In a recent trial in which this firm represented the restaurant and its owners against a claim that an alleged “assistant manager” so severely sexually harassed a waitress that the employee was criminally convicted of indecent sexual assault, it was left to a jury to decide the question of fact as to whether the alleged “assistant manager” performed such tasks around the restaurant that he, under the law, qualified as a “supervisor” and thus rendered the corporate entity “strictly liable” for his own misconduct. In that case, the restaurant and its owners prevailed before the jury, yet such is not always the case.
With proper legal documentation and planning before an act of misconduct is ever alleged, a restaurant and its owners need never be exposed to the whims of a jury in this regard. Indeed, spelling out in the company’s sexual harassment policy which employees are deemed to have “supervisory” authority is an effective and cost efficient device to avoid problems that later get heard in Court or the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. A restaurant is an expensive investment, so to lose the value of that investment and the benefit of a thriving business because of an employee’s impulsive, bad behavior, is a legal risk no business owner should overlook.