Legal Analysis of Workplace Sexual Harassment: A Detailed Report

This report examines a case of workplace sexual harassment, focusing on the legal implications of anti-gay harassment. The assignment analyzes the scenario where a gay employee is subjected to sexually suggestive remarks and offensive behavior by a straight coworker. It addresses the legal questions raised by the supervisor regarding federal and state laws protecting against such harassment, specifically exploring whether federal law provides protection based on sexual orientation and the potential for the gay employee to pursue legal action. The report delves into the complexities of workplace discrimination, the limitations of current federal protections, and the importance of state laws and employer policies in addressing and preventing harassment. Furthermore, the report references relevant legal precedents and scholarly articles to support its analysis, emphasizing the need for clear workplace policies and procedures to protect employees from harassment, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Running head: WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 1
Workplace Sexual Harassment
Student name
Professor name
Institution
Course
Date of submission

WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 2
TOPIC 1
The actions of being sexually harassed are always common and such cases have been
frequently reported among employees. Sexual orientation discrimination refers to a state of being
treated differently from other workers in a workplace because you are seen sexual orientation or
rather you are real. According to the case study, however, the gay coworker is being treated
differently because of his sexual behavior by a straight coworker. This includes mocking him of
his sexual behaviors and also showing him pictures of other male friends. However, depending
on the workplace you work, this type of behavior may be illegal according to (Minson, 2016).
Despite the fact that the federal government protects individuals from workplace discrimination
based on race, sex, age, and other factors, there is no clear federal law that protects individuals
from sexual orientation from any private employers except those employed by the federal
government.
There have been several debates over the years that Title VII which prohibits against the
art of sexual discrimination also incorporates sexual orientation but there have been no
successful proportions (Schultz, 2018). This is so because sexual orientation is mainly
stereotypes on gender based on the behavior of both men and women in society. This, therefore,
means, therefore, means the gay worker cannot sue the straight worker based on any federal law
(Hersch, 2015). Despite the attempts by the Equal Employment Opportunity to enforce the
federal laws on anti-discrimination, the matter is still unsettled. Living with the behavior is
according to someone’s wish and so if one chooses to live with it it’s upon him. Being a gay or
an anti-gay doesn’t necessarily mean that they should start discriminating one another at a
workplace.

WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 3
TOPIC 2
Sexual harassment is always common in workplaces. The cases have been many with
legal strategies devised to curb the situation. The State and Federal government both protects the
rights of any employee regardless of the sexual needs expressed by each one of them. The sexual
harassment in Maryland refrains any other employee harassment and advocate for a suitable
working environment. In this case, however, Allen who has been sexually harassed deserves
better treatment and any cases of sexual discrimination should not be allowed whatsoever
(Marshall, 2017). There have been many complains among employees against workplace sexual
harassment where some employers do not treat their workers in a better way. Although the law
doesn’t need that everybody is treated equally, it also does not require that anyone is treated
differently due to sexual behavior or race.
According to the American Disabilities Act of 1990, the law prohibits against mental or
physically disabled individuals. Such as employees have a right to any form of accommodation
in order to let them effectively delegate their duties. The same law also prohibits any form of
sexual harassment from workplace personnel such as other employees and supervisors. The law
is applicable regardless of the harm activity being committed an abusive nature. Intensive studies
indicate that employees need to have a suitable complaint procedure where they file and make
them complains in their workplace to prompt any reasonable remedy in the workplace. There are
several agencies in Maryland which have been commissioned to enforce these related laws
which include the Maryland Commission on Human Relations and the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (Schultz, 2018). In order to Protect myself as a coworker 1 in this case,

WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 4
following the right procedure to file a charge against coworker 2 to ensure that my rights are
protected. The charge may apply either with or without the presence of a lawyer.
References
Hersch, J. (2015). Sexual harassment in the workplace. IZA World of Labor.
Marshall, A. M. (2017). Confronting sexual harassment: The law and politics of everyday life.
Routledge.
Minson, J. (2016). Questions Of Conduct: Sexual Harrassment Citizenship Government.
Springer.
Schultz, V. (2018). Telling Stories About Women and Work: Judicial Interpretations of Sex
Segregation in the Workplace in Title VII Cases Raising the Lack of Interest Argument
[1990]. In Feminist legal theory (pp. 124-155). Routledge.