Not if there is a preliminary.

My issue is the fact that verbal sexual harassment is basically anything anyone wants to call as such. It could be “hey nice hat” and it could be “Hey nice ass”.. leaving it vague without specifics or an actual documented incedent won’t hold in court.

Well, you see, I have taught my daughters to speak up when they have a problem and to never be pressured into anything they don’t want to do.

So.. if I’m out somewhere and I hear someone talking to someone else about sex.. I have a right to sue them because I was eaves dropping on their conversation..??

Soo.. by US law I can sue you for harassment now right?

Boom.

Really? SO then.. why do you not know the difference between hearsay and actual evidence?

You seem to be under the impression that I am for sexual harassment.. I am not. I am just pointing out that there is nothing concrete mentioned in this article.

I admit I have only read the examples that were listed in the article.. but are we talking about claims or actual documented incedents?

People who get offended easily often blow shit way out of proportion and exaggerate and embellish quite a bit.

Lol, sure why not? If she wasn’t retired I’m sure she’d love it.

HAHAHA..

Yes.. becuase they aren’t.

HAHAHAHAHAAHA!!!!! What a red herring. That isn’t even in the same ball park

They obviously have no issues with wanting women in their work place.

Soo.. you’re just going to go with the one qualifier that suits your case? LMAO!! I like how when you quoted the law, you convieniently left out parts of it.

We aren’t talking about pay here anyway.

Ok.. and which section of that law was broken? And in what manner?

Lol.. ok, and what human right was broken?

I completely agree, but a “hostile work environment” is not direct sexual harassment. If she was suing for employees creating an unessecarily hostile workspace, then I could see that having a minor chance.

See, the problem with this case is I see a lot of hearsay and “IF it was so” and very little actual documented…

Really? SO... exactly what law did they break? Being taken to court does not mean you have actually broken any laws. That’s what the judge is there to decide.
Or did you not know that?

No, I understand it all too well.

Sexual harassment in the USA is now basically anything you want it to be, due to the vague legal descriptions.

I accept that she was offended by people and situation sin her workplace, but I see no direct harassment. A lot of a boss being a bit of a dick, but that isn’t illegal and…

Wow.. then you’ve got easily frauded laws on harrassment. If he did not make advances directed at her specifically, then I fail to see where the harassment is.

Actually, it isn’t. An ad-hom is disregarding a comment based on some superficial or unrelated characteristic or point.

What I did is called ‘name calling’.. lol.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! So.. you don’t know the definitions of those words I see.

How dare you! That’s sexual harassment.. Imma sue you for that.