MENUMENU
  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
        • SEE MORE
          PREMIUM RESOURCES
  • HR DEEP DIVES
        • Coronavirus (COVID-19) Resources for HR Professionals
          Employment Law
          Labor Law Posting Requirements: Everything You Need to Know
          Recruiting
          businesswoman selecting future employees on digital interfaces
          Recruiting Resources for HR & Hiring Managers
          Performance Management
          vector image of young female making star rating
          Performance Review Resources
          Employment Law
          Understanding Equal Employment Opportunity and the EEOC
          Recruiting
          Onboarding Resources for HR & Hiring Managers
  • CORONAVIRUS & HR

  • LOGIN
  • SIGN UP FREE

HR Morning

MENUMENU
  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
        • SEE MORE
          PREMIUM RESOURCES
  • HR DEEP DIVES
        • Coronavirus (COVID-19) Resources for HR Professionals
          Employment Law
          Labor Law Posting Requirements: Everything You Need to Know
          Recruiting
          businesswoman selecting future employees on digital interfaces
          Recruiting Resources for HR & Hiring Managers
          Performance Management
          vector image of young female making star rating
          Performance Review Resources
          Employment Law
          Understanding Equal Employment Opportunity and the EEOC
          Recruiting
          Onboarding Resources for HR & Hiring Managers
  • CORONAVIRUS & HR
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • More
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Staff Administration
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • Employee Services
    • Work Location
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans

New 'Howard Stern' ruling opens door to discrimination suit

Fred Hosier
by Fred Hosier
July 17, 2008
3 minute read
  • SHARE ON

Do any employees at your company play radio programs by shock jocks such as Howard Stern, Bubba the Love Sponge, or Opie and Anthony? If so, it could create a problem. A federal appeals court has ruled regular exposure to language and radio programs that are particularly offensive to women but not targeted at a particular worker may still support a hostile work environment claim.
Ingrid Reeves was one of only two women who worked for C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). Reeves worked in a cubicle environment, surrounded by men in other cubes (the other woman didn’t work near her).
Reeves alleged that sexually offensive language permeated  the work environment near her cube at CHRW every day. She also claimed that sexually explicit radio programs played on a daily basis (the text of the lawsuit never mentions the name of the show).
The comments included three derogatory terms used to refer to women and other crude sexual terms (if you want to know exactly how far the comments went, you can read a PDF of the court’s decision here). 
Reeves said she complained to her co-workers and supervisor many times, but the comments, which weren’t directed at her, continued.
Reeves was also offended by a radio program that was played every morning on the stereo in the office. She said discussions on the program about female anatomy and sexual topics offended her.
When Reeves complained about the radio program, she was often told she could play her own music or change the station. However, she testified that if she did so, the other employees would soon change the radio back to the program that offended her.
CHRW’s branch manager testified that he agreed with Reeves’ accounts of some words being used in the office. He also said he had one or two talks with one of Reeves’ co-workers about language and mentioned language to others during performance evaluations after Reeves complained.
Reeves resigned from her job and filed a complaint against CHRW two years later alleging that the use of sexually offensive language (including that heard on the radio) created a hostile work environment in violation of federal law.
She argued that even though the language wasn’t directed at her, it created a hostile work environment.
CHRW argued that the lawsuit should be thrown out because men and women were subjected to the same behavior in the office.
Previous decision on race pertains to gender
The Eleventh Circuit court noted that it’s well established that racially offensive language need not be targeted at the plaintiff to support a hostile work environment claim.
CHRW argued that the court shouldn’t look to race cases in connection with this one because “race is different” than gender.
But the court disagreed. It said the conversations and jokes that allegedly permeated the office on a daily basis were more degrading to women than men, and that the radio program claims were similar.  So even if men and women were equally exposed, the language had a discriminatory effect on Reeves because of its degrading nature.
The court said a jury could reasonably find that the offensive language and radio program interfered with Reeves’ job performance, even though the conduct wasn’t directed specifically at her. It sent the case back to a lower court for trial.
What do you think of the court’s decision? Does this raise the bar for companies trying to prevent themselves from being perceived as having a hostile work environment? Let us know that you think.

Fred Hosier
Fred Hosier
Fred Hosier is editor of Safety News Alert. He has written about occupational safety and health since 1999. Fred's been in the communications business since 1985, including 11 years at WILM Newsradio in Wilmington, DE, where he was News Director.

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS immediately access 10 FREE HR guides.

I WANT MY FREE GUIDES

Keep Up To Date with the Latest HR News

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

Sign up for a free HRMorning membership and get our newsletter!
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • HR Technology
  • Performance Management
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation & Payroll
  • Policy & Culture
  • Staff Administration
  • Wellness & Safety
  • Staff Departure
  • Employee Services
  • Work Location
  • HR Career & Self-Care

HRMorning, part of the SuccessFuel Network, provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day’s headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Privacy Policy Terms of Service
Copyright © 2021 SuccessFuel

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

preloader