For Employment Law, an Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure
All employers would be wise to engage employment counsel to review their policies and develop new ones where there are gaps in addressing foreseeable scenarios.
February 23, 2018 at 03:20 PM
6 minute read
For several months, the topic of sex and power in the workplace has been dominating our news cycle. It is undeniable that there is a relationship between these themes, and it is hard to dispute that it is a good thing to finally call attention to this long-standing, deeply rooted problem. Amid the tumult of the Weinstein scandal, #MeToo, Shi*tty Media Men, #TimesUp and the countless non-celebrities affected by these issues, what have we learned? How can we turn the corner to foster workplaces where women don't need to create whisper networks or suffer in silence for fear of retaliation?
The truth is: This is not a novel problem. Not all that long ago it was commonplace for homosexuals or minorities, for example, to be treated poorly in the workforce. The mistreatment eased only when there was a cultural shift against the predators. There is a reason we don't often hear overt slurs anymore—no one would tolerate that type of blatant racism or abuse. That is not to say, of course, that more veiled, insidious forms of discrimination haven't developed, but, the hypothetical bad actor knows that such obvious treatment is unacceptable and could subject them to severe consequences. The only way that is going to happen again, in this context, is for there to be a top-down paradigm shift of prioritizing safety, equality, and respect in the workplace.
It is encouraging that the conversation is ongoing and that many companies are taking steps to investigate the issues within their own workplaces and are implementing change to build a culture of equality. For these changes to have any meaning though, leadership must care more about the quality and integrity of their workers than the value of their power players or top earners. Appealing to the concern for corporate bank accounts, from a dollars and cents standpoint, turning a blind eye to complaints about these “valued” employees runs counter to being fiscally protective. The exposure for liability in this arena is significant and growing. The new Tax Cuts and Job Act adds a provision to the Tax Code which prohibits employers from taking a deduction for amounts paid to settle sexual harassment or abuse claims if that settlement includes a nondisclosure agreement. Indeed, the tide is turning against silencing victims and from giving employers an incentive in paying for silence.
So how do we respond to the knowledge of how prevalent sexual harassment is the first place? One very distressing response we have seen is men refusing to be alone or work closely with female colleagues. We must put a stop to this. Excluding women from meetings, conferences, mentoring opportunities, etc., is in itself a form of discrimination. Segregation is not the answer. It was not then, and it is not now. It is common sense that employees should not be making physical contact with one another unless there is a foundation within the co-worker relationship to support that a hug or a touch on the arm, for example, would not be unwelcome. It is also common sense that morale and camaraderie are important in a workplace. Employees should be encouraged to be friendly and polite to one another, and it would be a shame for employees of any gender to feel afraid to compliment another's haircut or new shoes.
Of course, the scope of the issues are far wider than that. Complications arise when dating occurs in the workplace. This is an area ripe for company policies to develop. Perhaps there is a disclosure requirement that requires the parties to acknowledge that the relationship is consensual. Perhaps a couple who works together are prohibited from having an overlap between the relationship and reporting structure. What happens if it is the female employee who is typically reassigned? One question begets another. The solutions are not always simple and often need to be specifically tailored for individual workplaces.
What is far simpler, however, are the steps that employers can take to empower employees to speak up should they feel they are being victimized; both men and women, when they feel secure to do so, are capable of speaking up for themselves and being clear about their boundaries. The burden is on employers to create an environment in which employees feel that they can express those boundaries, and make complaints when those boundaries are not being respected, without fear of reprisal. It is in this arena it seems we still have miles to go.
We are past the point of claiming ignorance that a pat on the behind, leering, dirty pictures, or other aggressive behavior is unacceptable conduct. If a company does not have a policy explicitly prohibiting this type behavior, or fails to conduct trainings that place employees on notice that these acts, if substantiated, would lead to immediate dismissal, then the company has not joined us in the 21st century and needs to take a good hard look at their participation in the problem.
To start, companies must implement clear reporting procedures and must be genuinely committed to conducting thorough and impartial investigations. If that cannot be accomplished through an unbiased internal human resources department, outside counsel or third-party human resource teams should conduct the investigations to put more distance between the findings and “desired” business decisions. Then the hard part: Employers must be prepared to act on the findings should they substantiate allegations of impropriety. It might hurt, but that sting is the feeling of disappointment that the star performer was actually a liability. Leadership faced with that painful reality should channel that feeling into a commitment to hiring people who wouldn't put the company in that position. And, leadership should pour some of that energy into supporting the brave employee(s) who put themselves in a vulnerable position. Maybe she (or he) is the next star performer.
One thing is for sure: All employers would be wise to engage employment counsel to review their policies and develop new ones where there are gaps in addressing foreseeable scenarios. When it comes to employment law, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Randi (Melnick) Cohen is a solo practitioner in New York City. She specializes in labor and employment law with a particular passion for solving workplace problems.
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 All![Legal Restrictions Governing Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace Legal Restrictions Governing Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/6d/24/0db683694a68a210dab2e7f555ed/ai-prompt-engineering-767x633.jpg)
Legal Restrictions Governing Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace
9 minute read![Anti-Abortion Groups' Challenge to New York's 'Boss Bill' Is Returning to Federal Trial Court Anti-Abortion Groups' Challenge to New York's 'Boss Bill' Is Returning to Federal Trial Court](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2022/09/second-circuit-court-appeals-767x633-2.jpg)
Anti-Abortion Groups' Challenge to New York's 'Boss Bill' Is Returning to Federal Trial Court
Trending Stories
- 1Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand and Rate Hikes Drove Strong Year for Big Law
- 2Dentons Taps D.C. Capital Markets Attorney for New US Managing Partner
- 3Auto Dealers Ask Court to Pump the Brakes on Scout Motors’ Florida Sales
- 4German Court Orders X to Release Data Amid Election Interference Concerns
- 5Litigation Trends to Watch From Law.com Radar: Suits Strike at DEI Policies, 'Meme Coins' and Infractions in Cannabis Labeling
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