Kyrstin Schomberg
BLAW: 300
Harris v. Forklift
The background behind this case starts with a woman named Teressa Harris. Teressa Harris was a valued manager at a forklifting company from 1985 to 1987. Forklift Systems, Inc was a rental company that sent out machinary to several customers. The President of the company was Charles Hardy. Hardy created a negative working environment for Teressa and other women. Hardy would say things like, “Your a women, what do you know?”, and “Your a dumbass women!” Hardy made sexual enduendos that caused tension in the work place. Charles made the work atmosphere almost unbarrable for his rental manager, Teressa. Throughout the years, many belittling and harsh words were exchanged with Harris and Hardy. …show more content…
One thing they still were trying to figure out was if Hardy’s actions created any psychological affect on Harris. It was clear that Harris felt uncomfortable in the work place and had no desire to continue working under Hardy. This created the basis for the courts ruling. The higher courts decided that the disrict court was wrong in judging that Harris had no psychological harm with her interactions with Hardy. The courts had addressed that all conditions of the work environment need to be evaluated before making a rulling. There was no factual way to understand how Hardy had fully affected Harris without understanding the environment, and being their when these events took place.
The main issue that needed to be discussed was if Hardys actions created an abusive environment. It was clear that he had made discriminatory comments but did this environment harm Harris psychologically. The Courts had a hard time defining the case at hand. On one side, Harris took offense to these comments but did they affect her work. In the end, court ruled that being in any “hostile” or “abusive” situation is hard to understand unless you have the circumstances. Hardy could have put harm onto Harris. Since the circumstances were unclear it was hard to understand the extent of this
BLAW: 300
Harris v. Forklift
The background behind this case starts with a woman named Teressa Harris. Teressa Harris was a valued manager at a forklifting company from 1985 to 1987. Forklift Systems, Inc was a rental company that sent out machinary to several customers. The President of the company was Charles Hardy. Hardy created a negative working environment for Teressa and other women. Hardy would say things like, “Your a women, what do you know?”, and “Your a dumbass women!” Hardy made sexual enduendos that caused tension in the work place. Charles made the work atmosphere almost unbarrable for his rental manager, Teressa. Throughout the years, many belittling and harsh words were exchanged with Harris and Hardy. …show more content…
One thing they still were trying to figure out was if Hardy’s actions created any psychological affect on Harris. It was clear that Harris felt uncomfortable in the work place and had no desire to continue working under Hardy. This created the basis for the courts ruling. The higher courts decided that the disrict court was wrong in judging that Harris had no psychological harm with her interactions with Hardy. The courts had addressed that all conditions of the work environment need to be evaluated before making a rulling. There was no factual way to understand how Hardy had fully affected Harris without understanding the environment, and being their when these events took place.
The main issue that needed to be discussed was if Hardys actions created an abusive environment. It was clear that he had made discriminatory comments but did this environment harm Harris psychologically. The Courts had a hard time defining the case at hand. On one side, Harris took offense to these comments but did they affect her work. In the end, court ruled that being in any “hostile” or “abusive” situation is hard to understand unless you have the circumstances. Hardy could have put harm onto Harris. Since the circumstances were unclear it was hard to understand the extent of this