FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 18, 1997

Massachusetts SJC Rules in Same-Gender Sexual Harassment Case

Massachusetts SJC Rules in Favor of Employees in Same-Gender Sexual Harassment Case

(BOSTON, Massachusetts) The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled today in a case of first impression that sexual harassment of a man by a man is unlawful, regardless of the sexual orientation of the harasser or the victim.

Mary Bonauto, an attorney with Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), called the case “a strong statement that the proper focus in a sexual harassment case is on the conduct of the parties and not the gender or sexual orientation of the harasser or victim.” GLAD, with assistance of cooperating attorney Nan Evans, filed a friend of the court brief in favor of the employees on behalf of GLAD, making precisely that point.

This case was decided under the Massachusetts state anti-discrimination law. Similar cases are pending under federal law, and it is expected that this decision will be considered by federal courts and other state courts addressing these issues. Three men, former employees of 84 Lumber Company in Springfield, previously filed sexual harassment claims against the company and their male supervisors. The employees complained they had been touched and fondled “everywhere” and asked to perform sex acts with a manager. On one occasion, an employee’s head was forced to within a foot of a manager’s exposed penis.

Although the employees won their trial in Hampden County Superior Court, the company appealed on the grounds that the supervisors are heterosexual men and therefore could not sexually harass heterosexual men. The trial judge found the sexual orientation of the parties irrelevant and focussed on the sexual nature of the conduct by the harasser to the victim. A “hostile environment” can constitute sexual harassment even without requests for sexual favors.” The SJC agreed with this analysis.

According to Bonauto, “focusing on the conduct is the right approach. Otherwise a company could be held responsible when its male employees harass women, but those same male employees could engage in even worse sexual conduct toward other men and go unpunished.” Bonauto also observed the case is helpful for gay people and people perceived to be gay in Massachusetts who fail to live up to the harasser’s notion of what a “real man” or “real woman” is supposed to be.

GLAD’s friend of the court brief was joined by the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association, the Women’s Bar Association of Massachusetts, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association.

GLAD is New England’s leading legal rights organization for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and people with HIV. GLAD’s mission is to achieve full equality and justice for all individuals in these groups, primarily through impact litigation and education.