Iowa Hostile Work Environment
Posted by Tamara
If an employee in Iowa is targeted for negative or insulting behavior because of race, sex, color, national ancestry, religion, pregnancy, age, or disability, that employee is dealing with a hostile work environment. The guilty party could be a supervisor, but it could just as easily be a coworker.
If an employee is the target of unwanted sexual advances, on the other hand, that is sexual harassment. Again, the guilty party could be either a coworker or a supervisor.
The distinction is being drawn because many people confuse sexual harassment and “hostile work environment.” Even an advice column like Ask Amy or a TV sitcom like The Office may use the terms interchangeably.
Examples will help clarify the situation. Here are two cases of actual creation of a hostile work environment.
In one case settled recently by the EEOC, the Executive Chef was constantly calling Hispanic employees “wetbacks” or “dumb Mexicans.” This was a hostile work environment for Hispanic workers because they were targeted for rude or negative behavior because of race, national ancestry, or color. Nobody had made unwanted sexual advances, so there was no sexual harassment.
The owner and managers of a chain of new car dealerships often called females, both customers and employees, “dingbats.” Female salespeople were singled out for scornful remarks when they failed to meet sales quotas. On the other hand, male salespeople faced no such comments when they did not meet their quotas. This was definitely a case of the creation of a “hostile work environment,” according to a judge, who awarded 12 female employees, both current and former, with a total of $12 million. There were no cases in which the employees faced unwanted sexual advances, so no sexual harassment was involved.
In another situation, settled by the EEOC, the Executive Chef of the Hilton hotel in Lisle, Illinois, called Hispanic employees “dumb Mexicans” and “wetbacks.” This was the creation of a hostile work environment because the Hispanic employees were singled out due to their race, national ancestry, or color. None was the target of sexual advances, so sexual harassment was not involved.
Last 10 posts by Tamara
- Louisiana Employee Privacy Act - April 20th, 2011
- FMLA 101 – Mississippi Maternity Leave - April 19th, 2011
- Florida Overtime Update - April 18th, 2011
- Delaware Paid Holidays - April 15th, 2011
- North Carolina Employee Privacy Act - April 14th, 2011
- Wisconsin NLRA Poster Requirement - April 13th, 2011
- Ohio Maternity Leave - April 12th, 2011
- Georgia Overtime Update - April 11th, 2011
- Oklahoma Paid Holidays - April 8th, 2011
- Maryland Overtime Per Diem Update - April 7th, 2011