Opinion ID: 765123
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The harassment was based on race or religion;

Text: 35 4. The harassment had the effect of unreasonably interfering with Hafford's work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment; and 36 5. The existence of employer liability. 37 See Risinger v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, 883 F.2d 475, 484 (6th Cir. 1990). In determining whether an environment is one that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive and that the plaintiff in fact did perceive to be so, courts look at all of the circumstances, including: 38 [T]he frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance. 39 Harris, 510 U.S. at 23; Abeita v. TransAmerica Mailings, Inc., 159 F.3d 246, 251 (6th Cir. 1998). A recurring point in the Supreme Court's opinions is that 'simple teasing,' offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to discriminatory changes in the 'terms and conditions of employment' and that conductmust be extreme to amount to a change in the terms and conditions of employment. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 2283-84 (1998) (citations omitted).