San Francisco Employment Attorney Blog

In 2001, six female employees sued Wal-Mart for sexual discrimination, claiming that female workers had less opportunity for promotion and were paid less than male workers doing same jobs. A true case of David versus Goliath, those odds have now shifted.

Today, 1.5 million female employees are participating in a class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart, citing gender-based discrimination in regards to a number of issues.

Throughout the proceedings, Wal-Mart has denied any wrongdoing or any discrepancy in pay. Even when it agreed to pay out upwards of $640 million in 2008 to settle a class action wage and hour lawsuit, the retail giant denied that it had cheated workers out of any wages.

This new class action, which was recently given the green light to proceed by an "en banc panel of the 9th Circuit," has shaken even Wal-Mart's steadfastness.

One image that people have when they hear the term "sexual harassment" is of a man being accused of sexually harassing a woman. However, all across the country more and more men are coming forward with claims that they have been harassed, often times by other men.

In 2008 13,867 charge receipts of sexual harassment were filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Of those, approximately 16% were filed by men, more than double the number of claims filed by men a decade earlier.

Part of the reason for the influx of claims by men is that claims of same-sex sexual harassment have only been legally recognized since 1998. In Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, the U.S. Supreme Court held that same-sex sexual harassment was actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

While the EEOC only keeps records of the sex of the individual filing the claim and not the sex of the accused harasser, James Ryan, an EEOC spokesman, states: "Anecdotally, we have noticed that there have been more cases [of same-sex sexual harassment suits]."

David Grinberg, a spokesman for the EEOC, notes: "While some people may think sexual harassment of male employees is a joke, the issue is real."

Reasons for the Increase of Same-Sex Sexual Harassment Claims

There may be several reasons for the increased number of same-sex sexual harassment claims made by men. However, one of the reasons may not be an attempt to be flirtatious.

When men harass other men, it is often an attempt to embarrass the victim. According to Marcia McCormick, associate professor at Saint Louis University School of Law: "Sexual harassment is about using power in a way to hurt somebody."

Another reason may be as a result of the economic downturn. Many men may feel as though their jobs are at risk and they may target co-workers that they see as a threat. Michele Paludi states: "By creating a hostile work environment, co-workers might miss deadlines or get negative performance reviews. The harasser might just be thinking, 'Better them than me.'" If the harassment is severe enough, the victim might even quit. Either way, the harasser feels more secure in his role at the company.

Do not Put up With Harassment

Sexual harassment, no matter who is the target or the aggressor, is wrong. If you are experiencing a hostile work environment, talk with an experienced employment law attorney.

On this blog, we focus on sexual harassment in the workplace, but it's important to remember that instances of abuse and indiscretion can happen anywhere. Upper St. Claire High School, in Pennsylvania, is shaping up to be a tragic example of this.

In early 2008, a freshman special education student went to her teachers to report a classmate who had attempted to fondle her on multiple occasions. At the time, the male student in question was already being watched following reports of sexual harassment and one report of sexual assault.

To that point, the school's response to these allegations had been a detention and some reading material on inappropriate behavior for the boy.

The highest library in the land, the United States Library of Congress, agreed to pay out $250,000 to Theresa Papademetriou earlier this month following a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the longtime employee last August. In the suit, Papademetriou accused Dr. Rubens Medina, former senior librarian, of "persistent harassment of female employees," including verbal abuse and inappropriate touching.

She said that Medina had harassed at least seven women, to her knowledge, and that library officials did nothing to prevent the abuse or ease the hostile work environment, essentially ignoring complaints by library staff. With Medina's harassment of coworkers increasing throughout 2006 and 2007, complaints from female staff members increased as well.

Last week, Playboy Entertainment Group was ordered to pay out more than $180,000 in damages to a former master control operator for Playboy TV. The Los Angeles Superior Court jury took less than two days to find on behalf of Julie Crouch, a married mother of four, who suffered sexual harassment and verbal abuse from fellow master control operator Charles Dorn during the more than five years they spent working together on Playboy TV.

During that time, Crouch claims that Dorn referred to her as a "whore," "slut" and "prostitute." He was also physically and verbally violent in the control room, creating an extremely hostile working environment, even though he never struck Crouch.

According to Dale Kasler in The Sacramento Bee, an "influential insurance-industry group" has recommended a 29.6 percent increase in workers' compensation premiums. Needless to say, this is bad news for businesses struggling to stand in California's staggering economy.

While the nearly 30 percent boost in workers' comp premiums may be a high estimate, many seem to believe that California business owners will see a price increase.

Employers are required to provide workers' compensation and can be held liable for failure to do so. Still, such a dramatic increase could make it harder for them to do business. Whether or not such a rise in premiums would force anyone out of business is up for debate, but it certainly won't make raises or additional staff more likely for businesses already in need of both.

Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled that an age discrimination lawsuit against Google could continue on to court and that stray remarks by former co-workers and superiors could be considered relevant in court. Not quite a guarantee that such offhand statements will be allowed as part of the prosecution's argument, the court's decision does allow for the potential that they may be deemed relevant.

The case in question involves Google's former director of engineering, Brian Reid. Hired when he was in his mid-50's, Brian accuses Google executives of promoting a youthful environment at the expense of older workers. He claims that during his time there, he was subject to designations as "an old fuddy-duddy" and other age-based quips.

Notorious for its predominantly young workforce, Google has denied that Reid was fired for any reason other than performance. Executives claim that Reid was simply not a fit for the company, but that that cultural fit had nothing to do with his age.

A female custodian for the Jurupa Unified School District filed a lawsuit last Thursday citing sexual discrimination and asked the court to enforce state-required sexual harassment education and training within the district.

The custodian, Doreen Archambault, claims that she has been subjected to both harassment and discrimination by colleagues who have questioned her sexual orientation. She also named district Superintendent Elliott Duchon and assistant superintendent of personnel services, Tamara Elzig, in the lawsuit.

School officials have denied that sexual harassment education is lax or ineffective within the school district.