Have you been the victim of “quid pro quo” sexual harassment at your workplace? You are not alone; unfortunately, tens of thousands of Americans encounter and report incidents of sexual harassment at their jobs each year.
Quid Pro Quo sexual harassment is illegal under California and federal laws. Generally, quid pro quo harassment in California involves an employer offering a work benefit in exchange for sexual favors. However, it may not look like a benefit but rather an employer threatening to make your time at work unbearable if you don’t give in to their demands for sexual favors. Quid pro quo can also look like better work schedules if you perform the sexual favors the supervisor requests.
Sexual harassment is illegal in California under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and federal civil rights laws. However, employers still engage in this illegal practice despite the law being in place and evolving over the past several decades.
Victims often feel powerless and vulnerable, subjected to unwanted sexual advances to either gain employment, maintain their jobs, or because of threats of losing hours, benefits, and more.
Misplaced blame and emotions often leave victims feeling at fault or without any recourse to take. However, the victim is in no way the guilty party in such situations, and there are legal actions to be taken in the event of quid pro quo or any form of workplace sexual harassment.
What does ‘Quid Pro Quo’ mean and look like at work?
‘Quid Pro Quo‘ Is a Latin phrase meaning, ‘this for that.’ A modern-day interpretation could be, “you scratch my back, I scratch yours.” However, in the case of workplace sexual harassment, “this for that” refers to sexual favors requested or demanded as a condition of receiving a specific job benefit, promotions, higher pay, and more.
Two of the most common types of quid pro quo harassment
- A supervisor or an employer offering an employee a benefit in exchange for their submission to a sexual favor,
- Employers or supervisors threatening their employees with work-related actions, like a termination if they do not submit to sexual demands.
By intimidating or strong-arming an employee with damaging employment actions, like a poor review, demotion, or termination, a supervisor implicitly or explicitly demands an applicant or employee to submit to unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances.
Demonstrating The Basis of a Case under Quid Pro Quo Laws
Sexual harassment is, unfortunately, a common occurrence in the workplace, as revealed by movements like the “Me Too” Movement (#metoo). Before these movements, even more cases went unreported. “Me Too” and other movements illustrate the importance of every person understanding their legal rights as employees. Whether an employer has made a more subtle hint at requesting sexual favors or taken overtly evident measures for their demands, it is a case of quid pro quo, and you as the victim can seek legal action.
California’s FEHA law follows the same method as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when distinguishing different types of sexual harassment claims. To demonstrate a violation of Title VII based on quid pro quo sexual harassment, an employee must prove specific requirements.
To indicate sexual harassment, an employee must affirm that they were subjected to unwelcome sexual advances, conduct, or statements from their supervisor or superior. It is necessary to exhibit that the advances made were unwelcome and that the offender had some level of authority over the employee.
Additionally, the employee’s sex is the basis of the harassment and determines under what law it falls. In other words, an employer who solicits sex from both male and female employees would not technically be liable for a quid pro quo sexual harassment claim since the treatment of the employees, be it horrible, was not based on sex. A supervisor, as described above, may very well be lawfully prosecuted for that type of behavior, but it would be under a different law.
Lastly, the employee must have suffered tangible consequences due to the harassment. Such effects could be in compensation change, conditions of employment, privileges, or other terms.
It is necessary to clarify that an employer is responsible for their supervisor’s harassment of an employee because they placed the supervisor in a position where they could do so. Whether the employer was negligent and failed to prevent the harassment, if the employer knew about the harassment, or they should have known about it, the employer is responsible. Therefore, employers should be cautious about appointing people to act on behalf of their companies.
Coercive Nature of Sexual Harassment and What to do If You Believe you’re a Victim
Quid pro quo usually involves an employer threatening to withhold a promotion or other job benefit if the employee refuses to follow through with a sexual advance or proposition. However, in some other cases, a supervisor might promise to increase a worker’s salary, promote them, or recommend them in return for a sexual favor. It does not matter whether the sexual favors are explicit or otherwise.
In most circumstances, employers or supervisors will not tell their employees outright that they will be fired if they refuse to give them sexual favors. Tactics are usually always coercive yet subtle.
An employee being coerced into quid pro quo harassment could look like an employer/supervisor utilizing unfair policies or manipulating company policies, making threats, or wage law violations.
Sexual harassment is a serious offense, but proving a case can be complex; however, it is possible.
If you believe you are a victim of “quid pro quo” sexual harassment, other forms of discrimination in the workplace, or have experienced retaliation for complaining, it iscrucial you contact an employment and discrimination attorney as soon as possible.
An experienced employment lawyer like those at SANFORD A. KASSEL, A Professional Law Corporation have years of experience, a comprehensive understanding of the law, and can help you successfully navigate your sexual harassment case.
