From: abepd@stdvax.gsfc.nasa.gov (Spankin' Ed Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Sexual Harassment and the Law
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:29:59 GMT
Organization: nasa
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1b3

There is an awful lot of sexual harassment discussion going on in this
group, but I haven't seen any mention of the actual law in the
discussions.  Recently, all employees here were required to attend
seminars on sexual harassment at which we were supplied with copies of
the written law.  The following are excerpts from [Title VII.
Pub.L.88-352.78 Stat. 253(42 U.S.C 2000e et seq)] (***note: these seem to
apply to the ongoing discussions***.)

PART 1604-GUIDELINES ON DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF SEX

1604.11 Sexual Harassment.
(a) Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation of Sec.703 of Title
VII.  unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other
verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual
harassment when (1)...stuff deleted
(2)...stuff deleted or,(3)such conduct has the purpose of effect of
unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or
creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

(foul languaged email/posts could easily apply to the end of section (a)).

(b) Determining whether alleged conduct constitutes sexual harassment
shall be done on a case-by-case basis.

(c) The employer is responsible for its acts and those of its agents and
supervisory employees with respect to sexual harassment regardless of
whether the specific acts complained of were authorized of even forbidden
by the employer and regardless of whether the employer knew or should
have known  of their occurrence.

(so if you get your net privs yanked because of being a harasser, your
bosses/administrators are just doing themselves a favor.)

(d) With respect to conduct between fellow employees, an employer is
responsible for acts of sexual harassment in the work place where the
employer (or its agents or supervisory employees) knows or should have
known of the conduct, unless it can show it took immediate and
appropriate corrective action.

(who's to say what supervisors should have known?  if the jury sees it
that way, oh well)

(e) An employer may also be responsible for the acts of non-employees,
with respect to sexual harassment of employees in the workplace, where
the employer knows or should have know of the conduct and fails to take
immediate and appropriate corrective action.  In reviewing these cases
the EEOC will consider the extent of the employer's control and any other
legal responsibility which the employer may have with respect to the
conduct of such non-employees.

(sounds like you don't even have to work in the same place to be a
harasser, like sending crude email/posts out to net-land or specific
net-users.)

Here are a few other quick facts about sexual harassment.

The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man.  The victim
does not have to be of the opposite sex.

The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a
supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee.

The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone
affected by the offensive conduct.  Also known as
third-party-complainants.  (any other net reader who was offended by
allegedly crude posts)

Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to the
victim.

The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome. (which Jennifer! has made clear
in this case.)

Anyway that is the law of the land (at least in the USA).  It would seem
to this lurker that perhaps the twits who send such foul email can be
held accountable for their sexual harassment so they had better watch
their steps.  It has been shown by another post that these harassers are
not so disguised as they may think.

NOW CAN WE PLEASE GET BACK TO POSTING SUPERMODEL GIFS?
 

email:    abepd@stdvax.gsfc.nasa.gov   
    <Goddard Space Flight Center>
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1998 soc.women:19903 alt.feminism:4700 soc.men:19550