Reference no: EM131006707

A woman hired as a prison librarian complained about harassment by a supervisor from another agency that operated at the prison. The behavior that was the subject of her complaint, some of which was witnessed by other employees, oc- curred about four times a week from the time that she was hired in July 2000 to October 2001. Her complaints about the supervisor included making comments to another male supervisor that the woman should be "spanked" every day; making insistent compliments about her appear- ance and "how attractive" she was; staring at her breasts during conversations; measuring her skirt for the purported purpose of determining whether it complied with the prison's dress code; and repeatedly remarking that if he had such an attractive wife, he would never allow her to work in a prison around so many inmates. Allegedly for safety reasons, the supervisor had a security camera installed in the librarian's office, permit- ting him to observe her as she worked at her desk. Right after the objectionable conduct be- gan, the librarian complained to her immediate supervisor, who said that "boys will be boys" and took no action. She did not file a formal com- plaint. She believed that she was ineligible to file a formal complaint during her first year of em- ployment due to her probationary status. After she had been on the job for more than a year, she complained to another manager and an internal investigation was undertaken at that point. The woman sued. What should the court decide? Why? (Singleton v. Department of Correctional Education, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24059 (4th Cir.))