Hawaii
How Faragher v. City of Boca Raton applies in Hawaii: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Discrimination.
Hawaii follows a similar framework as the federal standard set forth in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton when it comes to employer liability for sexual harassment. The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission emphasizes the importance of taking prompt action to remedy any complaints of harassment in the workplace.
An employer in Hawaii is vicariously liable for unlawful sexual harassment by an employee if the employer failed to take appropriate steps to prevent and correct the harassment or if the harassment is committed by a supervisor resulting in a tangible employment action.
The court held that employers can be held liable for harassment by a supervisor that results in tangible employment actions, adhering to the principles set forth in Faragher.
The court affirmed that there is a duty for employers to establish a safe working environment and address harassment claims effectively.
This case reinforced that a plaintiff must show that the employer had either actual or constructive knowledge of the harassment.
Hawaii's approach closely aligns with federal law and the guidelines provided in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton. However, the Hawaii Supreme Court has occasionally interpreted the state's anti-discrimination statutes more broadly than federal statutes, reflecting a local emphasis on protective employee rights.
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton serves as a foundation for understanding employer liability in workplace harassment cases, making it a pertinent topic in the Hawaii bar exam, particularly in the context of employment law.