The Third Circuit’s recent decision holds that workplace rumors rooted in gender stereotypes can constitute unlawful harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In Cuff v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Plaintiff’s complaints relied on a series of incidents that occurred over the initial 8-month probationary period of employment as a correctional officer. During this period, Plaintiff alleged that other employees – including, notably, supervisors –spread rumors that she was trading sexual favors for preferential treatment. She was questioned by officers and sergeants about her relationships with superiors, who she was sleeping with, and referred to as a “bedazzled twat” during a meeting she was not present at, and later in her presence. As time passed, other officers confronted her about some of these rumors, questioning their veracity.
Plaintiff reported these rumors, and other egregious incidents to her supervisors, however, they downplayed the seriousness of the incidents and further insinuated she might be fired if she filed a written report. Plaintiff was subsequently hospitalized with stress-related symptoms. Following her hospitalization, Plaintiff met with a DOC equal employment opportunity investigator and upon the investigator’s suggestion, Plaintiff formally requested a hardship transfer to another prison. According to Plaintiff, her supervisor instructed her to submit a resignation letter and return her uniform as a routine prerequisite to transfer. Following her “resignation,” the DOC denied her transfer request on the grounds that she was no longer an employee.
On appeal from summary judgment, Plaintiff argued the District Court erred, among other grounds, by dismissing her hostile work environment claims. In reviewing the District Court’s finding that the rumor was “insufficient to meet her burden,” the Third Circuit found that the lower court failed to give any weight to Plaintiff’s claim that multiple officers confronted her about the rumor – a factor that could support a finding of pervasiveness and severity required for a hostile work environment claim. The Court also highlighted that each of Plaintiff’s allegations were interwoven with a common rumor – that Plaintiff was trading sexual favors for special treatment, which is inherently gendered and humiliating. As such, the Court held that a reasonable jury could find that Plaintiff’s allegations amounted to harassment.
The ruling in this case is a cautionary tale – and a reminder – that employers should remain vigilant to workplace rumor and respond appropriately when such allegations are brought to their attention. Rumors rooted in sexism combined with indifferent – or even worse, complicit – supervisors can lead to employers being liable in a hostile work environment claim.
Please contact an NFC team member if you have any questions or seek further assistance.