Feldman, Fox & Morgado both defends and prosecute claims for sexual harassment and discrimination. Both Federal and State Law Prohibit Sexual Harassment Discrimination PRIMA FACIE CASE UNDER TITLE VII FOR SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION TITLE VII claims: Plaintiff employee can establish claim/case of violation/discrimination in 1 of 2 ways 1) through tangible employment action - discharge, demotion, pay decrease or 2) through creation of a hostile work environment caused by sexual harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of the work. FLORIDA STATUTES SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION 760.10 Unlawful employment practices: Unlawful for employer, employment agency, labor-management committee, or a labor organization to discriminate against any persons because that person has opposed any practice under this section, or because that person has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this section. HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT (SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS): When the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that are sufficiently severe orpervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment, TITLE VII is violated. Harris v. Forklift Sys, Inc, 510 US 17, (1993). The Key is theconduct must be Severe or Pervasive. A Plaintiff's burden to prove prima facie case: To establish a prima facie case of hostile work environment sexual harassment, a plaintiff must establish: 1) he or she is a member of a protected group; 2) he or she was the subject of unwelcome sexual harassment; 3) the harassment occurred because of his or her sex; and 4) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of his or her employment. Breda v. Wolf Camera & Video, 222 F.3d 886, 889, n. 3 (11th Cir.2000). 5) "the employee must show that the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take remedial action." Castleberry, 810 So.2d at 1029-30. Eckerd does not dispute that Natson proved a prima facie case of sexual harassment. Employers generally are liable for a supervisor's sexual harassment if the harassment is SEVERE and PERVASIVE enough to result in a hostile work environment amounting to discrimination prohibited by Title VII, 42 USC 2000e et. sq. Non-supervisory harassment. The Employer is presumed to be the supervisor. Where the harasser is a co-employee, the Employer can be held liable where the employer knew or should have known about the conduct. The employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt remedial action. DEFENDING AGAINST THE CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT: FARAGHER/ELLERTH DEFENSE: (the genius of the Faragher-Ellerthplan is that the corresponding duties it places on employers and employees are designed to stop sexual harassment before it reaches the severe or pervasive stage amounting to discrimination in violation of Title VII.) And an Employer may not be found liable if: a) it exercises reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior; and b) the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided. |
