Not every obnoxious workplace behavior is unlawful harassment. To violate federal law, the harassment has to be unwelcome, based on a "protected category" (for example, sex or race), and "severe or pervasive."
But most employers aren't satisfied with banning only "illegal" behavior, and rightfully not. The law does a fairly good job of keeping us from each other's throats. But it doesn't mandate that we be nice, or even courteous, to each other. That's what company policies and good manners are for.
There are a lot of workplace behaviors which, although technically not "unlawful harassment," are likely to get an employee accused of, fired for, or even sued for, unlawful harassment. Here are my top five "high-risk" behaviors:
No. 1: Having an extramarital affair with a co-worker. How can this be? Harassment has to be "unwelcome," doesn't it? If you're having an affair, doesn't that mean both parties are willing participants? Well, yes. But it's still risky business. Here's why:
There are not "two parties" to an extramarital affair. There are at least three, or four if both parties are married. (Not to mention kids, extended family, close friends, lawyers, and private investigators.) When you consider the spouses as well as the lovers, it becomes obvious that there is no outcome to an affair that is going to be good for everyone. Either the parties to the affair decide to leave their spouses and get married, which means the jilted spouses are hurt, angry, and sometimes vindictive or unstable -- or one party decides to go back to his or her spouse, which means the jilted partner in the affair is hurt, angry, and sometimes vindictive or unstable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48DN8QWVAJg
It's the "vindictive/unstable" part that is the most likely to create the risk of a harassment complaint. Here's one scenario that occurs fairly often in real life: Husband finds out that his wife was having an affair with her supervisor, is irate, and threatens to get a divorce and take the kids and all the money. Maybe even sue her for alimony. How does she calm her husband down? The easiest way out is to accuse the supervisor of sexual harassment. Then the husband's fury is directed at the supervisor, and not his wife. Problem solved! (Except for the supervisor, whose problems are just beginning . . .)
Or how about this one? Co-workers are having an affair. The woman decides that it's a mistake, and she breaks up and tells her partner that she is going back to her husband. Partner is devastated, and begins stalking woman and calling her at all hours. When woman threatens to call the police, heartbroken partner turns mean and goes to HR and accuses her of sexual harassment.
Or this: Co-workers are having an affair, and they send "playful" sexual emails to each other using the company system. Both parties are probably in violation of the company's computer use policy, and they're likely to be fired over it.
No. 2: Telling sexual, racial, or ethnic jokes to co-workers who you know will think they're funny. If you think the jokes are funny, and your co-workers think they're funny, then what's the problem? I can think of three problems right off the bat: (1) We never know what other people really think, even if we think we know what they think, (2) a third party may overhear the jokes, and may not share your sense of "humor," or (3) your co-workers did indeed find your jokes hilarious, but a few months later they got mad at you for something unrelated, and they reported you and your jokes to HR out of spite.
No. 3: Using gender-specific or "sexual" curse words. That guy who's just being a "d**k." Or the wimp who is a "p**sy." Or that argumentative woman who is a "b***h." And "f**k" this dead-end job, anyway. How can these expletives be "harassment"? You didn't mean them in a sexual way. True, but the words all have sexual associations and may be viewed as "harassing" by your co-workers. In addition, when you call a difficult woman a "b***h," you are sorta making a comment about her gender in addition to her unpleasant personality. So watch out for the way you cuss at work. If you must cuss, you are better off using words that are not associated with gender or sex acts. (But note: If you direct all of your cursing to members of one particular racial or ethnic group, or of one gender, you could be guilty of actual harassment even if your words are "gender-neutral.")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH_JRjJtNSw
No. 4: Talking about politics or religion at work. There is an old etiquette rule that one should not discuss politics or religion in polite company. The rationale is that people disagree vehemently on these topics, and so such a discussion is unlikely to create a socially pleasant environment.
I am pro-First Amendment, and I love arguing about politics and religion. But I still believe that the etiquette rule is a good one to follow at work. There are two political topics that I have seen turn into lawsuits in real life: (1) whether women should work outside the home, and (2) whether affirmative action is a good idea. I'd add one more to the list based on recent events, although I haven't seen any litigation result from it (yet): immigration policy. Also watch out if your religious beliefs are so strong that you feel compelled to tell your co-workers they'll suffer eternal damnation if they don't repent ASAP -- or if your lack of belief is so strong that you feel compelled to tell your religious co-workers that they're a bunch of suckers who believe in fairy tales.
The First Amendment means only that the government can't infringe on your rights of free speech or freedom of religion. Unless you work in the public sector, the First Amendment doesn't control what your employer -- or your offended co-workers -- can do.
No. 5: Injudicious use of social media. If you are Facebook "friends" with your co-workers, then you need to watch what you say on Facebook. The same goes for other social media platforms. Keep in mind who will be reading what you post, and post accordingly. I'd even recommend being careful with "likes." If this is too stifling to your personality, then don't be friends with or followers of anyone you work with. You might also want to make sure your privacy settings are adjusted properly. And re-check them on a regular basis, because Facebook changes the rules about once a week.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010