Ohio
How Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth applies in Ohio: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Law.
Ohio law adopts the principles established in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth regarding employer liability for sexual harassment. The Ohio courts recognize the affirmative defense outlined in the case, emphasizing the necessity of a prompt and appropriate response from employers to prevent and address harassment.
In Ohio, an employer may avoid liability for a supervisor's sexual harassment if the employer proves (1) that they exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior, and (2) that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.
The court applied the Ellerth framework, emphasizing the need for employers to have clear policies and procedures addressing harassment.
The court reiterated the Ellerth affirmative defense, emphasizing the importance of training and reporting mechanisms.
The court found that the employer did not fulfill its obligation to create an anti-harassment environment.
Ohio's approach mirrors the federal standard by incorporating the same affirmative defense principles from Ellerth; however, Ohio law places additional emphasis on the implementation of anti-harassment policies and training programs as pivotal elements of the defense. The state also allows for broader interpretations of what constitutes an appropriate workplace environment under Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4112.
The principles from Ellerth are essential for the Ohio bar exam, particularly in the Employment Law section, where candidates must demonstrate an understanding of employer liability principles in harassment cases.