Office Affairs Lead to Successful Retaliation Claim 10-05-2005
- By Rita Risser, attorney at law

In the Fair Measures August enews, we reported on a California Supreme Court case that held that several office affairs by a manager could lead to claims of hostile environment by other women in the office. This month, in Missouri, another case of multiple office affairs by a manager leads to a successful claim of retaliation - by the manager!

In this case the manager allegedly had affairs with 8 to 10 women in the office. Two of the women, he claimed, sexually harassed him after he terminated his relationships with them. One frequently came around his desk and said she was attracted to him. The other woman made unannounced visits to his home. He complained that the harassment was making it difficult for him to perform his job.

He filed a harassment claim that was investigated by the employer. During the investigation, the women denied they harassed him, although some co-workers did corroborate that the one woman hung around his desk. Based on the investigation, the employer terminated the manager for lying during the investigation and filing a false complaint.

The Court of Appeals said, "It cannot be the case that any employee who files a Title VII claim and is disbelieved by his or her employer can be legitimately fired. If such were the case, every employee could be deterred from filing their action and the purposes of Title VII in regards to sexual harassment would be defeated. However, it also cannot be true that a plaintiff can file false charges, lie to an investigator, and possibly defame co-employees, without suffering repercussions simply because the investigation was about sexual harassment. To do so would leave employers with no ability to fire employees for defaming other employees or the employer through their complaint when the allegations are without any basis in fact."

The Court held, "In this case, the investigator's belief that Gilooly [the manager]was lying was the basis for the DoA's decision to fire Gilooly. According to the termination letter, the belief that Gilooly was lying was founded solely on the statements of other employees and witnesses. The letter contained no independently verifiable evidence that contradicted Gilooly's allegations. Without such additional corroboration, the statements in the termination letter amount to little more than a description of conflicting stories with the employer disbelieving Gilooly's version of the events. ... Had the investigator found a clearer record of deception and detailed the basis for such findings, a court could find that the firing was not for protected conduct."

What you should do: Harassment complaints should be handled in such a way that they do not affect the employment of the people involved. If it's a "he said, she said" situation, in most cases the employer should not assume that one person is lying and terminate on that basis.

In addition, this case points out another reason why employers should strongly discourage affairs in the office. As this case shows, anyone and everyone involved in the situation could end up suing!

Gilooly v. Missouri Dept of Health (8th Cir 08/31/2005)

 

Information here is correct at the time it is posted. Case decisions cited here may be reversed. Please do not rely on this information without consulting an attorney first.