Employees Must Accept Reasonable Remedies Offered to Cure Sexual Harassment Claims
- By Your mom
- •
- 01 Jul, 2007
The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found an employee’s failure to accept
several options proposed by her employer to remedy claims of sexual harassment absolved the
employer of all liability. Baldwin v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Alabama, 480 F.3d 1287 (11 th Cir.
2007).
The plaintiff, a marketing representative, claimed she was sexually harassed by her
newly appointed boss immediately after his promotion in November 2000. The alleged
harassment consisted of inappropriate remarks, propositions, and gestures. Plaintiff reported her
concerns to management in October 2001. The company immediately investigated the complaint
by interviewing her supervisor and numerous co-workers in her office. The investigators were
unable to substantiate her claims; however, the employer offered to transfer the complainant to
another office, or have her and her boss undergo counseling with an outside psychologist who
would then monitor their relationship. Plaintiff rejected both options and was then terminated
for her refusal to continue working with her boss.
Following her termination she filed a sexual harassment and retaliation complaint. The
company invoked the Faragher-Ellerth defense, which requires it to show it exercised
reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any sexually harassing behavior, and that the
employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities
provided by the company. The court’s analysis focused on the corrective measures offered by
the company. It found the offers of transfer and counseling reasonable, even though rejected by
plaintiff. Because the company’s proposed remedial steps were reasonably calculated to prevent
future misconduct they satisfied the requirements contemplated by Faragher-Ellerth. By
rejecting the offers, and refusing to work with her boss, plaintiff left the employer with little
leeway. As a result, her termination was proper.
The court also found the company’s investigation was reasonable even though plaintiff
objected to several aspects of it. The judges found that a company need not conduct a “full-
blown, due process, trial-type proceeding in response to sexual harassment complaints.” All that
is required is a reasonable investigation consisting of at least an informal inquiry aimed at
arriving at a fair estimate of the truth. In finding the company’s investigation appropriate the
court cited its use of experienced investigators, interviews of all potential witnesses, and careful
consideration of all evidence obtained.
Finally, the court turned its attention to the retaliation claim and found that the
employee’s failure to cooperate with the employer’s reasonable corrective measures, and not
retaliation for reporting the misconduct, was the reason for her termination. Therefore, her claim
for retaliatory discharge was without merit.
This case is instructive in that it indicates employers who put in place the necessary
policies, complaint procedures, and training to prevent harassment; adequately and promptly
investigate all complaints; and offer reasonable remedies can successfully defend themselves
when sued.
several options proposed by her employer to remedy claims of sexual harassment absolved the
employer of all liability. Baldwin v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Alabama, 480 F.3d 1287 (11 th Cir.
2007).
The plaintiff, a marketing representative, claimed she was sexually harassed by her
newly appointed boss immediately after his promotion in November 2000. The alleged
harassment consisted of inappropriate remarks, propositions, and gestures. Plaintiff reported her
concerns to management in October 2001. The company immediately investigated the complaint
by interviewing her supervisor and numerous co-workers in her office. The investigators were
unable to substantiate her claims; however, the employer offered to transfer the complainant to
another office, or have her and her boss undergo counseling with an outside psychologist who
would then monitor their relationship. Plaintiff rejected both options and was then terminated
for her refusal to continue working with her boss.
Following her termination she filed a sexual harassment and retaliation complaint. The
company invoked the Faragher-Ellerth defense, which requires it to show it exercised
reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any sexually harassing behavior, and that the
employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities
provided by the company. The court’s analysis focused on the corrective measures offered by
the company. It found the offers of transfer and counseling reasonable, even though rejected by
plaintiff. Because the company’s proposed remedial steps were reasonably calculated to prevent
future misconduct they satisfied the requirements contemplated by Faragher-Ellerth. By
rejecting the offers, and refusing to work with her boss, plaintiff left the employer with little
leeway. As a result, her termination was proper.
The court also found the company’s investigation was reasonable even though plaintiff
objected to several aspects of it. The judges found that a company need not conduct a “full-
blown, due process, trial-type proceeding in response to sexual harassment complaints.” All that
is required is a reasonable investigation consisting of at least an informal inquiry aimed at
arriving at a fair estimate of the truth. In finding the company’s investigation appropriate the
court cited its use of experienced investigators, interviews of all potential witnesses, and careful
consideration of all evidence obtained.
Finally, the court turned its attention to the retaliation claim and found that the
employee’s failure to cooperate with the employer’s reasonable corrective measures, and not
retaliation for reporting the misconduct, was the reason for her termination. Therefore, her claim
for retaliatory discharge was without merit.
This case is instructive in that it indicates employers who put in place the necessary
policies, complaint procedures, and training to prevent harassment; adequately and promptly
investigate all complaints; and offer reasonable remedies can successfully defend themselves
when sued.
