In a decision handed down on August 9, 2011, the Fifth Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal held that evidence regarding alleged inappropriate gender-related behavior directed toward female co-workers of the plaintiff (which occurred outside the plaintiff's presence, and of which the plaintiff was unaware) was admissible in support of plaintiff’s claims that she was sexually harassed and wrongfully terminated because of her gender.
In Pantoja v. Anton, the plaintiff filed a Superior Court Complaint against her former employer for sexual harassment and gender discrimination. Pantoja alleged she was subjected to a hostile work environment and then wrongfully terminated because of her gender. At trial, the judge granted defendant's motion to exclude evidence of alleged...
When a workplace is permeated with sexual favoritism, the message to employees is that they are viewed by management as “sexual playthings.”
The California Supreme Court in Miller v. Department of Corrections (2005) 36 Cal.4th 446, recognized that such rampant sexual favoritism by a manager who provides unwarranted and unfair employment benefits in return for sexual favors can convey a demeaning message to employees.
A message is implicitly conveyed that the managers who view employees as “sexual playthings” create a demeaning atmosphere in the workplace. Both female and male employees who find this type of sexual conduct offensive, can establish a claim for sexual harassment if the manager(s) conduct is sufficiently severe or...
Get legal industry updates via email