Unbelievable!!!

What is the name of your state? Vermont....this state is really backwards. My complaint to the office of our state which investigates sexual harassment was dismissed. I will write their letter of response exactly as they wrote it. "Specifically the information is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of sexual harassment or retaliation. The information you sent does establish a prima facie case that Ms. so and so was subjected to sexual harassment, and retaliation afterwards.
"We found when she finally did file a report the company acted and took steps to stop the harassment. Unfortunately it looks like her health continued to decline and she missed a lot of work. She finally reported the harassment and retaliation again, but to her old manager since he was the manager involved with investigation. At the same time her new manager terminated her for her absences, not because of her complaints. I am sorry we are unable to assist you by initiating an investigation at this time. Please call me if you have any questions". "It is my determination that the additional information, together with the information contained in the quesionnaire is insufficient to initiate a charge of employment discrimination". So this is our state on handling sexual harassment. Unreal. Faith

faithnlve said:

What is the name of your state? Vermont....this state is really backwards. My complaint to the office of our state which investigates sexual harassment was dismissed. I will write their letter of response exactly as they wrote it. "Specifically the information is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of sexual harassment or retaliation. The information you sent does establish a prima facie case that Ms. so and so was subjected to sexual harassment, and retaliation afterwards.
"We found when she finally did file a report the company acted and took steps to stop the harassment. Unfortunately it looks like her health continued to decline and she missed a lot of work. She finally reported the harassment and retaliation again, but to her old manager since he was the manager involved with investigation. At the same time her new manager terminated her for her absences, not because of her complaints. I am sorry we are unable to assist you by initiating an investigation at this time. Please call me if you have any questions". "It is my determination that the additional information, together with the information contained in the quesionnaire is insufficient to initiate a charge of employment discrimination". So this is our state on handling sexual harassment. Unreal. Faith

Click to expand...

**A: thanks for writing.

HomeGuru said:

**


A: thanks for writing.

Click to expand...

My response:

Yes, I concur. It was lovely reading, and quite gripping at moments. Although, with stories like this, there's usually a "love interest." Oh well.

IAAL

Im not sure if you think this is true or not. But what I really don't understand is how they can say in one sentence there is a case and in another they wont investigate.

faithnlve said:

Im not sure if you think this is true or not. But what I really don't understand is how they can say in one sentence there is a case and in another they wont investigate.

Click to expand...

My response:

Thanks for finally asking a question, or at least, narrowing your legal concern. We were at a loss as to what you wanted. All there was, was a story and your comment, "Unreal."

The company took steps on its own, e.g., "the company acted and took steps to stop the harassment." That's all that Federal law requires. If the company had done nothing, then maybe, perhaps, the agency would have begun an investigation.

Since we don't have the full story, this is only a supposition. But, it's not just your State; rather, this is Federal law and it's the law in all 50 States. So, it wouldn't have matter where this occurred. While Vermont may be "backwards" in many respects, this result (based upon what few facts were given) would have happened in the other States, too.

Good luck.

IAAL

OP- Federal law does nto require that the EEOC signs the seal of approval especially if one is bringing suit under section 1981. Now the company does have a defense if it investigated however in many circuits that is not a full defense as the company would be required to have a complaint "system" in place. Point? check with a lawyer in your area.

This is how I responded to their office on my dismissal.

When sexual harassment happens while employed, and the individual becomes ill due to the stresses of the constant harassment even though the company feels "they" followed through with the harassment policy in place, then the individual was fired for being out, why wouldn't the company be liable?? The employee feels they were wrongfully terminated since she would of not been out if not for the harassment and puts a complaint into your office for wrongful discharge. Why wouldn't your office investigate the harassment endured instead of dismissing the investigation of wrongful discharge? The harassment was the cause for the individual being out sick, and there is solid evidence of the sexual harassment endured every day for the first few months. I thought the attorney general's office was to protect the public (employees) of their rights to an environment free of this abuse? Just because the employer "claims" the termination had nothing to do with the harassment in which they also claimed "they" handled according to their policy, belittles the impact on the victim. The harassment and the retaliation and effects of the harassment on the employee should be pertinent information before just dismissing the complaint? Seems to me an investigation would involve the harassment endured on the complainant, doctor information, and the retrieval of evidence from the company involved before merely dismissing a complaint based upon what the company claims. How do you think they responded?

Under the federal statute, an employer's liability for sexual harassment varies depending upon the position of the individual doing the harassment and the nature of the harassment.

If the harassment was between co-workers, the employer is liable only when it becomes aware of the harassment and doesn't take appropriate action. There are some rare situtations where the courts have ruled that the employer should have been aware of the harassment because it was so obvious. If your employer takes appropriate action once it becomes aware of the harassment and can show it has an effective system of informing employees about harassment and the employer's means to address it, it has met its obligation under the federal statute.

The federal statute does provide for compensatory damages, which would include absences due to stress, related to suffering illegal discrimination. However, the state concluded that your employer did what was required when informed of the report of sexual harassment and, therefore, you did not suffer illegal sexual harassment discrimination. As a result, you are not entitled to equitable relief or punative or compensatory damages.

A claim of retaliation means that you believe that your employer terminated you because you reported the sexual harassment. The state concluded that the individual who terminated you, was not involved in the harassment matter and was not aware of it. Therefore, s/he couldn't have based your termination on your sexual harassment report.

Really, you are contending that your employer should have excused your absences because they resulted from the stress experienced because of the sexual harassment. However, there is no requirement that it do so.

Not being privy to the evidence the state considered, it's impossible to tell whether the state's findings are correct.

Most state anti-sexual harassment statutes parallel the federal law. I'm assuming that's the case in Vermont. However, it is EEOC, the federal agency, that enforces the federal statute. You might check with the state to determine whether you have any rights to have EEOC look at its decision.

I follow what your are saying. But my complaint does state the retaliation was after the harassment was reported. Plus I was not moved right after the complaint. I was placed back into the same area of the harassment. Then the harasser and his friends ganged up on me and confronted me when they learned of my complaint. That is when I begged for my manager to do something, move me, move him, whatever is takes. So they moved me that night. I was then told not to say anything and even though I was still forced to work back in the old area at times, to ignore them and suck it up. So, I felt like I was the one being punished. That is why I became sick again. The stress was overwhelming. So are you saying that I have no case because the company claims they followed their policy and too bad for Me?

The question that remains unanswered for me, is whether your employer took appropriate action when you complained about the harassment. I can't answer that question because I don't have access to the evidence. That's why I suggested that you check with the state office to see if you can ask EEOC to review your case. I don't know the relationship between your state office and EEOC.

The EEOC office is tied in with the attorney General Office. Anyways, I can tell you only this. Another manager is the one who put the complaint in for me. This manager was a friend of mine I was confiding in. When I met with my manager it was because he was notified by HR of the harassment at me. I do not know what happened after that since I was put back to work after in same area. While back in my area it became hostile after the guys found out about the sexual harassment complaint by me. I was scared to death at that point. That is when I threatened to quit if they didn't help me. I told them to do something, move me, something. So they did. But it didnt stop the evil glares. Plus I had to sit in my truck, so I would not run into these guys. I was the only female by the way. I worked only with guys. Plus I still had to go back to my old area to work even though I was afraid of those guys now. I was told to ignore them and to suck it up. Thats all I can tell you since I never knew the outcome other than them letting me go by the new manager who should of known the stress I was under. Thanks Faith