Case Of Corne Vs Bausch And Lomb example essay topic

As in the rape cases previously studied, the victims that are involved sexual harassment and sexual discrimination are subjected to an array of defenses created by their employers. All to often these rational explanations are under the guise of traditional gender ideologies, which attempt to explain natural sexual behavior and / or natural gender differences. As in the rape cases, the use of ridged gender roles often play a silent through critical role in shaping the courts decisions on sexual discrimination and sexual harassment cases. As will be demonstrated in the cases of Lanigan vs. Bartlett, Smith vs. Eastern Airlines Co., EEOC vs. Sears and Chambers vs. Omaha Girls Club, a traditional gender ideology denies equal opportunity by promoting an enviorment in which females are required to behave and dress under the guise of a stereotypical gender role. As a result of these certain expectations women are limited in the upward mobility of their careers. For example, in the case of Price Waterhouse vs. Hopkins, Price was discriminated against because she was deemed as too aggressive, on the other hand, in the EEOC vs. Sears case, women were seen as poor risks as a result of not being aggressive enough.

Secondly, in the case of Corne vs. Bausch & Lomb, we have a case which attempts to measure the severity of the sexual harrasment. In other words, the court attempts to measure the severity of sexual harrasment by equating it to the loss of employment opportunites, hence, disregarding the horrific psychological damage occurred by sexual harrasment. Consequently, the emphasis of tangable losses such as employment opportunites strike a similar cord with those rape cases that emphasize the characteristics of a traditional rape. In short, as in the cases of rape, the ideologies of a traditional gender role, not only promote these incendents of sexual harrasment and discrimination, but they also negatively affect the outcome of thes cases by downplaying the severity of these occurance's. Through the critical analysis of sexual harassment cases such as, Corne vs. Bausch and Lomb, Inc. and others, it becomes apparent that the these cases attempt to measure the severity of sexual harrasment through ridged criteria which included tangable and monetary losses.

Similiar to the rape cases, the court uses a ridged method in order to determine weather or not the behavior can be lable d as sexual harrasment. For example in the case of Doe vs. R. R Donnelley & Sons Co, the plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome d hugs, kisses, patting on the breasts; however the court stated that the incidents did not rise to the level of actionable sexual harrasment. Additionally, in the case of Corne vs. Bausch and Lomb, Inc, Mr. Prices conduct appears to be nothing more than a personal proclivity, peculiarity or mannerism. These perilous two cases described are similar to the case of Goldenberg vs. Maryland, in which the case was dismissed because of it was not recognized as a traditional rape because less force was used. Hence the cases of Corne vs. Bausch and Lomb, Doe vs. R.R. Donnelley & Sons and Co. and others, dismiss the fact that sexual conduct interferes with an individuals work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment. As in the case of Corne vs. Bausch and Lomb, Inc, Prices activites became so onerous that plaintiffs were forced to resign.

Conclusively, as a result of the court placing an emphasis on un disputable tangible and economic losses they disregard the serious psychological harm that resutls from the offensive conduct. Secondly, in the case of Lanigan vs. Bartlett and Smith vs. Eastern Airlines, Inc, one encounters an employer who attempts to enforce a stereotypical gender role upon their employees. In the case of Lanigan vs. Bartlett, the plaintiff was dismissed for failure to comply with the companys dress code. The policy stated that women employees in the general offices were allowed to wear pantsuits; however, women employes in the executive office were not allowed to wear pantsuits. The plaintiff argued that not allowing women to wear pants perpetuates the sterotype that men are more capable than women of making business decisions. Although, the court stated that plaintiff is unable to demonstrate how the defendants dress code polices impermissible restrict equal employment opportunites and her contention that the polices perpetrate a sterotype is simply a matter of opinion In my opinion, the policy of Bartlett and Company Grain did in fact perpetuate a sterotype for the simple reason that wearing traditional feminine attire is psychologically damaging because many women feel uncomfortable wearing skirts in a professional setting.

Hence, an envoriment that promotes a stereotypical dress code not only perpetuates a sexist, chauvinistic attitude in employment but rather requires a women to be viewed as sexual rather than being a credible employee. On the other hand, in the case of Smith vs. Eastern Airlines, Inc., the plaintiff Mary Smith was denied employment simply because she was a female whose height is 5 feet 11 inches. Furthermore, the height requriments for males was from 5 feet 7 inches to 6 feet 2 inches and he hight reqirment for females was from 5 feet 2 inches to 5 feet 9 inches. Aside from the hight requirement, it was necessary that the applicant must be attractive and in good health. The plaintiff was not hired because she did not have the Miss America look according to Ms. Straughmaside from this Mary Smith was otherwise qualified for the position.

According to the court, there was no basis for discrimination. The problem with this case is that a female of 5 feet 11 inches would be rejected whole a male of the same height would not be rejected. These ridged requirements of height and attractiveness, for a mostly female occupation, can be regarded as sex discrimination by requiring women to ad hear to a strict standard which is not applicable to men.