Review the scenario presented as it relates to the case of Hoyle v. Freightliner. Were the actions of the co-workers towards the female employee sufficient to meet the severe and pervasive threshold? Also, was the job reassignment to janitorial work indicative of discrimination or retaliation towards her? In providing your opinion, make sure to also indicate what you think the court should decide in this case. Next, look up the case. What did the court decide, and why? Do you agree with the court's decision?
-- Your solution is attached. Thank you for using BrainMass.
When we discuss situations that are severe and pervasive, we have to look at the acts taking place, and the duration of those acts. We also have to consider the fact that the sexual harassment laws have improved since the time period of when this case took place. There is a stronger emphasis on protecting the rights of workers when they are being sexually harassed. Therefore, it is important to analyze this case in conjunction with the laws that were in place during that time period, including the general attitude towards those laws (which was strong, but not as strong as it is now).
We know that the acts committed involved (1) the male workers leaving a tampon inside of a female worker's area, (2) sexually explicit screensavers on work computers, (3) sexually explicit photographs around the workplace where female employees could view them and (4) sexually explicit calendars in the workplace. We now have to consider if the female employees were disturbed or offended, as required by law, in this case.
We have a clear indication ...
This solution provides a comprehensive discussion regarding Hoyle v. Freightliner . The actions, laws, and issues are discussed in their entirety. The exact reassignments in relation to discrimination, and the court's decision are also thoroughly discussed.