Can a CEO Have an Affair with HR Without It Constituting Sexual Harassment at Work?

We are asking for Andy Byron and the entire Astronomer team  after the Coldplay Kiss Cam fiasco.

The truth is that a consensual sexual relationship between a supervisor and an employee does not, in itself, constitute actionable sexual harassment. The reason is simple: Actionable sexual harassment under Title VII requires that the sexual acts at issue be unwelcome by the other participant - Here, Kristin Cabot sure seemed to welcome the sexual acts and she was the HR Head, so she would be hard pressed to act like she did not know her rights to say no. 

However, Andy and Astronomer, we aren't done there - here is where you have problems. The real problems for Astronomer stem from how this relationship between Byron and Cabot, and any related conduct, affects other employees who are not directly involved in the consensual relationship as follows:

1. Adverse employment action for female employees who did NOT submit to sexual advances can support a Title VII claim of employment discrimination. Here are some case quotes to consider:
1. "[R]efusing to accede to sexual advances is an activity protected under Title VII." Rashid v Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 96 CIV. 1833 (AGS), 1998 WL 689931, at *2 (SDNY Oct. 2, 1998)
2. "Sexual harassment in the context of employment can form the basis for a Title VII claim. In the typical case, the female plaintiff claims that her male supervisor requested sexual favors from her and conditioned some job benefit, for example a promotion, on her assent. Such a claim is cognizable under Title VII." Toscano v Nimmo, 570 F. Supp. 1197, 1199 (1983)
3. "[S]he suffered what amounted to a 'reassignment with significantly different responsibilities' under Ellerth. She testified at trial that after she refused Flick's sexual advances, he substantially reduced her job responsibilities." Roberts v County of Cook, 01 C 9373, 2004 WL 1088230, at *2 (ND Ill May 12, 2004)
2. Hostile environment of sexual harassment for non-direct victims can support a Title VII claim of employment discrimination. Here are some case quotes to consider:
1. "Evidence of the general work atmosphere, involving employees other than the plaintiff, is relevant to the issue of whether there existed an atmosphere of hostile work environment which violated Title VII. This is so because “[e]ven a woman who was never herself the object of harassment might have a Title VII claim if she were forced to work in an atmosphere in which such harassment was pervasive.”" Broderick v Ruder, 685 F. Supp. 1269, 1277 (D.D.C. 1988)
2. "Past California decisions have established that the prohibition against sexual harassment includes protection from a broad range of conduct, ranging from expressly or impliedly conditioning employment benefits on submission to or tolerance of unwelcome sexual advances, to the creation of a work environment that is hostile or abusive on the basis of sex. Such a hostile environment may be created even if the plaintiff never is subjected to sexual advances." Miller v Dept of Corr., 36 Cal. 4th 446, 461 (2005)
3.  “[A]n employee may establish an actionable claim of sexual harassment under the FEHA by demonstrating that widespread sexual favoritism was severe or pervasive enough to alter his or her working conditions and create a hostile work environment." - Miller v Dept of Corr., 36 Cal. 4th 446, 461 (2005) (note that NYS Courts only require inferior rising above petty slights and trivial inconveniences rather than severe or pervasive)
3. Preferential treatment for female employees who submitted to sexual advances (like Kristin Cabot) can support a Title VII claim of employment discrimination by creating a hostile environment. Here are some case quotes to consider:
1. "[A] plaintiff makes out a prima facie case of sex discrimination by offering proof that a woman who was promoted to a job in the plaintiff's stead was having a sexual relationship with a person partially responsible for the hiring decision." Drinkwater v Union Carbide Corp., 904 F2d 853, 860 (3d Cir 1990)
2. "Additionally, Title VII is also violated when an employer affords preferential treatment to female employees who submit to sexual advances or other conduct of a sexual nature and such conduct is a matter of common knowledge." Broderick v Ruder, 685 F. Supp. 1269, 1277 (D.D.C. 1988)
3. "In those cases in which Title VII was extended to allow recovery based upon a supervisor's voluntary sexual relationship with a subordinate, the claims usually were premised upon the paramour receiving some form of preferential treatment over the claimant. (in this case, no Title VII because plaintiff alleged she was fired because she knew of the affair, a motivation that did not rely on her gender)" Ellert v Univ. of Texas, 52 F.3d 543, 546 (1995)
4. "[W]here a supervisor's preference for his or her paramour is transformed from simple favoritism to the concrete bestowal of tangible, economically valuable employment benefits denied other employees, such conduct can constitute prohibited discrimination." Perron v Sec'y Dep't of Health and Human Services, 2008 WL 5101577 at *5 (2008)
5. "Plaintiff opposes summary judgment in this regard on grounds that she in fact suffered three such adverse actions: 1) her failure to receive an annual special award; 2) her supervisor's selection of his paramour, Pamela Kite, for the desirable Katrina Detail; and 3) James Greer's failure to nominate her for a QSI. Plaintiff further points to circumstances surrounding all three of these actions as evincing Greer's discriminatory intent." Forrest v Brinker Int’l Payroll Co., LP, 511 F.3d 225, 229 (1st Cir. 2007)
6. "… plaintiff, without any doubt, was forced to work in an environment in which the WRO managers by their conduct harassed her and other WRO female employees, by bestowing preferential treatment upon those who submitted to their sexual advances. This preferential treatment undermined plaintiff's motivation and work performance and deprived plaintiff, and other WRO female employees, of promotions and job opportunities. The record is clear that plaintiff and other women working at the WRO found the sexual conduct and its accompanying manifestations which WRO managers engaged in over a protracted period of time to be offensive. The record also establishes that plaintiff and other women were for obvious reasons reluctant to voice their displeasure and, when they did, they were treated with a hostile response by WRO's management team." Broderick v Ruder, 685 F. Supp. 1269, 1277 (D.D.C. 1988)

Therefore, the "principle that emerges from the above cases is that absent claims of coercion or widespread sexual favoritism, where an employee engages in consensual sexual conduct with a supervisor and an employment decision is based on this conduct, Title VII is not implicated because any benefits of the relationship are due to the sexual conduct, rather than the gender, of the employee." Tenge v Phillips Modern Ag Co., 446 F3d 903, 909 (8th Cir 2006)

But here’s where the Coldplay Kiss Cam scandal takes a sharper turn. Andy’s wife, Megan Kerrigan, could pursue a divorce and depending on the terms of their prenup or postnup (if one exists), she might need to lean into the workplace discrimination angle to strengthen her financial claims. In doing so, she risks simultaneously substantiating a hostile work environment claim for other Astronomer employees, potentially encouraging those who’ve stayed silent to come forward. As Astronomer’s owner, Megan is caught in a bind - staying quiet protects the company by limiting further exposure to discrimination and retaliation claims, but the scorned spouse in her might not be willing to keep the peace.

If you have been involved in this situation at work and you want to know if you have a discrimination claim, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Did this sexual relationship between a supervisor and a co-worker create a workplace atmosphere where sexual harassment was either pervasive or, in New York, rose above petty slights and trivial inconveniences?
2. Was there a general workplace atmosphere where multiple employees experienced a hostile environment and was the situation widely discussed among staff? The more employees consistently affected, the stronger the potential case.
3. Was there favoritism shown toward employees who submitted to sexual advances from leadership or management and was that favoritism common knowledge? Did it result in lost promotions, missed job opportunities, or a decline in overall morale? 
4. Most importantly, ask yourself this - Were you ever propositioned by a supervisor and if you refused, were you denied any work benefits, opportunities, or advancement as a result?

If you're navigating a workplace relationship scandal or believe favoritism or harassment is impacting your career, contact Lieb at Law. Our employment law team is ready to evaluate whether your rights under Title VII or the NYS Human Rights Law have been violated. 

Visit https://www.liebatlaw.com or call us today to schedule a confidential consultation.

*Attorney Advertising

Protecting Survivors: NYS Bill Prohibits Financial Penalties in Nondisclosure Agreements

On November 17, 2023, Governor Hochul signed Bill A00581, amending NYS' General Obligations Law to prohibit settlements, or other resolution, of sexual harassment claims or any other form of unlawful discrimination from including any term or condition that requires the survivor to pay the defendant liquidated damages if the complainant violates a non-disclosure agreement.

Survivors of sexual harassment and discrimination are often required to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDA) as a condition for receiving compensation for their horror. NDAs frequently include provisions requiring survivors to pay liquidated damages (predetermined damages) if they violate the agreement and these damages can be devastating. 

As a result, survivors, who later change their minds or those who were coerced into signing an NDA, face financial hardships for speaking out about their experience. This new law will protect survivors by no longer allowing financial penalties against them for sharing their stories about experiencing harassment and discrimination.

This Bill takes effect immediately and will apply to agreements entered on or after its effectiveness Agreements can no longer require the survivor to forfeit part or all of the consideration for violating an NDA. Additionally, defendants can no longer require survivors to sign an affirmative statement, assertion, or disclaimer stating that they were not subject to discrimination or retaliation.

Important Discrimination Bill Passes NYS Senate - It's on the Assembly Now

On 3/13/2023, S3255 passed the NYS Senate and was delivered to the Assembly. 

This Anti-Discrimination Bill is so important to school-children and governmental employees facing discrimination in the State of New York.

Currently, when suing many governmental defendants for discrimination, such as school districts, victims only have one year to bring their claims (except for sexual harassment claims) before the New York State Division of Human Rights. This bill would make the limitations period three years. 

The bill is particularly important to bridge the gap between suing the government and non-governmental actors. When suing a non-government actor for discrimination, a victim can bring a court case, rather than a claim before the New York State Division of Human Rights, under the New York State Human Rights Law, within three years of the wrongful acts of discrimination. 

However, discrimination court cases against the government are often subject to a notice of claim statute where the statute of limitations is effectively limited to ninety days. 

As a result, many victims of governmental discrimination are out of luck when brining claims because they did not act quickly enough. 

Often times, a claim against a school district for permitting harassment in school is an ongoing case where acts over years demonstrate the discrimination, but recent events only tell an incomplete story. 

This law will bring fairness to the state and protect victims of discrimination.  

We strongly support the passage of this Bill and hope that the Assembly passes it swiftly.

Major Sexual Assault / Sexual Harassment Law Signed by President Biden

On December 7, 2022, President Biden signed the Speak Out Act into law. 

Now, nondisclosure and nondisparagement contract clauses relating to sexual assault disputes and sexual harassment disputes are unenforceable if they were agreed to before the dispute arises. 

According to the Act, a nondisclosure clause means "a provision in a contract or agreement that requires the parties to the contract or agreement not to disclose or discuss conduct, the existence of a settlement involving conduct, or information covered by the terms and conditions of the contract or agreement" whereas a nondisparagement clause means "a provision in a contract or agreement that requires 1 or more parties to the contract or agreement not to make a negative statement about another party that relates to the contract, agreement, claim, or case."

This is a major law - make not mistake. 

While states like New York go even further than this protection for victims, at CPLR 5003-b and General Obligations Law 5-336, and that increased protection remains enforceable, most states don't protect victims from being preemptively silenced. 

With this increased nationwide protection, hopefully we can solve the horrific statistic that an "estimated 87 to 94 percent of those who experience sexual harassment never file a formal complaint." Victims need to be empowered to stand-up for their rights, not the other way around.

DC Law Now Requires Mandatory Sexual Harassment Training for Tipped Wage Workers

Washington DC now has mandatory sexual harassment trainings from a 2018 law, the Tipped Wage Workers Fairness Amendment Act.

Under the law, covered employers’ primary obligations include providing mandatory sexual harassment training to both business operators & tipped employees.

Other obligations require covered employers to report to the DC Office of Human Rights (OHR) both their sexual harassment policy & all harassment complaints made to management from 2020 on. All requirements are set forth in OHR’s fact sheet on employee rights, which must be posted at places of employment. 

OHR has created a portal for employers to report their compliance with the mandates of the Act & employers will be watched - so tread carefully. 

If you were harassed or discriminated against, this law & its trainings are not the end of the story. You have a claim under Title VII & other federal & state laws. Know your rights & act because statutes of limitations, including a filing requirement with EEOC might otherwise curtail your rights. This is serious & damages can be outrageous.  

 

Stop Sexual Assault and Harassment in Transportation Act Passes the House

The Stop Sexual Assault and Harassment in Transportation Act passed the House on March 30, 2022 and now makes its way to the senate. 

If passed, the Act will require airlines, railroads, vessels, buses, and transit entities (e.g., Uber / Lyft) to establish "a formal policy with respect to transportation sexual assault or harassment incidents" together with appropriate trainings. 

It is specifically designed to notice, warn, prevent, and combat sexual assault and harassment by the public and staff making transportation safe for all involved. 

The Act establishes civil penalties against harassers starting at $35,000. 

Shouldn't it be safe to travel and shouldn't it be safe to work in transit?

Workplace Sexual Harassment Hotline about to be Established by NYS Division of Human Rights

On March 7, 2022, the NYS Senate joined the Assembly to pass a bill (now going to the Governor to be enacted), which establishes a hotline for complainants of workplace sexual harassment. 

The Bill's Justification explains that "[n]early 75% of all sexual harassment goes unreported," and it envisions that this toll-free hotline, available, "at minimum, Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.," which will "connect complainants with experienced pro-bono attorneys who will help make them aware of their legal rights and advise them on the specifics of their individualized cases," will result in more reported claims. 

The issue with this STUPID Bill is two-fold:

1. Who needs a toll-free line in 2022? Aren't we past the time when telephone companies charge per second of use? Don't most people utilize VoIP or cell phones? What decade is the NYS Government operating in? Have they heard of the world wide web? 
2. Why are they referring to pro-bono (free) attorneys on a type of case where the plaintiff can recover their attorneys' fees from the plaintiff, by statute, and almost no plaintiffs pay their attorneys hourly fees? Sounds like a lipservice law to us, no?

Oh, to discourage attorneys from participating in this pro-bono stupid law, it also states that "Attorneys may not solicit, or permit employees or agents of the attorneys to solicit on the attorney's behalf, further representation of any individuals they advise through the hotline relating to discussed sexual harassment complaint." 

Once signed, this law will take effect on the 120th day thereafter and we doubt it will do a single thing to benefit victims because right now, any victim of workplace sexual harassment can and should already contact any attorney that they know of for a free consultation and if a claim is brought, the plaintiff can sue for the defendant to pay their attorneys' fees, as a matter of law.

 

Sexual Harassment & Assault Claims can be Brought by victims as Class Actions in Court

Victims of sexual harassment and sexual assault can now proceed in a class action, with other victims, and can also litigate their case in court, individually or collectively, regardless of having previously executed an arbitration agreement. 

This is really important because powerful companies have traditionally forced their employees and independent contractors to sign predispute joint-action waivers, which prevent victims from bringing joint, class, or collective actions against those companies for sexual harassment and sexual assault. The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 invalidated such waivers. Now, victims can work collectively and take on powerful companies in court in the same way that a union equalizes employee bargaining power at the proverbial negotiating table.

The Act also invalidates mandatory arbitration agreements, which heavily favor companies who regularly pay the same arbitrators, know their rules, have relationships, and win a vast majority of the time.

To learn more about this new law, here is an audio recording of my appearance on The Jay Oliver Show explaining the importance of the law right after it was passed by the Senate. To be clear, the recording misstates the law's effectiveness to past claims. The law only applies to claims that "arise[] or accrue[] on or after the date of enactment," which was March 2, 2022. 

 

Expect New Federal Sex Discrimination Laws & Regulations by the End of 2021

President Biden just established a Council to coordinate the Federal Government's efforts to advance gender equity and equality. 

In plain English, this counsel's mission is to combat sex discrimination by providing legislative and policy recommendations by September 24, 2021.

Stay tuned. Equality is happening now. 

Are you ready?

 

Employment Sexual Harassment - Case of Interest - Exceeding Petty Slights or Trivial Inconveniences

Back on October 11, 2019, the NYS Human Rights Law was modified with a new standard for actionable employment sex discrimination. The new standard was intended to align NYS more closely with the NYC Human Rights Law. 

The new standard is that conduct that exceeds "petty slights or trivial inconveniences" is actionable. 

As to what that means, the NYC law was interpreted by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (Federal Court) in Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux North America, Inc., which is the leading case. 

Now, we have a leading case interpreting the NYS law as well by a State Court. 

On December 15, 2020, the NYS Appellate Division decided Franco v Hyatt Corp. and found the following allegations to constitute conduct that exceeds petty slights or trivial inconveniences:

1. Supervisor made repeated sexual advances towards him, including reaching out to touch his face and holding his hand in an elevator while they were alone.
2. Supervisor also initiated conversations that made him uncomfortable, telling him she had a "crush" on him, telling him she was single and twice inviting him to her home to repair "a hole" in her apartment. 
3. Supervisor said she had a tattoo, adding that "You have to undress me to see it." 
4. After victim rebuffed advances, supervisor brought him to the Human Resources manager's office to complain about his work product and that she solicited complaints about him from other coworkers.

Interestingly, this case involved a female harasser of a male subordinate. 

When we train the NYS / NYC Mandatory Sexual Harassment Prevention Course to companies around the country, at sexualharassmenttrainingny.com, we always get push back to the concept that sexual harassment can be female on male. This case is a good reminder that everyone is protected from harassment at work. 

 

Employers May be Exposed to a Sex Discrimination Lawsuit From...an Alleged Harasser?

In this “Me Too” era, it is logical that an employer’s reflexive reaction to receiving a complaint of harassment from a female employee is to immediately fire the alleged male harasser. However, while the employer may believe that firing the male employee will protect the employer from a lawsuit by the female employee, such impulsive action without a thorough unbiased investigation may expose the employer to a sex discrimination lawsuit filed by . . . the alleged male perpetrator. 

Read the full article by Mordy Yankovich, Esq. published in the Suffolk Lawyer here. 

Real Tips HR: Can Employers Fire an Employee Accused of Sexual Harassment?

In this #metoo movement, employers must know how to react when an employee gets accused of sexual harassment. Can employers just fire someone on the spot? Andrew Lieb and Mordy Yankovich explain the answer in this short clip.

Protections for Victims of Harassment are Effective Today.

The following provisions of the recently passed New York State law which provide additional protections for victims of harassment/discrimination based on any protected class (sex, race, religion, etc.) go into effect today: 

1)  As of today, the high "severe and pervasive" standard for establishing claims of harassment no longer applies. Rather, any conduct, including isolated incidents, that merely rises above "petty slights" or "trivial inconveniences" may be considered harassment.

2) Whether or not an employee filed an internal complaint prior to filing a lawsuit is no longer determinative of an employer's liability.

3) Non-employees (contractors, vendors, etc.) can now bring claims of harassment against companies based on any protected class.

4) Non-disclosure provisions in agreements settling harassment claims are prohibited unless it is the employee's preference.

5) Mandatory arbitration of harassment claims based on any protected class is now prohibited.

Employers should ensure that these new provisions are included in their annual harassment prevention training.

Can Employers Discriminate Against Employees Based on Their Sexual Orientation or Status as Transgender? The Supreme Court to Weigh-In.

The Supreme Court of the United States is hearing oral arguments on three high profile cases today which will have a significant impact on LGBTQ rights in the workplace.

In the first two cases, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express, Inc.v. Zarda, the justices will determine whether Federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. (Federal law generally prohibits discrimination based on "sex"). In the third case, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the justices will determine whether employment discrimination against transgender people violates Federal law.

The decisions on both of these issues - which will likely be released in early 2020 - will be of great interest to both employers and employees.

Deadline = 1 Month: Sexual Harassment Prevention Training

Attention all employers / HR managers - you have 1 month left to complete your sexual harassment prevention training of all employees as required by Labor Law 201-g.

Failure to train = misdemeanor and exposure to lots of fines by the DOL.

Get your employees trained at sexualharassmenttrainingny.com

Status as a Victim of Domestic Violence is Now a Protected Class in New York State

Attention Employers in New York State: Governor Cuomo signed bill S1040 into law extending protections against discrimination in the workplace to victims of domestic violence.

The new law prohibits an employer from hiring or firing an employee or otherwise discriminating against an employee in compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of such employee's status as a victim of domestic violence. The law also requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodations to an employee who is known by the employer to be a victim of domestic violence, unless providing an accommodation would cause an "undue hardship" to the employer.

Reasonable accommodations for victims of domestic violence are limited to: seeking medical attention; obtaining services from a domestic violence shelter, program or rape crisis center; obtaining psychological counseling or legal services; and, taking safety measures to increase protections against future incidents of domestic violence (e.g. relocation). Time off as a result of such accommodation may be charged against the employee's paid time-off (per law and/or employer's policy). If paid time off is unavailable, an employer may treat such absence as leave without pay.

Employers should immediately update their handbooks, policies, and discrimination prevention trainings to comply with this new law.

Have you been the victim of employment discrimination?

Attention Employees - Have you faced inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of your age, race, creed, color, national original, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, domestic violence victim status, or because you have opposed discrimination at work?

Did you know that you only need to prove that this discrimination rises above what a reasonable victim of discrimination with the same protected characteristic would consider petty slights or trivial inconveniences to win your claim?

Did you know that you can recover lost wages?
Are you aware that you can be reinstated into your job?
Better yet, did you know that your employer could be required to pay you punitive damages (punishment)?

Guess what? Courts have been directed to award you reasonable attorney's fees if you win. This means that your employer's exposure goes up the entire time that they are defending the claim - it's a huge motivation for your employer to settle with you quickly.

Yesterday, 8/12/19, you were given a voice by the Governor - it's time for you to use that voice and speak up to end discrimination in the workplace.

Alert: CT Reduces Threshold for Mandatory Sexual Harassment Training

Effective October 1, 2019, Employers in Connecticut have new sexual harassment prevention obligations.

By way of Public Act No. 19-16, which amends General Statutes 46a-54(1)(15), now employers, with three or more employees, must:

• Within three months of start date, provide information concerning illegality of sexual harassment and remedies available by email or posting;
• Provide two hours of training and education between October 1, 2019 and 2020; and
• Provide such training to new hires within six months of start date.

Then, employers must provide periodic supplementain traings and updates not less than every ten years. 

The new training requirement is for all employees rather than just supervisors employees, as previously required, and it's applicable to employers with three or more employees rather than the previous fifty employee requirement.

 

Alert: Cuomo Makes it Easier for Workplace Sexual Harassment Claims

Attention Employers and HR!!!!

Cuomo signs sexual harassment law- as we first reported on June 19, 2019, A08421 passed both houses and now Cuomo has made it the law of the State of New York.

The legislation does the following:

• Changes the severe or pervasive standard of harassment to a very low standard of more than petty slights or trivial inconveniences;
• Eliminates part of the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense to a lawsuit by making the fact that the employee did not make a complaint about the harassment to the employer not determinative as to liability;
• Extends protection for non-employees in the workplace to all protected classes;
• Allows courts to award attorney's fees on all claims of employment discrimination, and allow for punitive damages in employment discrimination cases against private employers;
• Provide that the Human Rights Law is to be construed liberally for remedial purposes, regardless of how federal laws have been construed;
• Prohibit mandatory arbitration clauses for discrimination claims;
• Prohibit non-disclosure agreements in any settlement for a claim of discrimination, unless it's the complainant's preference;
• Provide that any term or condition in a non-disclosure agreement is void if it prohibits the complainant from initiating or participating in an agency investigation or disclosing facts necessary to receive public benefits;
• Require that employees be notified that non-disclosure agreements in employment contracts cannot prevent them from talking to the police, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the State Division of Human Rights or a similar local entity, or a lawyer;
• Extend the authority of the Attorney General to prosecute certain civil and criminal cases of discrimination against all protected classes;
• Require the Department of Labor and the Division of Human Rights to evaluate the impact of the model sexual harassment prevention policy every four years and update the policy as needed;
• Require any term or condition in a non-disclosure agreement be provided in writing to all parties, in plain English and the primary language of the complainant;
• Require the commissioner of the Labor Department to prepare templates of the model policy in languages other than English;
• Require every employer to provide employees with their sexual harassment policy in English or their primary language when they are hired and during training; and
• Extend the statute of limitations to file a sexual harassment complaint with the Division of Human Rights from one year to three years.

Visit discriminationpreventiontraining.com to keep your company safe from discrimination claims while maintaining a safe workplace for all.

Real Tips HR: New Discrimination Standard in NYS Coming Soon

Jokes which previously did not rise to the level for discrimination in the State of New York because they weren't pervasive may now qualify for a claim. Learn how even non-employees can bring suit for being offended by sex jokes. It's time to get your sexual harassment training today at www.discriminationpreventiontraining.com