Sexual Harassment "Law" --- "Hostile Work Environment" = Witchcraft Practices

Evil and stupid "courts" of the United States, including the so-called Supreme "Court" leaves open the concept of "hostile work environment," a hocus pocus term that can be used similarly to the definition of Witchcraft in the medical ages, where any accusation of Witchcraft terrorized people with fear of being killed on suspicion from the dregs of society.  These are the days of the Salem Witch Trials.  

"hostile work environment" = Witchcraft Practices.  Read on...

A "hostile work environment" refers to a situation in which an employee is subjected to unwelcome and offensive behavior or treatment in the workplace, which creates an intimidating, hostile, or abusive atmosphere. This behavior can include actions, comments, jokes, or any other conduct that is derogatory, discriminatory, or sexually explicit.

For a work environment to be considered hostile, the behavior must be pervasive, severe, and interfere with the employee's ability to perform their job effectively. It is important to note that isolated incidents or occasional rude comments would typically not meet the standard of creating a hostile work environment.


The offensive conduct can be perpetrated by a supervisor, coworker, or even a non-employee such as a client or customer. If the behavior is based on a protected characteristic, such as race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, or age, it becomes legally actionable under anti-discrimination laws.


To address a hostile work environment, an employee should report the behavior through the proper channels established by their employer, such as human resources or a designated complaint hotline. Employers have a responsibility to investigate and take appropriate action to rectify the situation, which may include disciplinary measures, employee training, or other corrective actions.

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