Disciplinary and Harassment Investigations

Cases on Point: Waymire v. Harris County 11

An employer prevailed in a harassment case in which (1) the supervisor began the investigation on the day the plaintiff complained, (2) the supervisor interviewed the plaintiff, accused harasser and several witnesses within one week, and (3) the employer prepared a report regarding the investigation, forwarded it to management personnel, and reprimanded the “harasser.” Werger v. City of Ladue 12 An employer prevailed in a harassment case where (1) numerous co-workers witnessed some of the objectionable conduct, (2) the Department Head immediately separated the accused from the accusers, ending the harassing behavior, and (3) the department head conducted an immediate and thorough investigation. Carmon v. Lubritzol Corp. 13 An employer prevailed in a harassment case in which several supervisors and the personnel manager (1) met with the plaintiff the day she complained to tell her they appreciated her bringing the incident to their attention and to reiterate the policy against harassment, (2) completed the investigation within three days, and (3) reprimanded and transferred the alleged harasser, even though there were no corroborating witnesses. Steiner v. Showboard Operating Co. 14 An employee prevailed where the employer failed to promptly investigate a claim of harassment after (1) the plaintiff complained of sexual harassment, (2) the employer did not initially investigate the claim, (3) the employee filed a charge with the EEOC, and (4) the employer investigated the complaint. Valentín v. Municipality of Aguidilla 15 And a jury found in favor of an employee in a harassment case where the agency did not conduct an investigation after (1) the employee complained to the designated complaint-receiver, lieutenant in charge of internal affairs investigations, the Police Commissioner, and the Mayor, (2) the accused and his friends admonished and disciplined the employee, and (3) the employee took 2 leaves of absence due to stress from the harassment. Dept. of Fair Employment & Housing v. Lyddan Law Group 16 DFEH may prosecute an action for failing to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment as an independent violation even where there is no legally actionable claim of harassment.

Disciplinary and Harassment Investigations ©2020 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 9