Imposing liability on a company for sexual harassment by supervisors cannot be justified as promoting equality between the sexes, protection of workers, or protection of the owners of the company. Such liability might be justified to prevent breach of contract or behavior offensive to the general public-- a "civility code". The recent Supreme Court ruling in Oncale that same-sex harassment is illegal can be justified on these grounds. The ruling in Ellerth and Faragher concerning employer liability for sexual harassment by supervisors contrary to the employer's interest is less satisfactory because the Court's rule will encourage litigation and defensive bureaucratic complexity.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Labor and Demography with number
9907002.
Length: Date of creation: 13 Jul 1999 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpla:9907002
Note: Type of Document - PDF; prepared on NextStation ; to print on ; pages: ; figures: none. Contact details of provider: Web page: http://129.3.20.41
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (EconWPA).
Find related papers by JEL classification: J78 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Public Policy (including comparable worth) J38 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Public Policy K31 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Labor Law
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: