Since the #MeToo movement went viral in October 2017, sexual harassment has dominated news headlines. But what has that meant for administrative agencies handling complaints and existing litigation? Here is a summary of recent sexual harassment activity in the EEOC and federal courts.

EEOC Lawsuits and Settlements

• SMX Staffing: In February, the EEOC announced that it sued an international staffing company for a manager’s alleged sexual harassment of female manufacturing line workers in Kansas City, Kansas. The alleged harassment occurred at a Procter & Gamble plant where the staffing company hired and supervised employees. According to the EEOC, a manager made repeated sexual comments to an employee who reported the comments to another supervisor. The other supervisor then allegedly told the employee that she should engage in intercourse with the purported harassing supervisor for additional pay. The lawsuit alleges that the harassment continued, and the employee eventually quit her job. The lawsuit was filed in the District of Kansas federal court (Case No. 2:18-civ-02058) and is ongoing.
• Beavers’ Inc/Arby’s: In March, the EEOC filed suit in the Southern District of Alabama federal court (Case No. 1:18-cv-00150) against an Arby’s franchisee for violation of Title VII. The EEOC alleges that the franchisee hired a team leader trainee with a history of sexual harassment who then pressured teenage female employees to have sex with him, among other things. According to the EEOC, the teenage female employees complained, but the employer took no action for several months until the alleged harasser physically injured one of the employees. In its press release announcing the lawsuit, the EEOC emphasized the importance of employers addressing complaints in a timely manner.

Federal Court Lawsuits and Decisions

• On April 27, 2018, Judge Lungstrom, a federal judge in Kansas, denied a motion to dismiss a negligent hiring and retention claim filed in involving alleged sexual harassment and workers’ compensation retaliation. The plaintiff in Stovall v. Brykan Legends, LLC (Case No. 17-cv-2412-JWL) was a dishwasher and busser employed by the defendant’s restaurant in Kansas City, Kansas. While employed, she alleges that her manager subjected her to unwanted sexual advances and other harassing behavior. She claims that she complained to the defendant, but the defendant took no corrective action.  Once the manager learned of the employee’s complaints, he allegedly violently attacked the plaintiff causing her to be injured. She claims not only physical injuries from the alleged attack but also severe emotional distress as the result of the attack and the manager’s purported ongoing harassment. Although the Kansas Workers’ Compensation Act includes an exclusivity provision, the court declined to dismiss the negligent hiring claim because the “essence” of the claim “goes beyond the physical injuries alleged by the plaintiff as a result of the purported attack.” The court held that the alleged emotional distress could come from injuries other than those the plaintiff claims she suffered in the physical attack. The lesson for employers is that if a sexual assault occurs at your workplace, you could be at risk for damages beyond those arising from physical injuries suffered in the assault. Again, prompt and effective corrective action of substantiated harassment complaints is key.