Legal Document

523 U.S. 75118 S.Ct. 998140 L.Ed.2d 201 Joseph ONCALE, Petitioner,v.SUNDOWNER OFFSHORE SERVICES, INCORPORATED, et al. No. 96-568. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Dec. 3, 1997. Decided March 4, 1998. Syllabus* Petitioner Oncale filed a complaint against his employer, respondent Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., claiming that sexual harassment directed him by coworkers in their workplace constituted "discriminat[ion] . because sex'' prohibited Title VII Civil Rights Act 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1). Relying on Fifth Circuit precedent, District held Oncale, male, had no cause action for male coworkers. The affirmed. Held: Sex discrimination consisting same-sex is actionable under VII. VII's prohibition "because protects men as well women, Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. EEOC, 462 669, 682, 103 2622, 2630, 77 89, and related context racial this has rejected any conclusive presumption an employer will not discriminate members own race, Castaneda Partida, 430 482, 499, 97 1272, 1282-1283, 51 498. There justification language or Court's precedents categorical rule barring claim merely plaintiff defendant (or person charged with acting behalf defendant) are same sex. Recognizing liability transform into general civility code American workplace, since at sex, conduct tinged offensive connotations; statute does reach genuine but innocuous differences ways women routinely interact same, opposite, sex; objective severity should be judged from perspective reasonable plaintiff's position, considering all circumstances. Pp. ____-____. 83 F.3d 118, reversed remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. THOMAS, concurring opinion. Nicholas Canaday, III, Baton Rouge, LA, petitioner. Edwin S. Kneedler, Washington, DC, Harry M. Reasoner, Houston, TX, respondents. Justice SCALIA 1 This case presents question whether can violate sex,'' §2000e-2(a)(1), when harasser harassed employee 2 * having granted summary judgment respondent, we must assume facts to alleged petitioner Oncale. precise details irrelevant legal point decide, interest both brevity dignity shall describe them only generally. In late October 1991, was working Services Chevron A., oil platform Gulf Mexico. He employed roustabout eight-man crew which included respondents John Lyons, Danny Pippen, Brandon Johnson. crane operator, driller, supervisory authority, App. 41, 77, 43. On several occasions, forcibly subjected sex-related, humiliating actions Pippen Johnson presence rest crew. Lyons also physically assaulted manner, threatened rape. 3 Oncale's complaints personnel produced remedial action; fact, company's Safety Compliance Clerk, Valent Hohen, told "picked [on] time too,'' called name suggesting homosexuality. Id., 77. eventually quit-asking pink slip reflect he "voluntarily left due verbal abuse.'' 79. When asked deposition why Sundowner, stated "I felt if I didn't leave my job, would raped forced have sex.'' 71. 4 Eastern Louisiana, alleging discriminated employment Circuit's decision Garcia Elf Atochem North America, 28 446, 451-452 (C.A.5 1994), district court "Mr. co-workers.'' 106. appeal, panel concluded binding 118 (1996). We certiorari. 520 ----, 117 2430, 138 192 (1997). II 5 1964 provides, relevant part, " [i]t unlawful practice individual respect compensation, terms, conditions, privileges employment, such individual's color, religion, national origin.'' 78 Stat. 255, amended, covers "terms'' "conditions'' narrow contractual sense, "evinces congressional intent strike entire spectrum disparate treatment employment.'' Meritor Savings Bank, FSB Vinson, 477 57, 64, 106 2399, 2404, 91 49 (1986) (citations internal quotation marks omitted). "When permeated discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, insult sufficiently severe pervasive alter conditions victim's create abusive environment, violated.'' Harris Forklift Systems, 510 17, 21, 114 367, 370, 126 295 (1993) 6 89 (1983), race. "Because many facets human motivation, it unwise presume matter law beings one definable group other group.'' 1282, 498 (1977). See id., 514 n. 6, S.Ct., 1290 (Powell, joined Burger, C.J., REHNQUIST, dissenting). Transportation Agency, Santa Clara Cty., 480 616, 107 1442, 94 615 (1987), claimed sex preferred female promotion. Although ultimately grounds, did consider significant supervisor who made man. 624-625, 1447-1448. If our doubt question, hold today nothing necessarily bars 7 Courts little trouble principle cases like Johnson, where claims been passed over job But issue arises "hostile environment'' claim, state federal courts taken bewildering variety stances. Some, case, never cognizable also, e.g., Goluszek H.P. Smith, 697 F.Supp. 1452 (N.D.Ill.1988). Other decisions say prove homosexual (and thus presumably motivated desire). Compare McWilliams Fairfax County Board Supervisors, 72 1191 (C.A.4 1996), Wrightson Pizza Hut 99 1996). Still others suggest content always actionable, regardless harasser's orientation, motivations. Doe Belleville, 119 563 (C.A.7 1997). 8 see statutory excluding coverage As some observed, male-on-male assuredly principal evil Congress concerned enacted prohibitions often go beyond cover reasonably comparable evils, provisions laws rather than concerns legislators governed. prohibits employment. Our holding includes extend kind meets requirements. 9 Respondents amici contend recognizing workplace. risk greater opposite-sex harassment, adequately met careful attention requirements statute. prohibit physical workplace; even between automatically words used connotations. "The critical issue, text indicates, exposed disadvantageous terms exposed.'' Harris, supra, 25, 372 (GINSBURG, concurring). 10 juries found inference easy draw most male-female situations, challenged typically involves explicit implicit proposals activity; those someone chain available there were credible evidence homosexual. harassing need desire support basis A trier fact might find discrimination, example, victim sex-specific derogatory another woman make clear hostility may course, offer direct comparative about how treated sexes mixed-sex Whatever evidentiary route chooses follow, she connotations, actually "discrimina[tion] 11 And requirement prevents expanding code: emphasized opposite requires neither asexuality nor androgyny forbids behavior so objectively "Conduct enough hostile work environment-an environment abusive-is purview.'' U.S., citing Meritor, 67, 2405-2406. regarded crucial, sufficient ensure do mistake ordinary socializing workplace-such horseplay intersexual flirtation-for "conditions 12 emphasized, moreover, "all circumstances.'' 23, 371. (as all) cases, inquiry consideration social particular occurs experienced its target. professional football player's severely pervasively abusive, coach smacks buttocks heads onto field-even coach's secretary (male female) back office. real impact depends constellation surrounding circumstances, expectations, relationships fully captured simple recitation acts performed. Common appropriate sensitivity context, enable distinguish teasing roughhousing among position abusive. III 13 Because conclude VII, Appeals reversed, remanded further proceedings consistent 14 It ordered. 15 concurring. 16 concur stresses every plead syllabus constitutes part prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 26 282, 287, 50 L.Ed. 499.

Classification Label: 1