Frank Lemon, the service manager for Fresno-based heavy equipment distributor J.M. Equipment Co., was fired without warning for making a sexually explicit remark to a female employee. Lemon sued, arguing that the company had until then tolerated a pervasive atmosphere of vulgar language and sexually charged conduct and that he was really terminated because J.M. perceived him to be disabled after he had a heart attack. Now a jury has returned a million-dollar verdict for Lemon. We’ll tell you what the employer did wrong and how you can handle harassment situations the right way.
Worker Suffers Heart Attack
Lemon had a good performance record during his nine years with J.M. But he claimed that things went downhill after his heart attack. He returned to work but couldn’t put in 14-hour days anymore. Lemon’s managers allegedly asked his wife about his medication and said they didn’t want him to drop dead on them.
400+ pages of state-specific, easy-read reference materials at your fingertips—fully updated! Check out the Guide to Employment Law for California Employers and get up to speed on everything you need to know.
Supervisor Fired For Crude Remark
Three months after Lemon returned, J.M.’s owners asked him if he’d made a remark to a female employee about a “blow job.” Lemon admitted he had and was fired on the spot. The managers allegedly said they hated to terminate someone in his condition but had no choice under the company’s zero-tolerance sexual harassment policy.
Worker Claims Policy Was Disregarded
Lemon turned around and sued, charging that the stated reason for his termination was a pretext for disability bias. He argued that the company generally ignored its written harassment policy. Male and female employees, he claimed, regularly used profanity and sexually explicit language, and managers participated in and condoned sexually charged behavior. For example, Lemon said a film of a supervisor cavorting with a stripper at a company party was shown on J.M.’s premises.
Lemon’s attorney, William J. Smith, told CEA that the company’s investigation of the harassment allegations consisted solely of asking Lemon if he made the remark, and that Lemon wasn’t given a chance to explain the incident. Plus, Lemon charged, another employee involved in a sexual harassment incident two months earlier had received only a written reprimand, and no other employee was ever suspended or fired for harassment.
J.M. denied that it discriminated against Lemon based on his heart condition and maintained that Lemon was fired for violating the company’s written sexual harassment policy.A Fresno jury returned a verdict for Lemon, ordering J.M. Equipment to pay him $1,225,000.
3-Part Test
It’s critical to have a written zero-tolerance policy on sexual harassment. But this case demonstrates that not consistently enforcing your policy can leave you vulnerable to a lawsuit by an employee who is fired for harassment. Courts will examine the following factors to determine whether you had grounds for firing a harasser:
- Did the employer act in good faith in reaching the termination decision? If you have legitimate reasons for terminating a worker for performance or other problems, state them. Don’t use a sexual harassment charge as an excuse to get rid of the employee.
- Did the employer conduct an appropriate investigation? The best way to protect yourself is to act only after a full investigation that gives the accused an opportunity to respond to the charges.
- Did the employer reasonably believe the harassment allegations to be true? Besides determining whether the alleged conduct occurred, you need to decide whether the misconduct was sexual harassment under your policy. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that isolated comments such as a single crude remark typically don’t add up to illegal harassment.