labor lawAdivision of labor law center

Employers in Illinois need to be aware of a new ruling that holds them liable for the conduct of any supervisor towards any employee – especially in regards to sexual harassment.

The Illinois Supreme Court recently ruled that an employer is responsible for sexual harassment by an employee who happens to be a supervisor, even if the employee is not in that supervisor’s chain of command.

In other words, it is sexual harassment when a supervisor or manager makes advances towards any employee, not just one who works for the supervisor.

This ruling makes it even more important than ever, that Illinois employers train supervisors and managers to prevent sexual harassment and a hostile work environment.

In Sangamon County Sheriff’s Department v. Illinois Human Rights Commission, the judge ruled on April 16, 2009 that the employer was strictly liable for any manager’s or supervisor’s actions.

Sangamon County is primarily a rural area, about 200 miles southwest of Chicago.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal anti-discrimination law, an individual is not a “supervisor” in a case unless he or she has the authority to affect the victim’s employment status directly.

However, under the Illinois Human Rights Act, no such restriction applies. The employer is liable for the conduct of every supervisor in the organization, towards each and every employee in the organization.

In this case, a female records clerk with the Sangamon County Sheriff’s Department filed a complaint of sexual harassment and retaliation against the department. She alleged that a sergeant within the department, who was not her supervisor, was harassing her.

On appeal, the judge ruled that the employer had established a hostile work environment.

Interestingly enough, initially the suit was against both the male supervisor and the employer. The male supervisor, however, was dismissed from the case after settling out of court. This left the employer alone liable for his behavior.

The judge ruled that the employer was “strictly liable” for harassment (more…)

A recent case proves that even major cable channels are not immune from sex discrimination lawsuits. The Weather Channel recently lost an arbitration ruling with former anchorwoman Hilary Andrews. According to the suit, Andrews was subjected to unrelenting sexual harassment by her male co-anchor, Bob Stokes. All the details were revealed recently.

In the final ruling, the cable network noted that despite repeated complaints by Andrews and her predecessor, The Weather Channel took no steps to end the sexual harassment. Stokes, who is 50 years old, reportedly harassed his female coworkers repeatedly. At one point after Andrews had objected to his attentions, he told her, “It tortures me when you wear those heels and skirt.” The arbitrator ruled in Andrews favor, admitting that Stokes’ behavior became insulting and abusive when she turned him down. The Weather Channel is trying to keep the details of the arbitration secret, as it looks for a buyer.

A New York company will pay $375,000 to settle an EEOC sexual harassment lawsuit.

American Industrial Sales Corp doing business as RAK Industries, sells road construction barricades and signs. It also sells a variety of construction safety and personal safety items, as well as nuts and bolts, tools and personal safety equipment. 

The Rochester, NY company website touts it as “one of the country’s most rapidly growing resources of highway, safety and industrial products to municipalities, police, fire, parks and recreation departments, schools, hospitals, golf courses and resorts across the United States.” The website also mentions the company’s “full service solution” for customers and “personal attention.”

It’s the personal attention to female employees, rather than customers, that got the owner in trouble.

The owner, vice president and sales staff of RAK Industries  – according to the EEOC investigation and subsequent lawsuit – sexually harassed 18 female employees. The harassment includes inappropriate touching, unwelcome sexual advances and vulgar sexual comments, says an EEOC source.

Tragically, four victims were teenaged girls.

  (more…)