Legal Management Case Scenarios: Key Employment and Contract Law

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: The Bancroft Scenario

The scenario described in this case offers a clear-cut example of sexual harassment. An individual who has succeeded on the strength of her professional merits is being objectified and exploited on the basis of her desire for advancement. This is a particularly inappropriate situation insofar as it ties Bancroft's ambition for professional growth to her willingness to be objectified. It creates a working atmosphere in which Bancroft must defend her professional integrity at the risk of her own career. That she has been placed in this position is especially troubling because little can be done on her behalf to avoid confrontation short of simply complying with the unreasonable requests of her superior.

As the confrontation has already occurred, it appears that Bancroft has little recourse but to seek mediation through the Human Resources department. Her primary option is to politely refuse her employer's requests on the grounds that they have made her uncomfortable. Thereafter, a formal complaint must be filed outlining the nature of the request and her personal account of how it has created an inherently hostile working environment.

With respect to the role of Human Resources, any HR personnel who may have been within earshot of this conversation would have a responsibility both to confront the offending party and to use the incident as an opportunity to initiate formal sensitivity and ethics training. Further, an investigation should be conducted to determine whether other members of the firm have been made to feel uncomfortable in similar ways. If a pattern or culture of sexual hostility can be established, dismissal of the subject of Bancroft's complaint may be appropriate.

Consumer Contracts and Binding Arbitration: The Boomer v. AT&T Case

Boomer's case is a useful reference point for consumers who wish to understand their rights with respect to service contracts with major corporate providers. In this scenario, the customer accepted the terms of a contract with AT&T through his own inaction. According to the case, Boomer had been provided with clearly stated terms indicating that his long-distance rates would increase and that he had the right to contest these changes. Moreover, Boomer was explicitly informed that any such contest would be resolved by a legally binding arbitrator rather than through civil litigation.

Reviewing the legal language of a precedent invoking Boomer's case — Ragan and Mangiaracino v. AT&T — it becomes clear that Boomer is in all respects subject to the terms stated in that correspondence. As the statement had been issued in direct connection with already agreed-upon terms, the precedent establishes that Boomer's legal rights are shaped by those terms. The court proceedings note: "in Boomer v. AT&T Corp., 309 F.3d 404, 415 (7th Cir. 2002), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, applying Illinois law to facts identical to those in the case at bar, held that where an offeree takes the benefits of offered services with a reasonable opportunity to reject them and a reason to know that they were offered with the expectation of compensation, his silence and inaction operates as an acceptance of the offer." (Matoesian, 1) This establishes that Boomer's participation in a class-action suit over high long-distance prices will not be heard in a court of law.