As a firm that has handled female-on-male sexual harassment cases and male-on-male sexual harassment cases, the recent case of Kelley v. The Conco Companies was of great interest to us.
In the Kelley matter, a male apprentice employee said a male supervisor made many rude and vulgar comments to him, including comments describing how the supervisor wanted to have sex with the apprentice and would have sex with the apprentice. Besides those comments, there was no evidence the supervisor was homosexual.
The court ruled on summary judgment that it was so clear that the supervisor was not sexually interested in the apprentice that the supervisor’s conduct could not be sexual harassment and there was no need for a trial on this issue. Given the explicit nature of the supervisor’s comments, one wonders why a jury should not have been given a chance to decide whether the supervisor meant what he said.
Since at least one other case has held that actual sexual desire does not necessarily need to be proven to sue for male-on-male sexual harassment, future developments in same-gender sexual harassment should prove interesting.
© 2011, LT Pacific Law Group LLP. All rights reserved.