Patty, a partner in a law firm, showed special interest in Rex, a new associate at the firm. Patty frequently made sexual overtures to Rex and expected him to get physically intimate with her if he wanted to be a senior attorney at the firm. However, Rex’s refusal prompted Patty to tell him that he was not suitable to be a senior attorney, and she also started treating him badly in front of the other employees. Unable to bear the harassment any further, Rex quit the job and filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for sexual harassment. Which of the following holds true in this situation? 

A) The law firm would not be liable for sexual harassment because HR did not bring the complaint to the attention of management, so the firm did not know of the harassment. 

B) The law firm would not be liable for sexual harassment because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not protect male employees against harassment. 

C) The law firm would be strictly liable for sexual harassment because Patty is a supervisor, and the supervisor’s acts are considered those of the employer. 

D) The law firm would be liable for sexual harassment only if Rex can prove that he is married.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

CThe law firm would be strictly liable for sexual harassment because Patty is a s... View the full answer