According to the Department's analysis, the respondent's failure to discharge the male employee is not a discriminatory act under the Human Rights Act, and even if it were, the complainant did not produce evidence that she openly opposed the failure of the respondent to discharge the male employee. Based on its analysis, the Department recommends a finding of lack of substantial evidence with regard to Count C, retaliation for having opposed unlawful discriminatory action. We believe that the Department has applied an improper analysis. By our analysis, the complainant has not contended that the discriminatory action was the respondent's failure to discharge the male employee accused of sexual harassment. By our analysis, the complainant contends that the discriminatory action was the sexual harassment of the female nurse's aide.
Sexual harassment is illegal under the Human Rights Act.
According to the Human Rights Act, it is not only unlawful discrimination if an employee commits sexual harassment, it is also unlawful discrimination if an employer becomes aware of the conduct of one of its employees alleged to be sexual harassed and fails to take reasonable corrective measures. See Id., par. The complainant protested to management after the female nurse's aide approached her with an allegation of sexual harassment which the respondent's management had failed to address. According to the complainant, the female nurse's aide came to her to request that there be an investigation of the sexual harassment incident. The complainant states that after the investigation, she wrote a memo to McDonald, a member of the respondent's management, recommending that the male employee involved in the sexual harassment incident be terminated immediately.