Sexual Harassment Court Scams: Supreme "Court" Decisions that Screwed American Offices

So called "rulings" from the so-called Supreme "Court" of the United States that began an entire industry of Intimidation and Fraud.  Look up the rulings in these evil "court" decisions, and learn how American work offices are dysfunctional.  Competent people prefer to work away from these insane places called "offices."  Can you believe so-called "judges" wrote these piles of shit?  Who the fuck are these assholes?


1. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986): This landmark case established that sexual harassment is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court ruled that both quid pro quo (favor or punishment in exchange for sexual favors) and hostile work environment forms of sexual harassment can be considered unlawful discrimination.

2. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993): The court clarified the standard for hostile work environment sexual harassment, stating that the behavior does not have to be overtly abusive or severely threatening to be considered unlawful, but simply creates an intimidating, abusive, or hostile work environment.


3. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth (1998): This case addressed the employer liability in cases of sexual harassment. The court recognized the "Ellerth/Faragher defense," which allows companies to avoid liability if they can prove that they had effective policies and procedures in place to prevent and address sexual harassment, and the victim unreasonably failed to take advantage of them.


4. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998): Similar to Burlington Industries case, this case further refined the employer liability standards in sexual harassment cases. The court ruled that employers are vicariously liable for hostile work environment sexual harassment by supervisors, but they can also assert the Ellerth/Faragher defense.


5. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. (1998): This case expanded the scope of sexual harassment by recognizing that same-sex harassment is also a violation of Title VII. The court determined that the gender of the parties involved is less important than whether the conduct is objectively offensive and creates a hostile work environment.


6. Vance v. Ball State University (2013): The court narrowed the definition of "supervisor" in sexual harassment cases by ruling that a person must have the power to take tangible employment actions (such as hiring, firing, etc.) in order to be considered a supervisor. This clarified the distinction between coworker harassment and supervisor harassment, affecting the standard of employer liability.


It's important to note that this list is not exhaustive, and there have been other significant Supreme Court cases addressing sexual harassment.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Common Law versus Civil Law

Common Law and Civil Law are two different legal systems with distinct origins and features.   Common Law is a legal system primarily based on court decisions and judicial precedent rather than codified law. It emphasizes the importance of case law and relies on a hierarchy of courts to interpret and apply the law. Common Law systems originated in England and were later adopted by countries that were once part of the British Empire, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and several others. In contrast, Civil Law is a legal system based on a codified set of laws that are created and updated by legislators. The legal rules and principles are primarily found in a comprehensive written legal code, which forms the basis for judicial decision-making. Civil Law systems originated in ancient Rome and have subsequently been adopted by many countries across the globe, including most of Europe, Latin America, and parts of Africa and Asia. One major difference between Common Law...
Read more

Why you get Sexual Harassment Training: The Stupid Supreme "Court" ruling Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998)

 The so-called Supreme "Court" of the United States created an entire industry of consultants and lawyers specializing in Sexual Harassment "law" because there is no real law.  They kept things undefined and subjective for the purpose of lining the pockets of scam artists and dishonest attorneys looking for cash in on the tons of money available from stupid corporate leaders scared to death of "getting sued." Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998) is a significant Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of employer liability in cases of sexual harassment. The case involved a female lifeguard, Beth Ann Faragher, who alleged that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment and supervisor harassment by two of her male supervisors. The court examined whether the City of Boca Raton could be held vicariously liable for the supervisors' actions. The key question was whether the supervisors' conduct fell within the scope of their employment, ma...
Read more

Stare Decisis: The Importance of Precedent in Common Law Systems

Introduction: Stare decisis, which translates to "to stand by things decided," is a principle that forms the foundation of the common law legal system. It ensures predictability, consistency, and fairness in judicial decision-making. This report aims to explore the concept of stare decisis and emphasize its importance in common law systems. The Principle of Stare Decisis: Stare decisis dictates that lower courts must follow the legal reasoning and rulings made by higher courts in similar cases. The principle holds that precedent should be binding and authoritative in subsequent cases with similar facts or issues. This creates a cascading effect that establishes a body of legal principles and ensures stability in the interpretation and application of the law. Binding and Persuasive Precedents: In common law systems, courts are hierarchically organized, with higher courts having the authority to set precedents that lower courts are bound to follow. These binding preceden...
Read more