Teenage girls: the issue of sexual harassment
The press, as well as employment lawyers, have significantly educated the American public about the problem of sexual harassment in the workplace. Many adults were subjected to sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that had the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, or sexually offensive. . However, in recent years, the general public has become aware not only of how unprofessional and unethical such practices are, but more importantly, how such conduct can lead to significant litigation costs and massive lawsuits. for emotional distress.
Employers and supervisors in Massachusetts may not sexually harass their employees through direct or indirect advances. When a supervisor’s conduct has the purpose and effect of unreasonably interfering with an employee’s job performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, and sexually offensive work environment, Massachusetts courts have classified such conduct as sexual harassment. Cardona v. Car Rental Connection, 20 Mass. Rep. I. 82 (2005). More specifically, under Massachusetts law, it is an illegal practice for an employer, as defined mass. general Laws chap. 151B, § 1(5), to sexually harass any employee. In addition, sexual harassment is not limited to any verbal conduct of a sexual nature that is found to unreasonably interfere with an employee’s job performance through the creation of a humiliating or sexually offensive work environment, it may be sexual harassment according to Mass. General Laws Ch. 151B. Melnychenko v. 84 Lumber Co., 424 Mass. 285 (1997).
Under Massachusetts law, an employee has the right to be free from unreasonable, substantial, or serious interference with privacy, as set forth in GL c. 214, § 1B, ID. When a supervisor’s misconduct occurs in the defendant’s workplace while he or she is in a supervisory position, the sexually harassing conduct falls within the scope of employment for the purposes of GL c. 214, § 1B. College-Town, div. Interco, Inc.v. Massachusetts Comm’n Against Discrimination, 400 Mass. 156, 165-167, 508 NE2d 587 (1987).
As a result of the above, many companies have since instituted sexual harassment policies, which require all employees to read before beginning employment. Additionally, many companies have training programs for their adult workforce. The problem is that many companies employ teenage employees on a part-time basis, who don’t understand the ramifications of sexual harassment or participate in any of the training programs, read the manuals, or are told about sexual harassment by their supervisors, who in many cases also they are teenagers. This is particularly a problem for businesses that would be commonly found in a shopping mall, such as fast food businesses, retail stores, and amusement parks.
During 2007, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), referring to youth ages 16 to 19, “charges filed and anecdotal evidence indicate that discrimination is a problem for teens.” According to a social work professor, Susan Fineran, 35% of high school students surveyed said they had been sexually harassed at work, of which more than 60% were teenagers. According to a report in Nation’s Restaurant News magazine, over the past decade, restaurants alone have paid more than $7.3 million dollars to fight sexual harassment lawsuits regarding teens.
What is the essence of all this? If American companies want to avoid costly and lengthy litigation, they must do a much better job of educating part-time teen employees, just as they have done with their full-time adult workforce.
