Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Sexual harassment in the workplace in US labor law has been considered a form of discrimination on the basis of sex in the United States since the mid-1970s. [1] [2] There are two forms of sexual harassment recognized by United States law: quid pro quo sexual harassment (requiring an employee to tolerate sexual harassment to keep their job, receive a tangible benefit, or avoid punishment) and ...
Quid pro quo" harassment takes place when a supervisor requires sex, sexual favors, or sexual contact from an employee/job candidate as a condition of their employment. Only supervisors who have the authority to make tangible employment actions (i.e. hire, fire, promote, etc.), can commit "quid pro quo" harassment. [ 15 ]
While sexual harassment is a form of workplace harassment, the United States Department of Labor defines workplace harassment as being more than just sexual harassment. [10] "It may entail quid pro quo harassment, which occurs in cases in which employment decisions or treatment are based on submission to or rejection of unwelcome conduct ...
Examples of this include gestures, taunts, hazing, threats, sexual slurs, etc. Gender harassment is the most widespread form of harassment but its typically ignored because it is not seen as big of an issue as other forms of sexual harassment. Sexual coercion includes the exchange of sexual acts/favors for job related benefits (quid pro quo).
(The Center Square) – Quid pro quo allegations are a key part of the U.S. government’s corruption case against former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and codefendant Michael McClain.
This concept is related to quid pro quo sexual harassment, which is defined by Cornell Law School as "sexual harassment in which a boss conveys to an employee that he or she will base an employment decision, e.g. whether to hire, promote, or fire that employee, on the employee's satisfaction of sexual demand. For example, it is quid pro quo ...
For example, if an employee reported safety violations at work, was injured, attempted to join a union, or reported regulatory violations by management, and management's response was to harass and pressure the employee to quit. Employers have tried to force employees to quit by imposing unwarranted discipline, reducing hours, cutting wages, or ...
Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993), is a US labor law case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the definition of a "hostile" or "abusive" work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.