Which statement below is false? A. A sexual harassment claim under Title VII is filed against the employer, not the harasser. B. When a co-worker is the harasser, a hostile work environment claim is appropriate. The plaintiff must be able to prove the harassing conduct is intimidating, offensive, severe and pervasive. The Reasonable Person Standard will apply to these cases. C. Constructive Discharge is evidence of severe and pervasive sexual harassment D. There is no employer defense to a hostile work environment claim. QUESTION 2 The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (1978), requires employers to treat pregnancy neutrally when making employment decisions. It requires employers to judge pregnant women on ability rather than a temporary physical condition. In Michele C. Krause v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions (2009), the plaintiff was terminated less than a year after she returned from maternity leave. Which facts were significant in the court's decision to deny summary judgment for the employer? A. Krause had to withstand verbal comments and statements from her supervisor, Coser, that were dismissive and critical about her pregnancy. B. Krause was required by her supervisor to travel to a meeting via airplane despite his knowledge of her medical provider's recommendation that she not fly for the duration of her pregnancy. c. Krause was replaced by a male despite the fact that she had a larger book of business and higher percentage effective rating than her male counterparts, who were all retained despite the employer's claim of an economic downturn. D. All of the choices above because they can be used to establish pregnancy was not treated neutrally by the employer and that the legitimate and non- discriminatory reason for her termination (economic downturn) was a pretext for actual discrimination based on pregnancy and gender. As a result, the case needed to go to a fact finder and not be decided by summary judgment. QUESTION 3 UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc. (1991) illustrates the dilemma faced by an employer who sought to minimize their risk of liability and also protect women of child bearing age as well as their unborn children from harm due to lead exposure. Which statement is accurate regarding the case? A. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that a policy which excludes employees solely on the basis of gender and pregnancy violates federal law regardless of any altruistic motive the employer may possess. B. Johnson Controls' policy, which prohibited women from working in the battery division due to known risks to a developing fetus caused by lead exposure, was a policy of exclusion based on gender and pregnancy and was held invalid under Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. C. The policy discriminated against women who were of childbearing age but who might choose not to have children. D. All of the choices above