Harassment

Subscribe to Harassment via RSS
Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII written in business textbook

In Bivens v. Zep, Inc., No. 24-2109 (6th Cir. Aug. 8, 2025), the Sixth Circuit split with the EEOC and most U.S. Courts of Appeals as to when an employer may be liable under Title VII for harassment by a non-agent (e.g., non-employees such as an employer’s customers or clients). The court rejected the prevalent negligence standard and instead held that a plaintiff must show that an employer “intended” for the harassment by the non-employee to occur.Continue Reading Sixth Circuit Splits with EEOC and Other Circuits as to Employer Liability for Harassment by Non-Employees Under Title VII

In the California case of Okonowsky v. Garland, a male supervisor in a federal prison (a lieutenant) used his private Instagram account to post sexually offensive content about a female prison psychologist.  The District Court dismissed the psychologist’s hostile work environment claim, holding that the posts occurred entirely outside the workplace, were made on the lieutenant’s personal Instagram account, and were not sent or otherwise displayed to the psychologist.  The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the Title VII claim and found that, in view of the generally permanent nature of the sexual posts and the references to the workplace on the Instagram account, the psychologist’s work environment could have been made hostile, especially since she had to interact with the lieutenant on a regular basis, and despite the fact that the lieutenant’s conduct occurred “off-site.”Continue Reading Recent Judicial Decisions Highlight the Importance of Anti-Harassment Training