Washington
How Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth applies in Washington: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Law.
Washington law aligns with the principles laid out in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth concerning employer liability for sexual harassment in the workplace. The Washington Law Against Discrimination emphasizes that employers can be held liable for the actions of their employees when the harassment creates a hostile work environment.
Under Washington law, an employer may be liable for sexual harassment if a supervisor's actions result in a tangible employment action or if the harassment creates a hostile work environment, regardless of whether there is a tangible employment action.
The court held that an employer can be liable for harassment by a supervisor if the employer failed to take reasonable steps to prevent or correct the harassment.
The court ruled that an employer can be held responsible for severe or pervasive harassment by a supervisor if they have knowledge of the conduct and fail to act.
This case further clarified the standard for proving a hostile work environment by focusing on the totality of circumstances.
While Washington law incorporates the principles established in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, it expands liability by emphasizing the need for employers to prevent and remedy harassment. This contrasts with the federal standard, which is more lenient regarding employer defenses when no tangible employment action is taken.
Understanding the application of the Ellerth case in Washington is crucial for the Washington State Bar Exam, especially in employment law questions involving sexual harassment.