A long-time Connecticut administrative assistant got along well with her boss—until his messy divorce. After that, she claimed, he began hitting on her. When she refused his advances, she later testified, he threatened her. Judges at two levels argued about whether she had a case.For a Limited Time receive a
FREE HR Report "Top 10 Best Practices in HR Management." This comprehensive special report will give you the information you need to know about these current HR challenges and how to most effectively manage them in your workplace.
Download NowWhat happened. Hired in 1973, “Kylie” worked for Electric Boat in Groton, a nuclear submarine manufacturer, and was assigned as secretary to an engineering manager in 1998. Their working relationship went smoothly until 2004, shortly after he was divorced. At that point, she alleged, he began making sexual comments, standing too close to her, and engaging in other offensive conduct. In addition, he repeatedly said he wanted to “choke” her, “kill” her, or “see [her] in [her] coffin.”
Co-workers who overheard these comments warned her to be careful. She had finally had enough when he presented her with a pussy willow plant in April 2005. That’s when she complained to HR. She was soon moved away from the manager to another job, but she charged that most of her duties were stripped away, her new supervisor berated her, and colleagues shunned her for complaining about her former boss.
She sued for sexual harassment and retaliation, and the company ordered her to be examined by a psychiatrist. When she refused, she was fired. A federal district judge dismissed her charges, reasoning partly that the manager had also reportedly threatened to choke or kill male employees. Joined by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Kylie appealed to the 2nd Circuit, which covers Connecticut, New York, and Vermont.
What the court said. Several Electric Boat doctors had apparently said Kylie had paranoid tendencies, leading to the request for a psychiatric exam. So appellate judges affirmed the lower court’s decision that the request was legitimate, and Kylie’s refusal was grounds for termination. But they disagreed with the judge that Kylie had not suffered sufficiently severe or pervasive treatment to justify a hostile-environment claim. And, they said, her job transfer should not have led to reduced duties and mistreatment by boss and co-workers, so that might have been retaliation for her complaints. Those charges should be heard by a jury, they ruled. Kaytor v. Electric Boat Corp., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, No. 09-1859-cv (6/29/10).
Point to remember: Most of all, judges rejected the employer’s contention that the manager had been heard threatening male subordinates. They wrote that “it would be exceedingly perverse” if an employer could escape liability because a harasser sometimes abused men “although his preferred targets were female.”