[ad_1]
A young industrial mechanic had filed a lawsuit against two clients of the company she worked for with claims for compensation and redress for sexual harassment. Before the Court of Appeal, the case also concerned claims against the employing company, which was ordered to pay compensation.
The question before the Supreme Court was whether the two clients had violated the prohibition against sexual harassment in the Gender Equality Law of 2013 § 8, continued in the current Law of Gender Equality and Discrimination § 13.
A customer on one occasion put his hands under the sweater on the woman’s lower back, and on a later occasion pretended to take her crotch. Over time, the other customers had approached the woman and, among other things, repeatedly tickled her waist. The actions occurred while the woman worked as the sole employee in a 15-employee machine shop.
The Supreme Court found that both clients had subjected the woman to sexual harassment. The behavior of both clients was sexually explicit, unwanted and upsetting to the woman. They were ordered to pay a reparation of 15,000 and 20,000 crowns, respectively.
– The ruling provides guidance on the lower limit for the prohibition of sexual harassment, writes the Supreme Court.
Glad to be believed
Tina Storsletten Nordstrøm, a lawyer in LO’s legal department, is the woman’s lawyer.
– My client is happy that they believe him and that the case has finally come to an end. This case is important because it clarifies protection against sexual harassment, he says.
– The verdict shows that women and men do not have to accept abusive and annoying attention. Statistics Norway’s survey on living conditions shows that 13% of women aged 19-24 experience sexual harassment once a month or more. So my client’s situation was not unique, but a typical example of a very large problem, he adds.
The attorney still believes that the levels of compensation are very low. Furthermore, no coverage was granted for legal expenses.
– Therefore, going to court with these cases is still associated with great financial risk, says Tina Storsletten Nordstrøm.
The now 23-year-old woman was happy to have gotten a job at the male-dominated company. He got along well with his colleagues and had no trouble avoiding the harsh humor and direct tone of the workplace, according to his explanation in district court.
But the clients who touched her put an end to her well-being.
She was cursed and clearly stated that the behavior was unacceptable. She felt unsafe at work and informed the doctor, employer, and company president. But the abusive behavior only continued and he ended up on long-term sick leave.
Sexual harassment is said to have mainly taken place in 2016 and 2017.
Tron Dalheim, an employment law attorney and partner at the Thommessen law firm, previously told DN that the Court of Appeal’s ruling may be an important source of case law.
– The verdict is unique in that it clarifies the employer’s responsibility to prevent and deter sexual harassment, Dalheim said when that verdict was ready.
– Now I tell you that you have received a clarification on what is the lower limit for sexual harassment, he tells DN on Tuesday.(Terms)Copyright Dagens Næringsliv AS and / or our suppliers. We would like you to share our cases via a link, which leads directly to our pages. Copying or other use of all or part of the content can only be done with written permission or as permitted by law. For more terms, see here.
