The Robinson vs. Jacksonville Shipyards - Case Study Example

The court did, in fact, find in favor of the female employees and also found that the elimination of sexual discrimination was more important than preserving the free speech rights of those inflicting pain and discomfort through their words and actions. Yet, there have been cases in which other courts have found that telling sexual jokes or displaying sexual images is not a form of sexual harassment. That brings about the questions of whether or not the treatment of Lois Robinson and the other women of Jacksonville Shipyards should really be considered a form of sex discrimination.

It also makes one wonder that if the managers of Jacksonville Shipyards acknowledged the treatment as morally wrong, would they agree or disagree that the male employees did anything illegal In Robinson vs. Jacksonville Shipyards, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida found in favor of the women who made claims that the male workers of Jacksonville Shipyards engaged in sexually offensive acts. These acts included sexually degrading comments being made as well as sexually explicit images of women hanging in obvious places around the workplace (Manske, 2003).

Now one must take into consideration that Lois Robinson was not pressured for sexual favors, was not denied any advancement or a wage increase because of the treatment she was receiving, and she did not suffer a mental breakdown due to the treatment. What it comes down to is that she was offended.Sexual Harassment is defined by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors verbally or physically. The definition further states that if submission, or lack thereof, has an impact on one's employment status or, if such conduct interferes with the work of the individual being affected, creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment, that such actions are considered sexual harassment.

As for sexual discrimination, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that employment discrimination is prohibited based on race, color, sex, age or national origin. These prohibitions are also included in sexual harassment (Unknown, 1998).It is fair to state that Lois Robinson and the women of Jacksonville Shipyards experienced some form of both sexual harassment and sexual discrimination. When one looks at both Title VII and the laws set forth by the EEOC, Lois Robinson experienced discrimination based on her sex and experienced acts that created an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment.

It is clear to see that the case falls into both categories, yet the harassment she received did not cover all the qualifying offenses. That is because only one of the offenses within these laws needs to be committed to qualifying as sexual harassment or sexual discrimination (Heathfield, n.d.).Legalities of their actions If Jackson shipyards were to admit that what their male employees did was morally wrong, but denied that their employees did anything illegal, would they be justified in this logic The truth is that they would not be justified?

Under federal, state, and some city laws, sexual harassment and/or discrimination in the workplace are illegal acts.