South Carolina
How Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth applies in South Carolina: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Discrimination (Title VII).
South Carolina adheres to the principles established in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, recognizing the importance of employer liability in cases of sexual harassment under Title VII when the harassment is perpetrated by a supervisor. South Carolina courts have mirrored the federal standards, highlighting the significance of the employer's response to allegations of harassment.
An employer may be held vicariously liable for a supervisor's harassment if the harassment culminates in a tangible employment action. If no tangible action occurs, the employer can assert an affirmative defense if it can demonstrate reasonable care in preventing and correcting harassment and if the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities provided.
The court held that the employer could be liable for hostile work environment sexual harassment when a supervisor's actions created a legally cognizable claim under Title VII.
The South Carolina court adopted the federal standard of severity and pervasiveness in evaluating claims of hostile work environment.
The court reiterated that an employer's failure to act on complaints of harassment may lead to liability under the standards established in Ellerth.
South Carolina's approach to sexual harassment in the workplace aligns with the federal standards set forth in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, especially regarding vicarious liability. However, South Carolina emphasizes the need for employers to take prompt corrective action not only as a defense but as a duty under state law.
Understanding the principles from Burlington and its application in South Carolina is crucial for bar candidates, particularly in answering questions related to employment law and discrimination.