Read the “Sidebar 20.6” in Ch. 20 of the text.
Write paper of 700- to 1,050-words in which you analyze the sexual harassment issues presented in scenario.
- Analyze each of the elements of this case: the applicable defenses and the basis for the court’s ruling.
- Analyze the possible liability in this case if the sexual harasser(s) were an independent contractor versus an employee.
Cite to at least three peer-reviewed sources.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
Sidebar 20.6
Hithon v. Tyson Foods, Inc.: The Use of the Word “Boy”
John Hithon and Anthony Ash, African American
men, worked at a Tyson Foods plant in Alabama.
When two supervisor positions opened up, they were
passed over for promotion and two white men from
other plants were hired. Believing that the failure to
be promoted resulted from racial prejudice, Hithon
and Ash filed an employment discrimination claim
against their employer.
As part of their case, the plaintiffs produced
evidence that their white boss used the term “boy”
when referring to them. Is the use of the term boy
racially discriminatory?
In 2002, an Alabama jury awarded Hithon and
Ash $250,000 each in compensatory damages and
$1.5 million in punitive damages. After a magistrate
overruled the jury’s verdict, Hilton and Ash appealed.
On appeal, the 11th Circuit determined that an adult
African American man being called “boy” alone was
not discriminatory unless it was preceded by “black”
or “white.”
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed
the 11th Circuit’s decision, stating:
Although it is true that the disputed word
will not always be evidence of racial animus,
it does not follow that the term, standing
alone, is always benign . . .The speaker’s
meaning may depend on various factors
including context, inflection, tone of voice,
local custom and historical usage.
Thereafter, another Alabama jury found in favor of
Hithon, awarding him $35,000 in back pay, $300,000
in compensatory damages for his mental anguish
and $1 million in punitives. The District Court vacated
the punitive damage award. Both sides appealed. On
appeal, the 11th Circuit voted 2-1 entering a judgment
in favor of Tyson Foods. The majority said that
the evidence did not support Hithon’s argument.
