Understanding Hostile Work Environment in Maryland

What Is Hostile Work Environment?

“The United States Supreme Court has held that ‘hostile environment’ sex discrimination, inter alia, is actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” (See Watson v. Peoples Ins. Co. (1991) 322 Md. 467, 479-80; Meritor Sav. Bank, F.S.B. v. Vinson (1986) 477 U.S. 57, 106 S.Ct. 2399, 91 L.Ed.2d 49.)

“Applying portions of the guidelines issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in interpreting Title VII, the Court noted that sexual harassment actionable under Title VII included [u]nwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.” (See id; 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11(a) (1985).)

“Hostile environment sexual harassment need not be directly linked to the grant or denial of an economic quid pro quo where such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.” (See Watson v. Peoples Ins. Co. (1991) 322 Md. 467, 479-80.)

“Inasmuch as Title VII prohibits retaliatory discharges for complaints about any violations of its prohibitions, Title VII would prohibit discharge in retaliation for a complaint of hostile environment sexual harassment.” (See id.)

“The source of the policy against hostile environment sexual discrimination is statutory, and exclusively statutory.” (See id.)

“A hostile environment exists [w]hen the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment.” (See id; Collins v. Catholic Charities, No. 1648, at *35 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Oct. 24, 2016).)

“Conduct that is not severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment — an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive — is beyond Title VII's purview. Likewise, if the victim does not subjectively perceive the environment to be abusive, the conduct has not actually altered the conditions of the victim's employment, and there is no Title VII violation.” (See Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc. (1993) 510 U.S. 17, 21-22.)

Prima Facie Case for Hostile Work Environment

“To prevail on a claim that a workplace is hostile, a plaintiff must show that there is

unwelcome conduct;
that is based on the plaintiff's sex [, age, race, or national origin];
which is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the plaintiff's conditions of employment and to create an abusive work environment; and
which is imputable to the employer."

(See Collins v. Catholic Charities, No. 1648, at *35 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Oct. 24, 2016); Okoli v. City of Balt. (2011) 648 F.3d 216, 220.)

Standard of Review for Hostile Work Environment Claim

“Whether the environment is objectively hostile or abusive is judged from the perspective of a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position.” (See Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc. (1998) 523 U.S. 75, 81.)

“That determination is made by looking at all the circumstances, which may include the 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.” (See Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc. (1993) 510 U.S. 17, 23; Collins v. Catholic Charities, No. 1648, at *35-36 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Oct. 24, 2016).)

Hostile Work Environment Federal Standard

“There can be no doubt federal harassment standards are demanding.” (See Al-Zubaidy v. TEK Indus., Inc. (2005) 406 F.3d 1030, 1038; McCurdy v. Ark. State Police (2004) 375 F.3d 762, 768.)

“Indeed, the Supreme Court has made it clear that conduct must be extreme to amount to a change in the terms and conditions of employment.” (See id; Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998) 524 U.S. 775, 788, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 141 L.Ed.2d 662.)

“The Supreme Court also has made it abundantly clear that the standards for judging hostility are sufficiently demanding to ensure that Title VII does not become a general civility code.” (See id.)

Current as of April 01, 2024 | Updated by Trellis Law Content Team

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information and is subject to change without notice.

Dockets for Hostile Work Environment in Maryland

Sort By

The United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development vs Millhouse Andrews, Faith et al

Filed

Dec 09, 2022

Court

Frederick County

County

Frederick County, MD

Case #