Most employers are cognizant of their obligation to conduct an investigation in response to allegations of sexual harassment in the workplace.
Most employers are cognizant of their obligation to conduct an investigation in response to allegations of sexual harassment in the workplace. However, a recent federal court of appeals decision highlights the need for such investigations to be thorough and unbiased and not rely too much on information from witnesses with potentially improper motivations.
In Byrnes v. St. Catherine Hospital et al., Matthew Byrnes, a surgeon for St. Catherine Hospital, filed a complaint with the hospital's Medical Executive Committee (MEC) president alleging that another doctor at the hospital had sexually harassed nurses, failed to wear gloves during sensitive exams, and had improperly handled one type of operation. The MEC president showed Dr. Byrnes' complaint to the doctor who was the subject of the complaint, and the MEC president and Human Resources subsequently conducted an internal investigation regarding the complaint. As part of this investigation, one nurse told the MEC president that the accused doctor had touched her in an inappropriate way. The MEC president also obtained information substantiating the allegations about the accused doctor's alleged lack of hand hygiene as well as disagreement from one nurse regarding the accused doctor's patient care.
Following the investigation, the MEC president met with the MEC, shared the details of...
Denton Loudermill Jr. watched every Kansas City Chiefs game at his sister's house with his family. The Kansas native and his late father were diehard fans. So, when the 2024 Super Bowl champions' ...