Montgomery County Makes It Easier for Employees to Prove Unlawful Harassment

Marc EngelMarc Engel

Last month, the Montgomery County (Maryland) Council enacted amendments to the county’s anti-discrimination statute, which substantially lowers the standard for proving unlawful hostile harassment claims.

The amendment was signed into law on October 16, 2020 and takes effect on January 15, 2021. As discussed below, the amendments are likely to have a profound impact upon employers.

Overview

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by local, state, and federal law (Title VII). There are two types of unlawful harassment: (i) quid pro quo harassment (“you do this for me, and I do that for you”) and (ii) the more common type of harassment, known as hostile work environment.

Under current county, Maryland state, and federal law, in order to establish unlawful harassment, an employee must:

  • Establish that the conduct was unwelcome;
  • Was based upon the sex of the employee;
  • Was sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to alter the employee’s conditions of employment and to create an abusive work environment; and
  • The wrongdoing is imputable on a factual basis to the employer.

These requirements also apply to harassment claims based upon other unlawful factors, such as age and race.

The “severe or pervasive” prong has both a subjective and an objective component. With regard to the subjective component, an employee must show that she or he subjectively perceived, as a reasonable person would perceive, that the environment was hostile or abusive.

The conduct must also be objectively “severe or pervasive” and have a substantial effect on the terms or on the conditions of employment. The “severe or pervasive” requirement has proven challenging for employees to satisfy. The Fourth Circuit (where Maryland is located) has noted that boorish and crude behavior alone is not sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to be actionable under Title VII. As the Fourth Circuit explained: “While no one condones boorishness, there is a line between what can justifiably be called sexual harassment and what is merely crude behavior.”

Summary of Impact of New Legislation

The amendments to the Montgomery County anti-discrimination statute effectively replace the requirement that workplace conduct be sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to alter the working conditions of a reasonable person in the employee’s shoes, with the requirement that a reasonable person in the employee’s shoes “would consider the conduct to be more than a petty slight, trivial inconvenience, or minor annoyance.”

Although the law still contains an element of objective reasonableness, the employee is only required to establish that the conduct was more than a trivial inconvenience, minor annoyance or petty slight (and not that the conduct was sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to alter the working conditions of a reasonable person in the employee’s shoes) – which is a significantly lower standard than the one used under Maryland’s state anti-discrimination law and under Title VII.

Takeaways

To learn about steps employers should consider taking, read the rest of the article on our website: https://www.lerchearly.com/news/montgomery-county-makes-it-easier-for-employees-to-prove-unlawful-harassment.

For more information, contact Marc at 301-657-0184 or mrengel@lerchearly.com.

Maryland Law Bans Natural Hair Discrimination

The state joins Montgomery County and Virginia in adopting such legislation

Nida KanwalNida Kanwal

Effective October 1, 2020 Maryland’s anti-discrimination law prevents discrimination against persons based on their protective hairstyles and textures.

These types of laws, referred to as Creating a Respectful World for Natural Hair (CROWN) acts, are now being enacted in many states and localities. Montgomery County has had such a law in place since February of 2020, making it the first county in the country to ban hair discrimination. Virginia’s law went into effect on July 1, 2020. DC has not yet enacted such a law.

Maryland’s anti-discrimination law, Title 20 of the State Government Article of the Maryland Code, prevents various types of discrimination including discrimination in employment, places of public accommodation, leasing of commercial property, and housing. The definitional section of the title, Md. Code, State Gov’t § 20-101, has been amended to broaden the definition of “race” by including “traits associated with race including hair texture, afro hairstyles, and protective hairstyles.” Additionally, protective hairstyles is defined to include “braids, twists, and locks.”

Notably, the Senate version of the bill attempted to restrict the law by including language that an employer could establish and require an employee to “adhere to reasonable workplace appearance, grooming, and dress standards that are directly related to the nature of the employment of the employee.” However, this language was ultimately struck before the Act’s passage.

Employers should review any grooming and personal appearance standards or handbook policies in their workplace to ensure that they do not violate the new law.

For more information, contact Nida at 301-657-0744 or nkanwal@lerchearly.com.