As seen in the case study, a court decision may be one way for any company to legally define what constitutes sexual harassment in the workplace, but there are many ways to define sexual harassment. Everyone has different views and tolerance levels towards sexual harassment. When a case of sexual harassment occurs in a workplace, however, it comes down to how the courts define sexual harassment. The Supreme Court defines sexual harassment to be unlawful in two ways. “The first type involves sexual harassment that results in a tangible employment action;” this is referred to as quid pro quo. For example, if an employee complies with the harasser’s request, then she will get a raise. This unlawful act is usually presented in the workplace by a person who has an upper hand, such as a manager, to ensure that s/he will get what s/he wants. Employees are often victimized by fear that they will not get promoted or that they will get fired. They also dread that if a complaint is filed, it will not be handled correctly. “This instance of sexual harassment always involves another violation of employee rights; [sic] wrongful termination.” This would occur, for instance, when “a supervisor . . . tells a subordinate that . . . she must be sexually cooperative with [him] or . . . she will be fired, and who then indeed does fire the subordinate for not submitting” (“U.S. Supreme Court Defines”). [schwinlaw.com]
Sexual harassment is discrimination that involves any uninvited comments, exploits, or behavior regarding sex, gender, or sexual orientation. If any type of violation is made by a co-worker, a boss, a work acquaintance, or even a non-employee such as a client, vendor, or contractor, this will be considered unlawful sexual harassment within the work environment. Sexual harassment can create a hostile and uneasy work environment. Sexual harassment includes inappropriate verbal advances, unwelcomed physical behavior that creates an aggressive, hostile, intimidating or malicious work environment for employees. Sexual harassment includes sending suggestive e-mails, notes, and
In 2011 the Department of Education released a “Dear Colleague” letter aimed at reminding educators of a fact established by the Supreme Court: under Title IX, schools much ensure survivors of sexual assault can stay in school and learn safely and notified colleges and university that the federal government was going to be aggressive on sexual misconduct. However, under DeVos’s new ruling the federal government is pulling back their investigation into sexual assault on college campuses.
“One in five women are sexually assaulted while in college” (Not Alone, 2014). In our class of twenty women that means that possibly five women have been sexually assaulted. Out of the five women that I stated could have been sexually assaulted they may have known the perpetrator and often will not report what has happened. According to the spring count of students completed by West Chester University, 9,211 of those students were females (“Headcount Enrollment”, 2014). If I go by the statistic mentioned earlier that one in five women is assaulted that would mean that 1,842 women have been sexually assaulted while enrolled at West Chester University of Pennsylvania. Out of 1,842 possible assaults only four were reported last year. Two of which the victims knew prior to the assault. Rankin and Associates consulting conducted a Climate Assessment on West Chester University in September of 2010, a section of the results focused on sexual assault on students. According to the report seven people who reported a sexual assault to the university described their reactions to the universities response. Two students shared the way they felt the response was inappropriate or poor. One described that they felt the suspension for one semester was not an appropriate response to an admitted rape, that public safety lost the victims statement, judicial affairs painted the victim offender as innocent, and that the registrar protected the offender putting the victim in harm’s way and everyone
There are also negative aspects that could come from publishing this story before fact checking and interviewing all who were involved; for example, this story shines a negative light on the University of Virginia, current students, faculty, staff and even alumni. Using facts within the story of how the of head of the University’s Sexual Misconduct Board, Dean Nicole Eromo, handled the incident when Jackie finally decided to report it months
I interviewed two women and one man about the University of Iowa’s efforts with respect to sexual assault on campus. The first person I interviewed was a twenty-one year old woman from England named Gina. Michaela, an eighteen year old female from a small-town Southern Baptist high school, was the second female I interviewed. The only man I interviewed was Matt, a 19 year old male from a mid-sized town.
Before watching this film, I did not aware of the prevalence of sexual violence on college campuses. It surprised me how the school administrations suspected the victims are the wrong people.
This article contends that although well intentioned, the mandates of the Dear Colleague Letter are not the best way to handle campus sexual assault. Universities should have a number of different options available, from mediation (as long as both parties agree) to a full blown adjudicatory hearing. When suspension or expulsion may result, the respondent must have the right to an adjudicatory hearing with robust procedural rights. More controversially, this article argues that Title IX allows universities to make these changes.
McCaskill, who is organizing the three roundtables through her Subcommittee on Financial & Contracting Oversight, is teaming up with Senators Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut to better understand how colleges and universities handle sexual assaults on campus, as the Senators consider legislative solutions. Participating in the roundtables will be current or former student survivors, campus safety and sexual assault experts, sex crimes prosecutors, university law enforcement, victim advocacy and response organizations, and university administrators. "These roundtables are the next step in our in-depth look at the practices our campus communities have in place to protect students and bring perpetrators to justice and how we can fix, strengthen and enforce them," said McCaskill, a former courtroom prosecutor of sex crimes. "It's clear we have a lot of work to do to tackle the systemic issues that prevent victims from reporting these crimes, that prevent schools from effectively protecting these survivors, and prevent clear and proper enforcement of federal law. These meetings will help us understand, from those who know best, what more we can do for students, administrators, and law enforcement to give them the tools they need to curb this epidemic. (McCaskill, Paragraph 4)" With all of this happening many procedures have been suggested and are all getting tested out. “The consequences of sexual assault are potentially very serious. An immediate concern is a physical injury, which may be extensive enough to require medical treatment or hospitalization.11 Pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV, are additional concerns.12 Emotional damage may be serious and equally requiring of treatment. Sexual assault may affect students’ academic achievement
Throughout the 1840’s and 1850’s a growing tension developed between the Northern and Southern states of America. That tension was primarily focused on the existence of slavery in the Southern states. Most Northern states had abolished slavery by 1850 and made a promise to the people to end slavery completely. They wanted the South to begin to become similar to the North, and to live under the concept of free labor, and not rely on slavery for productivity. The resentment for the interference of the North angered southerners because they felt that it was not the place of the federal government to interfere. Ever since the American Revolution sectional differences arose, the first being those favoring greater states rights and those
Sexual assault has mistakenly become a partisan issue, and due to that, preponderance of evidence in relation to the “Dear Colleague letter” and Title IX in relation to Betsy DeVos new policy advocating a more at large based on evidence approach has fallen under debate. As page 1 paragraph 6 of How Campus Sexual Assault Became So Politicized, “While colleges have historically neglected student sexual-assault victims by failing to adequately punish perpetrators, many believe the Obama administration may have gone too far with its reforms. In 2011, Obama’s Education Department issued what’s become known as the “Dear Colleague” letter,
In 2011, the Office for Civil Rights issued “Dear Colleague Letter” which aims to clarify case reporting, provide resources for administrators and victims, and better explain the role universities play in the case process (Rammell, 2014). Another step in resolving the issue of Title IX compliance is a document recently issued by the Office for Civil Rights. In this document, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (2014) answers questions and further educates college and university administrators on correct Title IX compliance. NASPA also reviewed this document and commended it as breakthrough document that will work to better prevent sexual discrimination and respond to Title IX cases (Smith, Sun, & Sponsler, 2014). In addition to NASPA’s stamp of approval, the Association for Student Conduct Administration (“Student Conduct Administration,” 2014) recently issued a White Paper on Title IX compliance that details student conduct best practices, resolution methods, and ways to best cater these methods to various institution types. While the Office for Civil Rights is taking the lead on Title IX compliance education, higher education and student affairs professionals play a large role in also ensuring Title IX
The lack of consistency in higher learning institutions can be attributed to that “until recently such institutions have not been subjected to legal sanction for failing to address the problem (Schneider, 1987, p. 525) Schneider writes, “only two reported federal cases have presented a claim of sexual harassment under Title IX” (p. 527). At the time, the only two reported cases were Alexander v Yale University (1980) and Moine v Temple Univ. School of Medicine (1986). More recently, however, in 2015, Michigan State was in violation of Title IX, as they were not appropriately vetting sexual harassment cases on their campus. “Prior to and during the course of Office for Civil Rights (OCR) investigation, the university made revisions to its Title IX policies and procedures in an effort to correct several Title IX compliance concerns” (ProQuest, 2015). Reiterating the amount of obscurity that exists within the policies that each institution enforces and abides by is, for the most part, no use.