Indiana News & Analysis

The 7th Circuit recently upheld a jury verdict awarding $250,000 in damages to a Costco female employee who was repeatedly stalked and harassed by a male customer for more than a year. Calling Costco's response to its employee's complaints about the customer's behavior and comments "unreasonably weak," the court concluded that while other plaintiffs had endured "far worse" treatment—indeed, Costco characterized its employee's experience with the customer as "tepid"—the female employee experienced demeaning, ostracizing, and terrorizing behavior because of her sex, sufficiently severe and pervasive to support a harassment claim. Let's take a closer look.

You likely recall a time not so long ago when the improper classification of employees as independent contractors was the hot topic for the IRS and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). In 2011, the agencies entered into a "Memorandum of Understanding" in which they agreed to share information about potential misclassifications in an effort to crack down on the common practice. The DOL also entered into similar agreements with roughly 30 state departments of labor.

OFCCP releases directives on equal employment and religious freedom. The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) in August issued two new policy directives, one focused on equal employment opportunity and the other addressing religious freedom. The equal employment opportunity directive calls for more comprehensive reviews of contractor compliance with federal antidiscrimination laws. The religious freedom directive is aimed at protecting the rights of religion-exercising organizations. The DOL said it is implementing a comprehensive compliance initiative that will include adding focused reviews to its compliance activities. The religious freedom directive instructs OFCCP staff to take into account recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions and White House Executive Orders that protect religious freedom.

On August 2, 2018, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all employers in Indiana) held that an employee presented sufficient evidence of sex discrimination when he alleged that he was sexually harassed by his male coworkers. The 7th Circuit disagreed with the employer's argument that its employees merely engaged in "sexual horseplay," which doesn't amount to sex discrimination, finding the employee presented sufficient evidence to show that men and women were treated differently and only men were harassed.