August 1, 2024
In a 4-3 decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court adopted the federal Title VII standard for determining who is a “supervisor” under the Connecticut Fair Employment Practice Act (CFEPA). The determination of “supervisor” status is critical under Title VII and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act because an employer is presumptively automatically liable for a hostile work environment perpetuated by a supervisor, although an employer can rebut that presumption by asserting that (1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any harassing behavior, and (2) the harassed employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities offered by the employer to avoid harm.
In O’Reggio v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, et al., decided on August 1, 2024, a narrow majority declined to adopt a much broader definition of “supervisor,” opting instead to accept the definition applied under Title VII as expressed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Vance v. Ball State University. Consequently, according to O’Reggio, in the case of a hostile work environment, an employer is vicariously liable for the acts of a harasser if the harasser has the power to take tangible employment actions. (If the harasser is a coworker of the employee being harassed, then the harassed employee is required to prove the employer’s negligence in failing to prevent the harassment from taking place.)
Read the full blog post on Employment Law Perspectives for more information.
Related Information
