Reference no: EM13850341

analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in scenario.

Analyze each of the elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court's ruling.

Analyze the possible liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor versus an employee.

Can vulgar language, even if it is not specifically directed at an individual, be actionable as sexualharassment under Title VII?  Yes-according to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The plaintiff, IngridReeves, worked at a sales company, C.H. Robinson. Reeves alleged that she was subjected to hearing hermale co-workers call other women names such as "b***h," "wh**e" and "c**t" on a daily basis. She also claimed that there were repeated vulgar discussionsabout female body parts and a pornographic image of a woman in the office. Reeves complained to her co-workers, her supervisor, and top company executives,but the offensive conduct was "accepted andtolerated." According to the 11th Circuit, "if Reeves's accountis to be believed, C.H. Robinson's workplace was more than a rough  environment-indiscriminately vulgar, profane, and sexual. Instead, a just reasonably couldfind that it was a workplace that exposed  eeves todisadvantageous terms or conditions of employment to which members of the other sex were not exposed."Moreover, the court stated that it was no defense toassert "that the workplace may have been vulgar andsexually degrading before Reeves arrived."