New Hampshire
How Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Discrimination (Title VII).
New Hampshire adheres to the principles established in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, which emphasizes employer liability for sexual harassment under Title VII. The state reinforces the application of the 'vicarious liability' standard where an employer can be held responsible for sexual harassment if the harassment culminates in a tangible employment action.
In New Hampshire, an employer is strictly liable for sexual harassment perpetrated by a supervisor that results in a tangible employment action, adhering to the framework set forth in Ellerth and further interpreting the implications of N.H. RSA 354-A.
Employer was held liable under RSA 354-A for supervisor's conduct leading to a tangible employment action against the employee.
The court affirmed that under New Hampshire law, liability for harassment claims can arise even without a tangible employment action.
New Hampshire law reflects the federal standard set by Ellerth but also allows for broader interpretations of liability, focusing on the broader context of workplace harassment. While the federal standard outlines specific tangible actions, New Hampshire courts have emphasized a more comprehensive approach to harassment claims.
Understanding Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth is essential for New Hampshire bar exam preparation as it addresses employer liability under RSA 354-A, often tested in the context of employment discrimination.