Read the "Sidebar 20.6" in Ch. 20 of the text.

Write paper of 700- to 1,050-words in which you analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in scenario.

· Analyze each of the elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court's ruling.

· Analyze the possible liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor versus an employee.

Cite to at least three peer-reviewed sources.

Sidebar 20.6:

Can vulgar language, even if it is not specifically directed at an individual, be actionable as sexual harassment under Title VII?

Yes-according to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, Ingrid Reeves, worked at a sales company, C.H. Robinson. Reeves alleged that she was subjected to hearing her male co-workers call other women names such as "b***h," "wh**e" and "c**t" on a daily basis. She also claimed that there were repeated vulgar discussions about female body parts and a pornographic image of a woman in the office.

Reeves complained to her co-workers, her supervisor, and top company executives, but the offensive conduct was "accepted and tolerated." According to the 11th Circuit, "if Reeves's account is to be believed, C.H. Robinson's workplace was more than a rough environment-indiscriminately vulgar, profane, and sexual. Instead, a just reasonably could find that it was a workplace that exposed Reeves to disadvantageous terms or conditions of employment to which members of the other sex were not exposed."

Moreover, the court stated that it was no defense to assert "that the workplace may have been vulgar and sexually degrading before Reeves arrived." For more information, see, Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 07-10270 (11th Cir. Jan. 20, 2010), available at  www.ca11.uscourts.gov/ opinions/ops/200710270op2.pdf.