Employer Held Potentially Liable for Failure to Prevent Sexual Assault

BY: Ronald W. Novotny

When can an employer be liable for failing to prevent a sexual assault or rape of an employee?  The California Court of Appeal in the recent case of M.F. v. Pacific Pearl Hotel Management, LLC (D070150, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, 10/26/17), helped provide some answers to this question.

The plaintiff in the case worked as a housekeeper in a five-building hotel property.  One morning, the hotel’s Engineering Manager saw a drunk man who was not a guest of the hotel walking around hotel property with a beer in his hand.  The Manager first saw the trespasser on the third floor of one of the hotel buildings and then on the second floor of the building, and once more in an elevator going to the first floor.  The Manager did not ask the trespasser to leave and did not report the trespasser’s presence to housekeeping management or the police.

The trespasser then approached several housekeepers cleaning hotel rooms several times while walking around the property, and propositioned one housekeeper for sexual favors in exchange for money.  A co-worker overheard the trespasser’s sexual harassing comments and persuaded the trespasser to leave the room.  The trespasser then tried to enter a hotel room in another building, but the housekeeper who was cleaning the room closed the door on him and reported the incident to the Housekeeping Manager.  While broadcasting the trespasser’s activities, the Housekeeping Manager did not go to the building where the second incident occurred.  Moreover, the plaintiff’s supervisor checked one floor of that building, but did not check the second floor where the plaintiff was working.

The trespasser then pushed the plaintiff’s cart aside and pushed the door open, forced the plaintiff back into the room, and raped and assaulted her for over two hours.  After he left, the plaintiff called the police and was hospitalized.

Although the trial court initially dismissed the case, the appellate court held that it could go forward because the hotel had been placed on adequate notice of the problem before the assault occurred.  The court held that after the trespasser began confronting and aggressively propositioning housekeeping employees for sexual favors, the hotel had a duty under the Fair Employment and Housing Act to end the harassment and to take reasonable care to prevent the same conduct from being done towards future victims.  The court specifically held that because the hotel knew or should have known that the trespasser was on its premises for about an hour before the rape occurred and that the trespasser had aggressively propositioned at least one other housekeeping employee for sexual favors, the hotel had a duty to act and could be found liable for sexual harassment based on its failure to take prompt corrective action to end the harassment by the non-employee trespasser.

Although the appellate court only held that a trial could proceed and it is not known whether the plaintiff will prevail on her claims, the case presents a good example of how important it is for employers to act promptly to put an end to any potentially harassing behavior whenever it occurs, whether it is being engaged in by an employee or non-employee visitor.

Recent Posts

Brunch Break

Join us in an opportunity to get to know your fellow WPCCA members for brunch at the beautiful Old Ranch Country Club in Seal Beach! This event will feature a presentation by the Apprenticeship Director of Training, David Burtle, who…

March 28, 2023

WPCCA 2023 Employment Law Updates Webinar

With a new year comes new employment laws. Join us for an overview of 2023 Employment Law Updates. Our presenter, Shauna Correia, Esq., will highlight recent developments and changes to employment law pertinent to subcontractors in SoCal.   Date: Wednesday, April…

March 20, 2023

NLRB Imposes Broad Restrictions On Severance Agreements

On February 21, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) in McLaren Macomb  (372 NLRB No. 58) held that severance agreements containing broad non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions are unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the…

March 3, 2023

OSH Appeals Board Decision in Heat Illness Prevention Case Adds Clarity to Provision of Water Requirements

Sacramento—The Department of Industrial Relations’ Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board (OSHAB) has issued a precedential decision regarding the provision of water at outdoor worksites, affirming that it must be as close as practicable to the areas where employees are…

February 27, 2023

Appellate Court Rejects Neutral Time Rounding When Electronic Timekeeping is Used

California courts have long approved neutral rounding policies (See’s Candy Shops v Superior Court, 210 Cal App. 4th 889 (2012). However, the California Court of Appeals recently in Camp v. Home Depot USA, Inc. No. H049033, 2022 WL 13874360 (Cal…

February 3, 2023