 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Palmer v. GTE California Incorporated1/30/2002
8.) The conduct must have this effect both subjectively on the plaintiff and objectively from the perspective of a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position. (Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., supra, 523 U.S. at p. 81; Harris, at pp. 21-22.) Whether the conduct creates a hostile or abusive work environment depends on factors such as the frequency of the conduct, its severity, including whether it is physically threatening or humiliating or merely an offensive utterance, and whether it unreasonably interferes with the employee's work performance. (Faragher, at pp. 787-788; Harris, at p. 23; Fisher, at p. 610.) The United States Supreme Court has stated that " `simple teasing,' [citation], offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to discriminatory changes in the `terms and conditions of employment.' " (Faragher, at p. 788.)
The trial court instructed the jury in accordance with this applicable law.
The demeaning comments by Celis repeated over a period of several months, Ast's apparent indifference concerning Celis's misconduct and failure to address it effectively, the unwelcome and sexually suggestive talk by Ast, and Jordan's apparent indifference concerning some of Ast's misconduct and failure to address it effectively would be offensive to a reasonable female employee and was offensive to Palmer. That misconduct was compounded by Palmer's involuntary confinement in the conference room despite her yelling and pounding on the door, Jordan's dismissive comment that the door was not locked, and Ast's later verbal assault and humiliation of Palmer in the hallway. Although the later events did not necessarily bear the hallmarks of patent gender harassment or discrimination, the events and actors were sufficiently interrelated that the trier of fact reasonably could conclude that all of the demeaning conduct toward Palmer was motivated by the same discriminatory animus toward her as a woman and that it was sufficiently severe and pervasive that it objectively and subjectively created a hostile or abusive work environment. We conclude that GTE has not shown error.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed and the order granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a new trial is reversed. Palmer shall recover costs on appeal.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
We concur:
CROSKEY, Acting P. J.
ALDRICH, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|