Gil Diekmann Quoted in The ABA Journal

The September 16, 2005 ABA Journal E-Report carries an article ("Sexual Harassment Need Not Be Sexual, Court Rules; 9th Circuit Panel Finds Boss’s Bullying of Women Is Actionable") that includes Gil's perspective on the recent Christopher v. National Education Association sexual harassment decision in Alaska.

"In a Sept. 2 opinion, the San Francisco-based court found that a pattern of workplace abuse directed at women can violate Title VII even if it’s not overtly motivated by lust or a desire to get rid of female employees. . . . "In its reversal of the district court ruling, the three-judge circuit panel noted there is no legal requirement that hostile acts be overtly sex- or gender-specific to be valid claims under Title VII. . . . The opinion notes that in future cases, quantitative comparisons between genders may not survive summary judgment because the difference in treatment will be too slight."

"It’s no new development to say that if you’re meaner to women than to men, that’s actionable discrimination," says Gilmore F. Diekmann Jr., a San Francisco employment defense lawyer. He mentions a section in the opinion that considers the plaintiffs’ subjective reactions to Harvey’s alleged behavior. "The bottom line is, maybe somebody’s perception might be something to consider, but I don’t read the court as saying that an individual woman’s subjective perception that she was being treated unfairly is going to carry the day," he adds. "There’s a lot of authority that says subjective observations are not relevant." According to Diekmann, it’s more common for men than women to bully in the workplace. "The real loudmouth boors are men," he says, adding that when women bully, it’s often more covert.