The claim arises where a supervisor conditions a tangible employment benefit on sexual submission, or takes adverse action for refusal. A single incident may suffice, unlike hostile environment claims.
The employer is strictly liable where a tangible action resulted.
Alternative Names:
Quid Pro Quo|Tangible Benefit Harassment
Why it Matters?
Strict liability attaches where the harassment culminated in a tangible employment action, which eliminates the Faragher-Ellerth defense entirely and makes the tangible action question the first analysis in any supervisor harassment case. A threat never carried out leaves the defense available, since no tangible action occurred. That distinction determines whether the employer's complaint procedure and the employee's use of it matter at all.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
When is the employer strictly liable?
What if the threat was never carried out?
