Workers will have a tougher time holding their employers accountable for client, customer, and vendor harassment if more federal appeals courts adopt the Sixth Circuit’s new standard that gives businesses a leg up.
The Cincinnati-based circuit recently split from six other courts, holding that employers must intend for third-party harassment to occur in order to be liable under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The panel relied on the US Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo to disregard an EEOCregulation that focused on employer negligence instead of intent.
The ruling is yet another “manifestation” that longstanding federal interpretations of unclear laws will face increased legal headwinds after Loper Bright, said Jules A. Levenson, a senior attorney at Seyfarth Shaw LLP.
Although the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sets precedent only in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, its decision opens a path for other circuits to revisit their tests for non-worker harassment.
The First, Second, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh circuits have all adopted a negligence-based standard for those claims, with some expressly following the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on the issue. The agency in rulemaking took the position that employers must know or should have known about the third-party harassment and failed to promptly correct it.
The Sixth Circuit’s ruling presents “an interesting twist because it potentially...
Summary This volume examines how AI-generated videos contributed to false narratives about Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients during the government shutdown, lending alleg...