Plaintiff resigned his employment following explicit sexual advances by a coworker outside of work, at plaintiff’s home and via his personal cell phone. Because the behavior occurred off-premises, plaintiff’s employer took no action when plaintiff reported the harassment. However, the HR representative who received plaintiff’s complaint responded with a sarcastic comment and a mocking social media post. Plaintiff filed suit, alleging claims for hostile work environment, failure to prevent harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and negligent hiring, among others. The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint and plaintiff appealed.
The Court of Appeal reversed in part, finding that while the offending conduct was not work-related merely because coworkers were involved, the employer’s response to plaintiff’s complaint could independently create a hostile work environment. The combination of the employer’s failure to act and the derisive behaviors of the HR representative arguably altered plaintiff’s work environment in an objectively severe manner, making the hostile work environment and failure to prevent harassment claims cognizable.
The Court of Appeal’s opinion provides a useful summary of California and federal case law exploring whether harassing conduct of supervisors and nonsupervisory coworkers occurring away from the workplace is imputable to the employer.
