Unless it’s obvious that an employer acted maliciously by purposely setting out to harm an employee, chances are it won’t be held responsible for the consequences of a co-worker’s crime.
After all, some criminal behavior just isn’t predictable. Courts only expect employers to follow the law when it comes to protecting employees from harm.
Recent case: Michelle, who is black, was an adjunct instructor for Suffolk County Community College. She worked there for many years while she earned several advanced degrees, including a doctoral degree.
Over the years, Michelle had complained that college administrators routinely referred to black employees as “you people” and made offensive comments about black women. She also claimed her supervisor questioned how she could have earned a doctorate in three years. This, she claimed, was evidence of a racially hostile work environment.
When a full-time position opened up in her field of ...(register to read more)
- How to Fire an Employee the Legal Way: 6 Termination Guidelines
- It's sometimes OK to fire disabled employee, but it's a mistake to cite medical costs
- Younger replacement doesn't prove age discrimination
- In hiring, don't overvalue interview skills; courts question subjective decision-making
- Carefully track angry employee's complaints