Sexual Harassment Complaint
Below is what a sexual harassment complaint might look like. Do not use it yourself; instead, seek a lawyer’s advice before doing anything. Complaints are factually and legal-specific, so this is not to be used even as a sample:
Complaint
1. The Plaintiff, Jane Doe, sues Defendant, A.B.C., L.L.C., under Title VII for sexual harassment and retaliation.
2. The Honorable Court has original jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3).
3. The venue is appropriate in the Gainesville Division under the local rules because the Defendant conducts business in Alachua County, Florida.
4. Plaintiff resides in Gainesville, Florida.
5. Defendant employs over 15 employees.
6. The Plaintiff is a female.
7. Plaintiff worked for Defendant.
8. Defendant was Plaintiff’s employer.
9. Plaintiff was sexually harassed by her supervisor from May 2012 through June 212.
10. Defendant knew about the sexual harassment of its supervisor.
11. Plaintiff reported the sexual harassment to Defendant on or about June 12, 2012.
12. The supervisor is a male.
13. The supervisor sexually harassed Plaintiff.
14. This supervisor sexually harassed other similarly situated female employees.
15. The supervisor’s sexual harassment was both severe and pervasive.
16. Plaintiff was subjected to verbal and visual sexual conduct.
17. The Plaintiff’s supervisor explicitly spoke to the Plaintiff about his problems.
18. The supervisor explicitly spoke to the Plaintiff about his desire to engage in sexual intercourse
19. Defendant engaged in quid pro quo sexual harassment.
20. Plaintiff’s supervisor explicitly offered to perform sexual acts on Plaintiff.
21. The Plaintiff’s supervisor would engage in physical things.
22. The supervisor’s prurient conduct was unwelcome.
23. The descriptions made Plaintiff physically sick.
24. Plaintiff reported the matter to Defendant.
25. The supervisor’s conduct was severe.
26. Specifically, the descriptions shook the foundation of Plaintiff’s sacred relationship.
27. Defendant did not engage in isolated prurient talk and actions.
28. Defendant engaged in such filthy conduct every workday.
29. Defendant sought to entice employees to perform work in exchange for their sexual pleasures while in the workplace.
30. Defendant, through the conduct of its manager, created an abusive work environment for Plaintiff because of her sex as well as that of other female subordinate employees.
31. The conduct was not teasing or mere inappropriate conduct.
32. It was predatory actions intended to groom subordinate employees first to discuss sex, second engage in sex while at work, and ultimately engage in sex with a management employee of Defendant.
33. The Plaintiff refused to fall into the trap.
34. The Plaintiff reported the sexual harassment.
35. Defendant took retaliatory action against Plaintiff.
36. Defendant failed to take prompt action to discourage reporting of sexual harassment and move to distance Plaintiff from the workplace with the ultimate goal of termination.
37. From June 1, 2012 (the date of the reporting to Defendant), Plaintiff’s termination was merely five weeks.
38. The adverse actions started promptly.
39. The Plaintiff filed her charge of discrimination with the EEOC within 180 days of being sexually harassed and discharged.
40. The EEOC issued a notice of right to sue letter.
41. Defendant is subject to Title VII.
42. Defendant was negligent in the training of its manager.
43. The Defendant was negligent in the supervision of its manager.
44. Defendant ignored the sexual harassment.
45. Defendant permitted the sexual harassment.
46. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for complaining about sexual harassment.
47. Defendant did not take prompt remedial action.
48. Plaintiff files suit within 90 days of receiving her notice of right to sue.
Count I – Sexual Harassment
49. Plaintiff reincorporates paragraphs 1 through 48 as if stated fully herein.
50. Plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome sexual advances by her supervisor.
51. Defendant knew or should have known that Plaintiff was being sexually harassed.
52. Defendant knew that Mr. Person, Plaintiff’s supervisor, was a serial sexual harasser, and it permitted Mr. Person to harass Plaintiff as well as other employees sexually.
53. Defendant did not take prompt remedial action.
54. Defendant sought to quiet reports of sexual harassment and took retaliatory action against Plaintiff.
55. Mr. Person was the Plaintiff’s supervisor.
56. Mr. Person would speak to Plaintiff about his parts.
57. Mr. Person would speak about his desire to have sexual intercourse.
58. Plaintiff was subjected to quid pro quo sexual harassment.
59. Defendant is responsible.
60. Mr. Person told Plaintiff that if she covered an extra shift, she could have sex.
61. Mr. Person explicitly stated that he wanted to perform sexual acts on Plaintiff.
62. Mr. Person wanted to take sexual turns on Plaintiff.
63. This is the language Plaintiff was forced to tolerate while working for Defendant.
64. Besides dirty words and thoughts, Mr. Person would engage in physical movements.
65. The actions of Mr. Person were horrific.
66. They were unwelcome.
67. The image of Mr. Person forcing himself onto Plaintiff made Plaintiff physically sick.
68. The sexual harassment of Mr. Person was not isolated.
69. Defendant knew about Mr. Person before the Union complained.
70. Defendant looked the other way.
71. Defendant knew that Mr. Person had the propensity to sexually harass female employees, and he did not care until the Union filed a grievance.
72. Defendant knew about Mr. Person prior to the grievance because Plaintiff had complained.
73. Had Defendant properly trained and supervised Mr. Person, Plaintiff would not have been sexually harassed.
74. Mr. Person was the Defendant’s Goal Manager.
75. Defendant does not follow its own Employee Handbook.
76. Defendant permitted Mr. Person to prey upon female employees.
77. Defendant gave Mr. Persona a platform to groom employees to first talk about sex, then to have sex while at work, and ultimately to have sex with him.
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for trial by jury, judgment, back pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, costs, post-judgment interest, and any other relief the Court deems appropriate and just.
Count II – Retaliation
78. Plaintiff reincorporates paragraphs 1 through 48 as if fully stated herein.
79. Plaintiff refused Defendant’s sexual overtures.
80. The Plaintiff reported the sexual harassment.
81. Defendant did not promptly act.
82. The Defendant only discharged Mr. Person after the Union filed a grievance.
83. Another Person, the director, stated that if there was continuous talk about Mr. Person, he would go on a firing spree.
84. Another Person stated that everyone who complained about Mr. Person was lying.
85. Plaintiff worked the night shift, which began at about 9:00 p.m.
86. On July 7, 2012, Plaintiff’s shift began at or about 10:00 p.m.
87. Plaintiff clocked in and worked.
88. Plaintiff’s shift was supposed to end at 6:00 a.m. on July 18, 2012.
89. Plaintiff worked past the end of her shift.
90. Plaintiff advised Defendant that she had to leave at or about 7:00 a.m.
91. After Plaintiff’s shift ended, Another Person told Plaintiff that he accepted her resignation.
92. Plaintiff did not resign.
93. Plaintiff immediately told Another Person that she did not resign and that it was retaliatory.
94. Another Person fired Plaintiff because she complained about sexual harassment.
95. The Union did not represent the Plaintiff.
96. The Plaintiff was fired by another person because he was upset that the Plaintiff had complained about sexual harassment, and it created more work for him.
97. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of Title VII because Plaintiff engaged in protected activity under the statute by objecting to sexual harassment.
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for trial by jury, judgment, back pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, costs, post-judgment interest, and any other relief the Court deems appropriate and just.