Five Steps Governments Should Take to Address Workplace Harassment
Richard K. Zuckerman, Chair, and Sharon N. Berlin, First Vice-Chair of the NYSBA Local and State Government Law Section, write: Seemingly daily harassment allegations being lodged against elected officials, high-level executives and public figures require municipalities to promptly stop this abhorrent behavior and its costly impact on morale, productivity and public perception.
January 19, 2018 at 02:00 PM
4 minute read
Seemingly daily harassment allegations being lodged against elected officials, high-level executives and public figures require municipalities to promptly stop this abhorrent behavior and its costly impact on morale, productivity and public perception.
Step 1: Implement an Anti-Harassment Policy
Implementation of an effective policy prohibiting illegal harassment and discrimination is an essential element of a prevention strategy that can preclude municipal liability. See EEOC, Promising Practices for Preventing Harassment. The policy should prohibit unlawful behavior based upon any characteristic protected by applicable law,[1] regardless of whether by or toward an employee, applicant or constituent, and clearly explain what is prohibited and why. Victims should be encouraged to report conduct that could eventually become prohibited harassment, and be encouraged to participate in related investigations. While confidentiality cannot be guaranteed, it should be provided consistent with a thorough investigation. The policy should also prohibit retaliation against complainants and investigation participants.
Step 2: Disseminate the Policy
A policy can only be effective when communicated. New employees should receive it when hired; others should receive it annually and whenever it is updated. The policy should be posted with other policies, on the employer's website, and included in any employee handbook. A signed receipt should be required when the policy is disseminated.
Step 3: Implement an Effective Complaint System
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission opines that an effective policy welcomes questions, concerns and complaints; encourages early reporting of problematic conduct; respectfully treats all involved; operates promptly, thoroughly and impartially; and imposes appropriate consequences for misconduct. See id. It should include multiple avenues of complaint, including about senior management.
Step 4: Train All Employees About the Policy and the Harassment Complaint System
Training should be regularly provided. See id.; see also Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 118 S. Ct. 2275 (1998); Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998). Employees should be educated about unacceptable conduct and its potential consequences; the employer's system for addressing complaints; what to do if one becomes aware of prohibited conduct; and that retaliation is prohibited. Clear, easily understood training, conducted by interactive trainers, in all relevant languages, should be tailored to the workplace and workforce. See id.
Because an employer can be liable for conduct committed by a supervisor with authority over the employee (Faragher and Ellerth, supra), supervisors must be trained to understand that their conduct is held to even higher standards, that they have a special obligation to recognize and prevent harassment, and how to respond if they become aware of it.
Step 5: Promptly Investigate and Remedy Harassment
An impartial investigation should promptly occur when a complaint is received. Where appropriate, swift remedial action must be implemented. The investigator should be experienced and not in the chain of command with the complainant or alleged harasser. Allegations involving senior officials are often referred to an outside investigator.
The investigator should report findings, recommendations and recommend appropriate disciplinary action. The employer should document its response, including corrective or preventative action taken and anti-retaliation warnings issued. The complainant and alleged harasser should be advised about the investigation's outcome, and periodic follow-up should ensure compliance.
These steps, while not guaranteeing perfect behavior, are essential strides towards that worthy goal.
Endnotes:
[1] Race, creed, color, national origin, sex, pregnancy, gender identity, transgender status, sexual orientation, disability, age, religion, military or veteran status, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, domestic violence victim status, use of a guide dog, hearing dog or service dog.
Richard K. Zuckerman and Sharon N. Berlin are partners at Lamb & Barnosky.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Who Are the Judges Assigned to Challenges to Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order?
- 2Litigators of the Week: A Directed Verdict Win for Cisco in a West Texas Patent Case
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Womble Bond Becomes First Firm in UK to Roll Out AI Tool Firmwide
- 5Will a Market Dominated by Small- to Mid-Cap Deals Give Rise to a Dark Horse US Firm in China?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250