This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: fired. Finally, the causal relationship element is supported by the
fact that she was purportedly fired on the day after she complained to a person from the
Human Resources Department of Appliance Direct.
It appears that there was enough evidence brought forward on each element of the
retaliation claim to defeat a motion for directed verdict. Accordingly, we conclude that it
was error to grant the motion.
B. The Sexual Harassment Claim.
    The grounds for a sexual harassment claim under either Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or under section 760.10(7), Florida Statutes (2007),
can be either a tangible employment action or, as Ms. Blizzard asserts in this case, the
*927 “creation of a hostile work environment caused by sexual harassment that is
sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of work.” Baldwin. To
establish a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim based on harassment by a
supervisor, Ms. Blizzard was required to show: (1) that she is a member of a protected
group; (2) that she was subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment, such as sexual
advances, requests for sexual favors, and other conduct of a sexual nature; (3) the
harassment was based on the sex of the employee; (4) the harassment was sufficiently
severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of employment and create a
discriminatorily abusive working environment; and (5) there is a basis for holding the
employer liable. Mendoza v. Borden, Inc., 195 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir.1999), cert. denied,
529 U.S. 1068, 120 S.Ct. 1674, 146 L.Ed.2d 483 (2000); Speedway SuperAmerica,
L.L.C. v. Dupont, 933 So.2d 75 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Moreover, the “employee must
show that the employer knew or should have known of the harassment, and yet failed to
take remedial action.” Natson v. Eckerd Corp., Inc., 885 So.2d 945, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA
2004) (quoting Castleberry v. Edward M. Chadbourne, Inc., 810 So.2d 1028, 1029-30
(Fla. 1st DCA 2002)). The United States Supreme Court has held in this regard that “An
employer is subject to vicarious liability to a victimized employee for an actionable
hostile environment created by a supervisor with immediate (or successively higher) 280 authority over the employee.” Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 777, 118
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.
- Spring '08