Sexual Harassment Between the Same Sex

Contrary to what you may think, same gender sexual harassment may be the basis for a sexual harassment claim. In other words, sexual harassment may exist even in the case where a male employee is being harassed by his male colleagues.

In Mogilefsky v. Superior Court (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1409, 1415, the Court held that a male creative editor (“Wayne”) had established enough facts to support a claim for sexual harassment against his male supervisor, Michael Levy. Wayne alleged that on two separate occasions, Michael demanded that Wayne stay overnight at his hotel suite. On the first occasion, Michael told Wayne that he would be paid more if he cooperated, asked him to play a pornographic film on the VCR, made lewd comments about the film, and asked him how much he would charge to perform acts similar to those depicted in the film. The next day, Michael falsely implied to other co-workers that he engaged in anal sex with Wayne. On the second occasion, Wayne went to Michael’s suite only after being warned by his co-workers that it was mandatory and that previous employees had been fired for not doing so. Michael allegedly referred to Wayne in degrading manner and inquired repeatedly into his private life, including questions regarding his prior relationships. Very early the next morning, Michael allegedly woke Wayne, requested him to take his clothes off, and told him that he wanted to sleep next to him.

In sum, it is clear that a claim for sexual harassment may exist between members of the same sex just as well as it could exist between members of the opposite sex. If you feel that you are being sexually harassed at work, contact the Mostafavi Law Group for a free consultation.

Latest Blog

Prejudice is not required for waiver of arbitration

No prejudice is required in determining whether a party to an arbitration agreement has waived its right to compel the arbitration and stay the action in the court. Morgan v. Sundance, Inc. (US 21–328 5/23/22) Arbitration Petitioner Robyn Morgan worked as an hourly employee at a Taco Bell franchise owned by respondent Sundance. When applying for […]

Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA)

As part of the federal CARES Act, the new Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program helps unemployed Californians who are business owners, self-employed, independent contractors, have limited work history, and others not usually eligible for regular state UI benefits who are out of business or services are significantly reduced as a direct result of the pandemic. The […]

GrubHub, DoorDash, Postmates and Uber Eats were sued in for sticking restaurants with “devil’s choice”

NEW YORK (Reuters) – GrubHub, DoorDash, Postmates and Uber Eats were sued on Monday for allegedly exploiting their dominance in restaurant meal deliveries to impose fees that consumers ultimately bear through higher menu prices, including during the coronavirus pandemic. In a proposed class action filed in Manhattan federal court, three consumers said the defendants violated […]

The California Supreme Court will decide on the faith of the gig economy

The California Supreme Court in CASTELLANOS v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA (Case: S279622) is presented with the question that does Business and Professions Code section 7451, which was enacted by Proposition 22 (the “Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act”), conflict with article XIV, section 4 of the California Constitution and therefore require that Proposition 22, by […]

Rest and meal premiums are considered wages

The California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc. (SC S258966 5/23/22), held that meal breaks are considered wages for the purpose of waiting penalty statute if the employee is not paid when the employment ends with the employer. The Naranjo Court, held that the extra pay for missed breaks constitutes “wages” that must be reported on […]