Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
National Litigation Hotline
Adopting a broader definition of 'supervisor' than other Courts of Appeals have done for purposes of establishing an employer's vicarious liability in a sexual harassment suit, the Second Circuit recently held that a male employee who did not have authority to hire, fire, reassign, promote, or change the benefits of a female co-worker was nonetheless her supervisor for Title VII purposes. Mack v. Otis Elevator Co., 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 6948 (2d Cir. April 11).
Yasharay Mack started working for Otis Elevator Company in 1999 as an elevator mechanic's helper. In her position, she assisted six elevator mechanics. From the time of her hire, Mack claimed, mechanic James Connolly made lascivious comments regarding her appearance, regularly changed out of his uniform in front of her, and on at least one occasion, tried to force her to sit on his lap and kiss him. He also commented that 'spics' and 'niggers' were not meant to do elevator work. Mack repeatedly complained to Connolly's supervisor about him, but the company took no action. Mack ultimately filed suit in district court, alleging a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), an employer is vicariously liable for the harassment of an employee only when 'a 'supervisor with immediate (or successively higher) authority over the employee' has engaged in the complained of conduct.' ' The company argued that it should not be held liable for Connolly's harassment of Mack because Connolly was her co-worker, not her supervisor. The company noted that Connolly could not have hired or fired Mack, could not reassign her to different duties or significantly change her benefits, and had no power to promote her ' in other words, that he could not cause Mack to suffer an adverse employment action. The district court granted summary judgment to Otis Elevator.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.