Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/11-556_11o2.pdf
Page Number: 53.0

Cite as:  570 U. S. ____ (2013) 

19 

GINSBURG, J., dissenting 

restricting  the  supervisor  category  to  those  formally  em-
powered  to  take  tangible  employment  actions,  victims  of
workplace  harassment  with  meritorious  Title  VII  claims
will find suit a hazardous endeavor.7 

Inevitably,  the  Court’s  definition  of  supervisor  will
hinder  efforts  to  stamp  out  discrimination  in  the  work-
place.  Because  supervisors  are  comparatively  few,  and 
employees  are  many,  “the  employer  has  a  greater  oppor-
tunity to guard against misconduct by supervisors than by
common  workers,”  and  a  greater  incentive  to  “screen 
[supervisors], train them, and monitor their performance.” 
Faragher,  524  U. S.,  at  803.    Vicarious  liability  for  em-
ployers  serves  this  end.    When  employers  know  they  will
be  answerable  for  the  injuries  a  harassing  jobsite  boss
inflicts, their incentive to provide preventative instruction
is heightened.  If vicarious liability is confined to supervi-
sors  formally  empowered  to  take  tangible  employment
actions, however, employers will have a diminished incen-
tive  to  train  those  who  control  their  subordinates’  work 
activities and schedules, i.e., the supervisors who “actually 
interact” with employees.  Ante, at 26. 

IV 

I turn now to the case before us.  Maetta Vance worked 
as  substitute  server  and  part-time  catering  assistant  for
Ball  State  University’s  Banquet  and  Catering  Division.
During the period in question, she alleged, Saundra Davis,
a  catering  specialist,  and  other  Ball  State  employees
subjected  her  to  a  racially  hostile  work  environment. 
Applying  controlling  Circuit  precedent,  the  District  Court
and Seventh Circuit concluded that Davis was not Vance’s 

—————— 

7 Nor is the Court’s confinement of supervisor status needed to deter
insubstantial claims.  Under the EEOC Guidance, a plaintiff must meet 
the  threshold  requirement  of  actionable  harassment  and  then  show
that  her  supervisor’s  authority  was  of  “sufficient  magnitude”  to  assist
in the harassment.  See EEOC Guidance 405:7652, 405:7654.