Analyze Each Of The Elements Of This Case

“Sidebar 20. 6″ in Ch. 20 of the text. Write paper of 700- to 1,050-words in which you analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in scenario. Analyze each of the elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court’s ruling. Analyze the possible liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor versus an employee. Can vulgar language, even if it is not specificallydirected at an individual, be actionable as sexualharassment under Title VII? Yes—according to the11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, IngridReeves, worked at a sales company, C. H. Robinson. Reeves alleged that she was subjected to hearing hermale co-workers call other women names such as”b***h,” “wh**e” and “c**t” on a daily basis. She alsoclaimed that there were repeated vulgar discussionsabout female body parts and a pornographic imageof a woman in the office. Reeves complained to herco-workers, her supervisor, and top company executives,but the offensive conduct was “accepted andtolerated. “According to the 11th Circuit, “if Reeves’s accountis to be believed, C. H. Robinson’s workplace was morethan a rough environment—indiscriminately vulgar,profane, and sexual. Instead, a just reasonably couldfind that it was a workplace that exposed Reeves todisadvantageous terms or conditions of employmentto which members of the other sex were not exposed. “Moreover, the court stated that it was no defense toassert “that the workplace may have been vulgar andsexually degrading before Reeves arrived. “For more information, see, Reeves v. C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. ,07-10270 (11th Cir. Jan. 20, 2010), available at www. ca11. uscourts. gov/opinions/ops/200710270op2. pdf. >> sidebar 20. 6

Originally posted 2018-07-14 00:53:17. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Analyze each of the elements of this case

Question
“Sidebar 20.6″ in Ch. 20 of the text.

Write paper of 700- to 1,050-words in which you analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in scenario.

Analyze each of the elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court’s ruling.
Analyze the possible liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor versus an employee.

Can vulgar language, even if it is not specificallydirected at an individual, be actionable as sexualharassment under Title VII? Yes—according to the11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, IngridReeves, worked at a sales company, C.H. Robinson.Reeves alleged that she was subjected to hearing hermale co-workers call other women names such as”b***h,” “wh**e” and “c**t” on a daily basis. She alsoclaimed that there were repeated vulgar discussionsabout female body parts and a pornographic imageof a woman in the office. Reeves complained to herco-workers, her supervisor, and top company executives,but the offensive conduct was “accepted andtolerated.”According to the 11th Circuit, “if Reeves’s accountis to be believed, C.H. Robinson’s workplace was morethan a rough environment—indiscriminately vulgar,profane, and sexual. Instead, a just reasonably couldfind that it was a workplace that exposed Reeves todisadvantageous terms or conditions of employmentto which members of the other sex were not exposed.”Moreover, the court stated that it was no defense toassert “that the workplace may have been vulgar andsexually degrading before Reeves arrived.”For more information, see, Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.,07-10270 (11th Cir. Jan. 20, 2010), available at www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200710270op2.pdf.>> sidebar 20.6