In Pennsylvania, the Jury Instruction 1.2.2 focuses on Race and/or Sex Discrimination Hostile Work Environment Created or Permitted by Supervisor, with an affirmative defense by the employer. This instruction aims to inform jurors about the legal parameters and considerations when evaluating a workplace discrimination case. Hostile work environment claims arise when an employee is subjected to unwelcome behavior or a pervasive pattern of discrimination, based on their race and/or sex, which creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. The focus here is on the supervisor's role in either creating or allowing such an environment to persist. The instruction illustrates that for this claim to be viable, the following elements must be proven by the plaintiff (the victim of discrimination): 1. The plaintiff was an employee or had an employment relationship with the defendant (their employer). 2. The plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome discriminatory conduct based on their race and/or sex. 3. The unwelcome conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the plaintiff's employment and create an abusive work environment. 4. The unwelcome conduct was created or permitted by the plaintiff's supervisor(s) who had the authority to take corrective action. Regarding the affirmative defense available to the employer, if proven, it can limit or absolve the employer from liability. The instruction explains that an employer may present an affirmative defense by demonstrating the following: 1. The employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior (such as implementing anti-discrimination policies, providing training, and establishing effective complaint procedures). 2. The plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer (such as not reporting the incidents or failing to use the complaint procedure). It's important to note that variations of this instruction can exist depending on the specific circumstances of the case and the court's jurisdiction. However, the main idea remains constant: proving the existence of a hostile work environment based on race and/or sex discrimination, its impact on the plaintiff's employment, and the role of the supervisor, while considering the employer's affirmative defense.
In Pennsylvania, the Jury Instruction 1.2.2 focuses on Race and/or Sex Discrimination Hostile Work Environment Created or Permitted by Supervisor, with an affirmative defense by the employer. This instruction aims to inform jurors about the legal parameters and considerations when evaluating a workplace discrimination case. Hostile work environment claims arise when an employee is subjected to unwelcome behavior or a pervasive pattern of discrimination, based on their race and/or sex, which creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. The focus here is on the supervisor's role in either creating or allowing such an environment to persist. The instruction illustrates that for this claim to be viable, the following elements must be proven by the plaintiff (the victim of discrimination): 1. The plaintiff was an employee or had an employment relationship with the defendant (their employer). 2. The plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome discriminatory conduct based on their race and/or sex. 3. The unwelcome conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the plaintiff's employment and create an abusive work environment. 4. The unwelcome conduct was created or permitted by the plaintiff's supervisor(s) who had the authority to take corrective action. Regarding the affirmative defense available to the employer, if proven, it can limit or absolve the employer from liability. The instruction explains that an employer may present an affirmative defense by demonstrating the following: 1. The employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior (such as implementing anti-discrimination policies, providing training, and establishing effective complaint procedures). 2. The plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer (such as not reporting the incidents or failing to use the complaint procedure). It's important to note that variations of this instruction can exist depending on the specific circumstances of the case and the court's jurisdiction. However, the main idea remains constant: proving the existence of a hostile work environment based on race and/or sex discrimination, its impact on the plaintiff's employment, and the role of the supervisor, while considering the employer's affirmative defense.
