It is the Commission's position that Title VII does not prohibit isolated instances of preferential treatment based upon consensual romantic relationships. Because King v. Palmer did not directly reach the merits of the paramour theory and because its statement about the issue has been almost unanimously rejected, it is not persuasive. Rather we agree with the weight of authority that it would be both impracticable and unwarranted for the courts to assume a generalized police power over intimate consensual relationships between co-employees. Accordingly we hold that a romantic relationship between a supervisor and an employee does not, without more, give rise to a sexual discrimination or sexual harassment claim either under the FEHA or the public policy of the state. Because Proksel has shown nothing more than such a relationship, her sexual discrimination and harassment claims were properly dismissed.
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. All rights reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.