Sexual Harassment and TV

This time, however, the unwilling target was not a hardened criminal. She was officer Caitlin Cross, a female co-worker.

Ironically, this gun-toting police officer seemed powerless to prevent Cage's constant advances: not satisfied with the results of their disastrous first date, Cage constantly demanded that Cross go out with him again. He even arrived at Cross' front door and once again asked for a date against her wishes.

Cross, played by Yasmine Bleeth of ``Baywatch'' fame, made only a passing reference to what many employers should be asking themselves

--is this situation going to result in a lawsuit for sexual harassment?

The trouble here is that what prime- time television increasingly portrays as acceptable office behavior may constitute sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Indeed, the growing gap between the frank display of sexuality on such shows as ``Snoops'' and ``Ally MacBeal'' and what the courts view as appropriate behavior in the workplace is bound to pose some difficult legal consequences for unprepared employers.

Consider the example of the sitcom ``Just Shoot Me.'' The character played by David Spade makes some not-so-subtle innuendos about his fantasies for a menage a trois with two female staff members. Again, this is presented as a part of everyday life in the office and characterized as a universal male fantasy that can be explored in the workplace.

In reality, this type of behavior is all but prohibited by the courts. A steady stream of sexual harassment cases in the nearly 10 years since the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings has made the topics of sex, sexual fantasies and sexual practices work place taboos.

Specific acts cited in recent cases held by the courts to contribute to sexual harassment because of a hostile work environment include such things as discussion by the harasser of his dissatisfaction with his sexual relationship with his partner, questions to the victim about what kind of underwear or birth control she uses or the nature of her sexual proclivities. Other examples include referring to a woman as ``honey,'' invitations for drinks, dinner or to go home with the harasser, comments about a woman's legs or breasts, remarks about the tightness of her clothes, rating women on the basis of physical attributes as well as jokes and off-color remarks.

Thus, the difference between the courts' standards of acceptable behavior in the workplace and what is commonly shown on prime-time television is bound to cause confusion for many workers and lead to unfortunate legal battles. Simply defending such cases is expensive, and jury ver dicts for the plaintiff often exceed seven figures.

An interesting intersection of these problems arose recently in the case of Jerold MacKenzie vs. the Miller Brewing Co., which involved the then top-rated TV sitcom ``Seinfeld.''

Miller fired MacKenzie after a female employee complained that he had discussed with her a racy episode in which Seinfeld forgets the name of his date, Dolores, and can only remember that it rhymes with a female body part. A trial court ordered Miller to pay MacKenzie $20 million. Perhaps one cost-effective way to give employees continuing training about what constitutes sexual harassment would be to simply have them watch more prime-time television -- as long as they don't discuss it at the office.