Scher Group
Developing a Strategy
 
 
Does your organization have a human resources strategy that has been tested in court? Has your policies and procedures contain workplace compliance law best practices to insure they will minimize the damaging effects of litigation? Below are examples of what the courts have ruled on based on having a strategic HR practice in organizations:
  • During 1998 and 1999 the US Supreme Court's decisions in Faragher, Ellerth, and Kolstad demonstrated the impact of proactive employment training. Since then, many state supreme courts and lower federal courts have followed with decisions:
    • For example, the New Jersey Supreme Court held in 2002 that, in the absence of managerial and supervisory training that triable issues existed as to the effectiveness of the counties (Gaines vs. Bellino).
    • A female African American Woman complained about a barrage of comments about her body and African American women in general and filed suit against her trucking company. Although they posted anti-discrimination posters, the company never adopted specific policy and trained. Therefore the company is subject to punitive damages (Anderson v GDC Inc.).
    • A company escaped liability in a case by undertaking training (Potomac Corp v Swinton).
    • Recently the US Supreme Court upheld a one million dollar punitive damages award in a racial discrimination case and excluded evidence of post litigation training because the training had only been implemented two months after the lawsuit was filed.
  • Harassment litigation is no longer limited to sexual harassment. For example, since September 11, 2001 there are a growing number of harassment claims being filed by those of Muslim faith or Arab and Middle Eastern national origin.

This potential financial loss and disruptive nature of workplace compliance lawsuits can and do have a numbing effect on the workplace. Employee morale and individual productivity is diminished and usually takes months even years to fully recover.