• Third Circuit Finds That a Custodial Foreman’s Authority to Assign Work to the Plaintiff Required a Finding That He Was the Plaintiff’s Supervisor for Purposes of Title VII.
  • October 9, 2017 | Author: Lee C. Durivage
  • Law Firm: Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C. - Philadelphia Office
  • The plaintiff was a substitute custodian in the employer’s school district. As a substitute custodian, she could obtain assignments at any school within the school district. In an effort to increase her hours, the plaintiff met with several custodial foremen in the district, as they had the authority to request that she work when one of their regular employees was out. Shortly after her meetings, she began to consistently receive assignments at one of the schools. In her lawsuit, she alleged that the custodial foreman of that school began to sexually harass her, including commenting that he would provide her with more hours if she performed sexual favors for him; grabbing her breasts or buttocks; and she found him in his office unclothed on one occasion. Approximately two months later, the custodial foreman appeared at her home and told her she would get an employment contract if she had sex with him. After he began kissing her, she reluctantly had sex with him, asserting that she felt that her job was threatened. Shortly thereafter, she rejected his advances. Within the next two months, her hours were cut at that particular school. The plaintiff complained to upper management regarding the incidents. The school investigated the concerns by interviewing ten employees. While the school did not find evidence of sexual harassment, it ordered the plaintiff and the custodial foreman to avoid any contact with each other.