The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued two Kentucky manufacturers of automotive interior systems and powertrain products, Toyota Boshoku Jackson Tennessee, LLC and Toyota Boshoku America, Inc., in Erlanger, Kentucky, and alleged sexual harassment and constructive discharge.

The EEOC alleges that since at least January 2021, the defendants' local managers and supervisors repeatedly demanded sexual favors from female workers in exchange for promotions and other employment benefits. Both managerial and non-managerial male employees also physically and verbally sexually harassed the women.

Some female workers were compelled to quit as a result of this harassment according to the EEOC. Other alleged victims were terminated in retaliation for complaining about the harassment.

Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-toyota-boshoku-sexual-harassment-constructive-discharge-and-retaliation

Commentary

The alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Employers are prohibited from discriminating against any individual because of their sex. Sex discrimination includes harassment. Title VII also prohibits retaliation for opposing unlawful discrimination.

The lawsuit also is an example of quid pro quo sexual harassment.

Quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when an employee suffers an adverse employment action because of their refusal to submit to, or engage in, the sexual demands of a manager or supervisor. Adverse employment actions include, but are not limited to, terminations, schedule changes, failure to promote, denial of training opportunities, and other benefits of employment.

Employers can face strict liability when managers or supervisors engage in quid pro quo sexual harassment that results in tangible adverse employment action against their victims.

Organizations must be proactive and consider the following to help reduce quid pro quo sexual harassment liability:

· Limit unilateral managerial authority over promotions, scheduling, and discipline decisions

· Require documented secondary review of all such decisions

· Train supervisors, managers, and employees regarding quid pro quo sexual harassment and how to report it

· Create a sexual harassment reporting channel that can bypass the managerial chain of command so employees experiencing quid pro quo harassment can make a complaint without alerting the accused authority figure

· Audit all employment decisions periodically to identify patterns suggesting favoritism tied to personal relationships rather than based on documented qualifications

The final takeaway is that investing in prevention measures, including improving training and intake, and being more proactive may help avoid quid pro quo risks.