decisions affecting the complainant and witnesses during and after the investigation to ensure that such decisions are not based on retaliatory motives” (Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors, 1999). Prima facie, there appears to be a case for harassment. The uncomfortable chair and the Line Manager’s attitude sufficiently aggravate the issue for a legal case. Lionel has the option to go to the top management. That there is a Line Manager makes it obvious that the firm is big enough to have higher authorities. Therefore, if Lionel opts to go to the top management and if the top management decides to act favorably, Lionel will be adequately compensated and there will be no reason for him to approach the courts. On the other hand, if the top management is adamant and refuses to change his chair and does not act on his complaint against his colleagues and the Line Manager, Lionel has the option to approach the court. Each state has its own laws against harassment in workplace. Broadly speaking, the laws favor genuine victims and compensation depends on the type and gravity of harassment. Lionel’s can win the case and get his chair replaced and the Line Manager appropriately disciplined along with financial compensation for the mental agonies suffered. However, Lionel’s 18 months’ stint in the firm provides hope that there will be justice for him if he approaches the top management. It is difficult to surmise what the top management has to say about his sexual preference except that they might caution him against sexually exploiting anyone in the firm. Conclusion The main argument is who authorized the chair for Lionel. Why would a firm deprive an employee of a good chair unless they wanted to make things difficult for him and get him to resign? Also, why would the Line Manager continue to block Lionel’s attempts to draw her attention to his colleagues’ taunts? Unless these mysterious questions are satisfactorily answered, it will be difficult to advise Lionel precisely on his course of action. We have provided solutions in different circumstances. These solutions basically depend on the top management’s reactions to Lionel’s complaints. If they reacted favorably, Lionel has no reason to take legal action. However, in case they were adamant on not listening to Lionel, Lionel had no options but to take legal action. Sources: Advice leaflet – Bullying and harassment at work: Guidance for employees, http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=797 Employee Rights in the Workplace, 2010, http://www.mypersonnelfile.com/ Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors, 18 June 1999, http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/harassment.html Gross, Barrie; 2010, Legal Remedies for Harassment in the Workplace, http://www.allbusiness.com/human-resources/workplace-health-safety/12470-1.html Harassment, http://employeeissues.com/harassment.htm Harassment and bullying at work, September 2009, http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/dvsequl/harassmt/harrass.htm Harassment in the Workplace, 23 October 2008, http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/discrimination_civil_rights/harassment.htm Harassment Laws, 2010, http://employeeissues.com/harassment_laws.htm Model Policy on Harassment and a Discrimination-Free Veterinary Workplace, April 2007, http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/harassment.asp Raymond, Neeta; August-September 2003, Sexual Harassment at Work, http://www.indiatogether.org/combatlaw/vol2/issue3/harass.htm Understanding Workplace Harassment, 01 August 2008, http://www.fcc.gov/owd/understanding-harassment.html Unlawful Workplace Harassment, 17 August 2000, http://www.osp.state.nc.us/manuals/manual99/wkplhs.pdf Volokh, Eugene; Freedom of Speech vs. Workplace Harassment Law – A Growing Conflict, http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/harass/ Workplace harassment (a), 19 April 2010, http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/subjects/harassment/index.htm Workplace Harassment (b), 16 May 2006, http://www.dhrm.state.va.us/hrpolicy/policy/pol230WorkplaceHarassment.pdf Read More