An Analysis of Vance v. Ball State University

1169 Words3 Pages

Supervisory responsibilities vary among the multitude of available jobs in the market; however, there are certain functions that exist in all jobs. Supervisors must decide when to hire, fire, promote, discipline, or transfer an employee. For example, it is fairly simple to identify a Chief Probation Officer with a defined title and responsibility; however, enthusiastic employees working toward professional development may be selected to handle progressively responsible tasks within an organization. Many business managers may choose to delegate tasks to those employees, thereby graying the structured lines of responsibility. As those lines diminish, organizations become vulnerable to violation of employee civil rights. In review of the Supreme Court case of Vance v. Ball State (2013), we examine Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and whether employers may be vicariously liable for subordinate actions when the employer is not directly involved in the creation of a hostile work environment. We will review the case’s journey to the Supreme Court, analyze the Court’s rationale in deciding that Ball State University was not vicariously liable for Vance’s alleged hostile work environment, and discuss the impact of that decision on human resource managers.

In 2006, Maetta Vance filed a lawsuit against Ball State University in the United States District Court of the Southern District of Indiana. Ms. Vance, an African-American woman, claimed that Ball State University was responsible for a coworker’s creation of a hostile work environment. Ms. Vance worked for Ball State University as a catering assistant and served that department since 1989. She was promoted in 1991, from substitute server to part-time catering assistant, and aga...

... middle of paper ...

...o be held vicariously liable. Finally, we discussed the implications that this ruling presents to human resource managers in identifying and training subordinates to progress into leadership roles and ensuring that continuous harassment training takes place to mitigate the risk of liability.

References

Brief of the Society for Human Resource Management and the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources as Amici Curiae, p. 20, Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. ___ (2013).

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth. 524 U. S. 742. (1998).

Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 7, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq (1964). Retrieved from Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm.

Far¬agher v. Boca Raton. 524 U. S. 775. (1998).

Vance v. Ball State University. Slip opinion. 570 U.S. ___. (2013).

Open Document