Hi, I’m looking for case laws that indicate quid pro quo sexual harassment cases between a senior employer and a junior employee.
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear member,
Please provide us with more information about the case. Write details in chronological sequence. Please explain the meaning of "quid pro quo sexual harassment cases".
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
8223Please provide us with more information about the case. Write details in chronological sequence. Please explain the meaning of "quid pro quo sexual harassment cases".
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, thank you for your reply. I'm just an intern on the case and I don't know the whole optics and facts, but I have been asked to compile case laws related to quid pro quo Sexual Harassment at the workplace. So, a list of cases would be appreciable.
Quid pro quo is also a form of sexual harassment that occurs in the workplace. It happens when a manager or individual in a position of power offers or merely hints that they will give the employee job benefits in return for that employee's satisfaction with a sexual demand. It may include a raise, promotion, or another benefit.
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Quid pro quo is also a form of sexual harassment that occurs in the workplace. It happens when a manager or individual in a position of power offers or merely hints that they will give the employee job benefits in return for that employee's satisfaction with a sexual demand. It may include a raise, promotion, or another benefit.
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear member,
If the manager and the female subordinate make a trade-off involving a sexual favor, then should we call it "harassment"? Whether or not to gain the favor is a choice of the female employee. However, if she accepts the demands, then what happens further is either with her consent or out of her own volition, and it is not under duress.
The meaning of "harassment" is "a feeling of intense annoyance caused by being tormented". However, when someone does it against one's will, then one gets tormented. Accepting the overtures and then calling it harassment is purely hypocritical.
Last year, the Indian women wrestlers protested against sexual harassment. They could not thwart the attempts at harassment, but later they came forward and demanded justice against their tormentor. Since this was not the case of "quid pro quo", these women validly claimed justice. This would not have been the case if they had accepted the favors and kept quiet.
As far as case laws of "quid pro quo sexual harassment" are concerned, it remains to be seen whether any company has readily published them. This is because no company wishes to air their dirty laundry in public. Therefore, even if such cases have happened, the company administration will prefer to keep them confidential rather than "air their grievances."
Anyway, you can search the Internet and find out whether you can find any relevant material.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the manager and the female subordinate make a trade-off involving a sexual favor, then should we call it "harassment"? Whether or not to gain the favor is a choice of the female employee. However, if she accepts the demands, then what happens further is either with her consent or out of her own volition, and it is not under duress.
The meaning of "harassment" is "a feeling of intense annoyance caused by being tormented". However, when someone does it against one's will, then one gets tormented. Accepting the overtures and then calling it harassment is purely hypocritical.
Last year, the Indian women wrestlers protested against sexual harassment. They could not thwart the attempts at harassment, but later they came forward and demanded justice against their tormentor. Since this was not the case of "quid pro quo", these women validly claimed justice. This would not have been the case if they had accepted the favors and kept quiet.
As far as case laws of "quid pro quo sexual harassment" are concerned, it remains to be seen whether any company has readily published them. This is because no company wishes to air their dirty laundry in public. Therefore, even if such cases have happened, the company administration will prefer to keep them confidential rather than "air their grievances."
Anyway, you can search the Internet and find out whether you can find any relevant material.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you are working for a law firm, I think your internal research teams should be able to answer this question better or your seniors will show you how to search for what you want.
Also, they will explain, you need full details of the case and not half-baked guesswork. The facts of the matter change the ruling given by the courts, so I am not sure how searching for generic cases helps.
But as Dinesh-ji said, it is not harassment if the 'victim' accepted the offer or hint and cooperated. But the matter can be considered as sexual harassment if the victim refuses, and the superior punishes her by denying promotion, removes her from work, or puts her in a disadvantageous position by any other means.
Once sexual harassment happens, it is immaterial if the offer was made or not. It is an offense. If the victim accepted the condition and got the benefits, then there is no case as there was no harassment as defined under the act or torts.
@Dinesh-ji, just wondering aloud - can the others (not offered the opportunity) file a complaint under sexual harassment for someone else getting the benefits?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Also, they will explain, you need full details of the case and not half-baked guesswork. The facts of the matter change the ruling given by the courts, so I am not sure how searching for generic cases helps.
But as Dinesh-ji said, it is not harassment if the 'victim' accepted the offer or hint and cooperated. But the matter can be considered as sexual harassment if the victim refuses, and the superior punishes her by denying promotion, removes her from work, or puts her in a disadvantageous position by any other means.
Once sexual harassment happens, it is immaterial if the offer was made or not. It is an offense. If the victim accepted the condition and got the benefits, then there is no case as there was no harassment as defined under the act or torts.
@Dinesh-ji, just wondering aloud - can the others (not offered the opportunity) file a complaint under sexual harassment for someone else getting the benefits?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Saswata Banerjee,
Your question is:
@Dinesh-ji, just wondering aloud - can the others (not offered the opportunity) file a complaint under sexual harassment for someone else getting the benefits?
This raises a question: who are the "other" persons? Are they from the same company, and if yes, then what material evidence do they have of the harassment? To gain professional favors from the authorities concerned, if the woman employee provides sexual favors, then where is the question of harassment? The other employees may come to know about this give-and-take, but what evidence do they have to prove that the merit has been compromised? Providing sexual favors is the rarest of rare. What about other favors like doing household work for the boss where the question of gender does not arise? How to prove that the boss has misused the authority?
For filing criminal charges, the victim comes forward and files a complaint. If nobody has come forward, then who is the victim? In certain crimes, the victim is injured extensively or in a state of shock and cannot file the complaint on one's own. In such cases, the victim needs assistance in filing the complaint. Even then, the police look for material evidence.
In India, roughly a quarter of the rape accused have been punished, and the other three quarters were acquitted for want of evidence. Their acquittal did not mean the rape did not take place. The courts accepted that the rape took place, but the courts could not award the punishment for want of evidence. If this is the state of the verdicts on the rape cases, then you can imagine how difficult it is to prove sexual harassment.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your question is:
@Dinesh-ji, just wondering aloud - can the others (not offered the opportunity) file a complaint under sexual harassment for someone else getting the benefits?
This raises a question: who are the "other" persons? Are they from the same company, and if yes, then what material evidence do they have of the harassment? To gain professional favors from the authorities concerned, if the woman employee provides sexual favors, then where is the question of harassment? The other employees may come to know about this give-and-take, but what evidence do they have to prove that the merit has been compromised? Providing sexual favors is the rarest of rare. What about other favors like doing household work for the boss where the question of gender does not arise? How to prove that the boss has misused the authority?
For filing criminal charges, the victim comes forward and files a complaint. If nobody has come forward, then who is the victim? In certain crimes, the victim is injured extensively or in a state of shock and cannot file the complaint on one's own. In such cases, the victim needs assistance in filing the complaint. Even then, the police look for material evidence.
In India, roughly a quarter of the rape accused have been punished, and the other three quarters were acquitted for want of evidence. Their acquittal did not mean the rape did not take place. The courts accepted that the rape took place, but the courts could not award the punishment for want of evidence. If this is the state of the verdicts on the rape cases, then you can imagine how difficult it is to prove sexual harassment.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Thank you for your inquiry regarding case law related to quid pro quo sexual harassment cases between senior employers and junior employees. This is an important and complex legal issue that merits a thoughtful response.
As you are likely aware, quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when an employer conditions the granting or withholding of a tangible job benefit on the employee's submission to unwelcome sexual conduct. This form of harassment is particularly egregious when the power dynamic involves a senior leader exploiting their authority over a subordinate. Such abuses of power can have devastating consequences for the victim's career, well-being, and sense of self.
In reviewing the relevant case law, a few key precedents come to mind. In the landmark Supreme Court decision Merit or Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986), the Court held that quid pro quo harassment is a form of sex discrimination prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This established that employers can be held liable for the discriminatory actions of supervisors who leverage their position to demand sexual favors.
Similarly, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Kauffman v. Allied Signal, Inc. (1997) found that an employer can be strictly liable for quid pro quo harassment, regardless of whether the company had knowledge of the supervisor's misconduct. This ruling underscores the heightened duty of care organizations have to prevent abuse of authority within their ranks.
More recently, the Tenth Circuit in Kramer v. Wasatch County Sheriff's Office (2017) clarified that quid pro quo harassment need not involve a tangible employment action, as long as the harasser's conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of the victim's employment. This broadened the legal definition in a way that better captures the insidious nature of such abuses.
I would encourage you to review these and other relevant court decisions as you build your case. Additionally, you may find it helpful to consult legal scholars and practitioners who have delved deeply into the evolving jurisprudence surrounding supervisor-subordinate harassment. Their insights could prove invaluable.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your inquiry regarding case law related to quid pro quo sexual harassment cases between senior employers and junior employees. This is an important and complex legal issue that merits a thoughtful response.
As you are likely aware, quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when an employer conditions the granting or withholding of a tangible job benefit on the employee's submission to unwelcome sexual conduct. This form of harassment is particularly egregious when the power dynamic involves a senior leader exploiting their authority over a subordinate. Such abuses of power can have devastating consequences for the victim's career, well-being, and sense of self.
In reviewing the relevant case law, a few key precedents come to mind. In the landmark Supreme Court decision Merit or Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986), the Court held that quid pro quo harassment is a form of sex discrimination prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This established that employers can be held liable for the discriminatory actions of supervisors who leverage their position to demand sexual favors.
Similarly, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Kauffman v. Allied Signal, Inc. (1997) found that an employer can be strictly liable for quid pro quo harassment, regardless of whether the company had knowledge of the supervisor's misconduct. This ruling underscores the heightened duty of care organizations have to prevent abuse of authority within their ranks.
More recently, the Tenth Circuit in Kramer v. Wasatch County Sheriff's Office (2017) clarified that quid pro quo harassment need not involve a tangible employment action, as long as the harasser's conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of the victim's employment. This broadened the legal definition in a way that better captures the insidious nature of such abuses.
I would encourage you to review these and other relevant court decisions as you build your case. Additionally, you may find it helpful to consult legal scholars and practitioners who have delved deeply into the evolving jurisprudence surrounding supervisor-subordinate harassment. Their insights could prove invaluable.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you copy from ChatGPT blindly, you will end up with such things.
These are not cases under Indian law and Indian courts. Since the OP is from Bengaluru, I doubt if the cases are of any relevance to his question.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
These are not cases under Indian law and Indian courts. Since the OP is from Bengaluru, I doubt if the cases are of any relevance to his question.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Banerjee,
Please note that sexual harassment is a universal problem and not restricted to only one country and its laws. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in taking examples from other countries. The very purpose of these definitions is to educate people and prevent them from committing the crime. This is the main concept; I hope you understand.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please note that sexual harassment is a universal problem and not restricted to only one country and its laws. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in taking examples from other countries. The very purpose of these definitions is to educate people and prevent them from committing the crime. This is the main concept; I hope you understand.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is meaningless to quote an act or a judgment that does not apply to a jurisdiction. It does not matter if an act is punishable in the USA if it is done in India by a non-US citizen. The US laws, Justice Department, American courts, and jury have no jurisdiction over the act, especially if it is not a crime in India.
Indian courts will also not bother to hear what an American law says about a matter of a crime or alleged crime in India unless it is covered in a specific clause of the extradition treaty, which this is not.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Indian courts will also not bother to hear what an American law says about a matter of a crime or alleged crime in India unless it is covered in a specific clause of the extradition treaty, which this is not.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Handbook on Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace.pdf