Scranton, Pennsylvania Sexual Harassment Lawyer

Sexual harassment is a serious issue that can severely undermine an individual’s sense of security, dignity, and well-being in the workplace. At Polishan Solfanelli, we represent workers in Scranton, Pennsylvania, who have experienced unwelcome conduct, offensive remarks, or discriminatory treatment based on gender or sexuality. Our attorneys are dedicated to protecting your rights and helping you navigate the complexities of filing claims under federal and state laws. When confronting unlawful workplace behaviors and potential retaliation, our legal team stands ready to provide compassionate guidance and committed advocacy every step of the way. We understand that confronting harassment at work can be daunting, which is why we take the time to listen to your concerns and pursue the most effective course of action on your behalf. To learn about your options or schedule a consultation, call Polishan Solfanelli at 570-562-4520. We look forward to helping you seek the justice you deserve.

Applicable Federal and State Laws 

Sexual harassment in Pennsylvania workplaces is prohibited under both federal and state legislation that outlaws discrimination on the basis of sex. At the federal level, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to most employers that have 15 or more employees. This federal statute bars discrimination and harassment that affect hiring, firing, pay, promotions, or any other term or condition of employment. Pennsylvania law complements these federal safeguards through the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA), which governs workplaces with at least four employees. In some contexts, smaller employers in Pennsylvania who are not covered by Title VII may still be subject to the PHRA’s requirements.

Under Title VII and the PHRA, unlawful sexual harassment includes unwelcome advances, demands for sexual favors, or any verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature that conditions an employment benefit on submission to such conduct or creates a hostile work environment. Overt threats, direct requests for sexual activity, or repeated lewd or demeaning comments can form the basis of a legal claim, especially if they negatively affect a person’s ability to undertake job responsibilities or work comfortably. Employers must strive to maintain clear anti-harassment policies, provide regular training on respectful workplace conduct, and investigate all complaints promptly. Taking steps to correct inappropriate actions when they surface may help reduce legal exposure and promote a more positive work setting.

Although independent contractors are typically excluded from these protections if they truly operate with independence, there can be circumstances where a contractor might be deemed an employee, depending on the degree of control the hiring entity exerts over work activities. Pennsylvania law takes a fact-specific approach to this determination, examining factors such as the nature of supervision, the right to direct specific job tasks, and how payment is distributed. Clarifying the relationship at the outset can help both parties understand which legal safeguards might apply. If you have questions about these laws or need representation, a sexual harassment lawyer in Scranton, Pennsylvania can help you understand your rights and options.

Coverage of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Similar Protected Traits 

Recent legal interpretations affirm that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity can be treated as a form of sex-based discrimination under federal law. Pennsylvania employers with the requisite number of workers may thus find themselves responsible for ensuring that harassment on these grounds does not occur. In addition, some municipalities within Pennsylvania have long included sexual orientation and gender identity as protected characteristics in local anti-discrimination ordinances. Therefore, if inappropriate conduct targets an individual because of their sexual orientation or perceived gender identity, such behavior may form the basis for a viable sexual harassment or discrimination claim.

Workplace harassment aimed at a person’s attire, pronouns, or perceived deviation from sex stereotypes may also breach these statutory protections if it contributes to a hostile or intimidating work environment. Employers should make certain that their existing anti-harassment policies address bullying or differential treatment connected to sexual orientation or gender identity. Training materials can go beyond traditional sex discrimination examples to include scenarios reflecting the diversity of today’s workforce. By offering clear reporting avenues and educating managers about these broader legal standards, an employer can promote an equitable environment that meets or exceeds Pennsylvania’s legal requirements.

If you have questions about your rights or responsibilities regarding harassment in the workplace, a Scranton, Pennsylvania sexual harassment attorney can provide valuable guidance.

Filing Deadlines and Administrative Steps 

Individuals who believe they have experienced sexual harassment in Pennsylvania typically must first file a formal complaint with a government agency before initiating any lawsuit. Depending on the particulars and choice of legal framework, individuals might file with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC), or with both agencies simultaneously.

1. PHRA Filing Period: Employees who plan to seek relief under the PHRA generally have 180 days from the date of the last alleged act of harassment to start the administrative process. If a worker files initially with the PHRC and requests cross-filing, the PHRC can automatically forward or share that information with the EEOC. This practice helps preserve employees’ rights under both state and federal law.
2. Title VII Filing Period: Those filing under Title VII in Pennsylvania typically have 300 days to submit a charge of discrimination to the EEOC because Pennsylvania is considered a “deferral state” with its own agency (the PHRC). By contrast, workers in states without such an agency may only have 180 days. After receiving a charge, the EEOC may investigate, attempt conciliation, or possibly dismiss the complaint at an early stage.
3. Cross-Filing Strategy: Some individuals are unsure whether to bring claims under only Title VII, only the PHRA, or both. In many cases, cross-filing is wise to ensure that any potential remedy available under each law is preserved. When completing the administrative submission, individuals typically indicate on the charge form that they also want the information sent to the other agency. This approach can avoid missed deadlines and ensures that all claims are evaluated under both frameworks.

Regardless of whether the agency process concludes with a dismissal, settlement, or other action, an individual must pay close attention to the final documents issued (for example, an EEOC “Dismissal and Notice of Rights” letter or the PHRC’s own notice). Once that notice of rights is received, an employee usually has a limited time to initiate a lawsuit. Under federal law, for example, individuals often have 90 days from receiving the EEOC letter to file a lawsuit in court. Pennsylvania law deadlines can be distinctive, so retaining copies of all documents and following procedural instructions carefully is crucial.

Understanding the Severe or Pervasive Standard 

Both federal and Pennsylvania courts use a “severe or pervasive” standard to evaluate whether workplace behavior amounts to illegal sexual harassment. This standard looks at the entire context of the alleged conduct—its frequency, seriousness, and effect on the victim’s ability to do their job. Conduct that is trivial or occasional might not meet the threshold unless it is especially egregious in nature—for instance, explicit sexual threats or physical aggression could be sufficient even if they occur only once.

When determining whether conduct is unwelcome, investigators and courts typically review whether the targeted individual visibly objected to or attempted to avoid the harassing behavior. The victim’s subjective perception is weighed against how a hypothetical reasonable person in a similar situation would feel. If jokes or comments concerning sexuality, physical appearance, or sexual activity become so frequent that they interfere with day-to-day responsibilities or make a person fear going to work, the behavior may well meet the severe or pervasive threshold. This method of evaluation is inclusive of scenarios that run the gamut from repeated remarks to a single severe instance. If you are dealing with these types of situations, a sexual harassment attorney in Scranton, Pennsylvania can help you assess your options and determine the appropriate next steps.

Types of Workplace Sexual Harassment 

Sexual harassment claims filed in Pennsylvania generally fall into two prime categories:

1. Quid Pro Quo Harassment: This occurs when a supervisor or someone in authority demands or suggests that sexual favors are the price of a promotion, raise, favorable evaluation, or even job security. An employer representative might say, “Agree to a date and I’ll give you a glowing evaluation,” or “Go out with me or you risk being fired.” If a tangible job action is linked to accepting or rejecting these sexual advances, the legal standard for quid pro quo harassment may be met.
2. Hostile Work Environment: This type of claim focuses on unwelcome conduct that is so severe or pervasive that it unreasonably interferes with a person’s job performance or creates an intimidating environment. The offending behavior can stem from managers, co-workers, or sometimes nonemployees, such as clients or vendors. Examples include persistent sexual jokes, circulating explicit images in the workplace, repeated attempts to discuss someone’s private sex life without invitation, or humiliating remarks about a person’s body. A successful claim hinges on demonstrating that the harassment was unwelcome and sufficiently serious to disrupt work conditions for the victim. Repeated slurs, belittling nicknames, or acts intended to embarrass the individual could all contribute to a hostile environment finding.

Protections Against Same-Sex Harassment 

Sexual harassment protections also cover situations where the alleged harasser and the victim share the same sex or gender identity. The relevant laws aim to prevent discrimination “because of sex,” and the harassing behavior need not occur between opposite genders to be actionable. In many instances, these claims arise when a person faces ongoing offensive remarks, unwanted physical contact, or repeated sexual propositions from a member of the same sex. The “severe or pervasive” standard applies in these cases, just as it does for opposite-sex harassment. Regardless of the parties’ genders or sexual orientations, the determining question remains whether the misconduct is unwelcome and serious enough to create an abusive or intimidating working environment.

Because sexual harassment often overlaps federal and state law, many individuals leverage cross-filing to protect all potential claims. One common misconception is that a person who files with the PHRC automatically satisfies every aspect of EEOC requirements. While the agencies do cooperate, details sometimes differ depending on how the form is completed. Individuals who wish to invoke their rights under Title VII should be explicit about cross-filing when they submit the complaint to the PHRC. Conversely, those starting with the EEOC should confirm in writing that they want the PHRC to receive their materials. Doing so helps avoid confusion and preserves claims during the administrative review.

Another important element of cross-filing is paying attention to different deadlines. Although Pennsylvania’s 180-day deadline under the PHRA may be shorter than the 300-day period under Title VII, in most circumstances employees can protect both sets of rights if they file promptly and ensure the matter is directed to both agencies. Importantly, if you wait longer than 180 days, you may lose the ability to pursue PHRA remedies. Meanwhile, missing the 300-day mark risks losing Title VII protections. Being aware of these distinctions allows employees to take timely action and not inadvertently waive claims.

If you have questions about the process or want advice about your rights, a Scranton, Pennsylvania sexual harassment lawyer can help you navigate cross-filing requirements.

Individual Liability Considerations Under the PHRA 

Under Title VII, liability typically falls on the employer entity itself, rather than individual managers. However, the PHRA contains an “aiding and abetting” provision allowing personal liability for coworkers, supervisors, or managers who directly assist in the commission of an unlawful discriminatory act. Simply knowing about harassment and failing to address it may not be enough to trigger personal liability. Instead, the individual must have helped escalate, perpetuate, or steer the harassing behavior. For instance, a manager who orchestrates or condones continuous sexual jokes in staff meetings could face personal liability if those actions contribute significantly to an employee’s harassment.

Examples of aiding and abetting might include a supervisor who receives repeated complaints of sexual misconduct but actively discourages the individual from reporting it further, or even threatens negative consequences if the person does not “drop it.” Another scenario could be a manager who arranges scheduling and tasks in a way designed to isolate or demean a complaining employee. By highlighting these aspects in training, employers can encourage managers and staff to intervene early, thereby decreasing the risk of personal liability for those who allow harassment to continue unchecked.

Local Ordinances and Additional Protections 

Many municipalities within Pennsylvania have local ordinances that address workplace discrimination and harassment more expansively than state or federal statutes. Cities such as Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Erie, Harrisburg, and others have their own non-discrimination protections and agencies to handle claims. Some of these ordinances apply to smaller employers than those covered under the PHRA, which can broaden the pool of protected workers. Furthermore, local agencies may have unique procedures, deadlines, or enforcement provisions that differ from state and federal rules.

For example, a city ordinance might require filing a complaint within a particular timeframe or allow a broader scope of damages. Employees may also have the option to file with a municipal human relations commission instead of, or in addition to, the PHRC or EEOC. When dealing with a Pennsylvania municipality that has a local fair practices law, it is often advantageous to verify each set of requirements. An individual who misses a filing window under the PHRA might still be timely under a local ordinance with different deadlines. Employers operating in multiple cities should keep track of the various local standards to ensure compliance in each jurisdiction.

Timeline After Receiving a Right to Sue Letter 

After an individual files a complaint with the EEOC, that agency might issue what is commonly termed a “Notice of Right to Sue.” This notice can also come if the EEOC dismisses a charge or if the agency concludes its investigation and decides not to pursue litigation. Under federal law, once you receive your notice, you typically have 90 days to initiate a lawsuit in federal court. Failing to file within that 90-day window likely results in losing the claim under Title VII. It is therefore critical for employees to track both the date they receive the letter and any detailed instructions in the letter itself.

A similar timeline can arise with the PHRC, although the exact procedures differ. Once the PHRC has closed its investigation and provides a right-to-sue letter or final decision, an individual might have a short deadline to pursue the matter in state court. If an individual forgets to act within the stated timeframe, the PHRA claims are usually forfeited. It is possible that local ordinances also have final determinations and short filing windows for lawsuits, so employees should be attentive to each distinct timeline. Acting quickly upon receipt of a right-to-sue letter ensures that the claim can be reviewed on its merits, rather than dismissed for procedural reasons.

If you have questions about what happens after receiving a right to sue letter, consider reaching out to a sexual harassment lawyer in Scranton, Pennsylvania for guidance.

Differences in Damages Under Title VII and PHRA 

Under Title VII, individuals who prevail may recover back pay, front pay, compensatory damages for emotional suffering, and—if the conduct was particularly egregious—punitive damages. The total amount of compensatory and punitive damages is subject to caps that vary according to the size of the employer, with larger employers potentially facing higher caps. If a party is successful, it may also be possible to recover attorney fees and related litigation costs, which can be beneficial given the expense of legal proceedings.

By contrast, the PHRA does not generally permit an award of punitive damages in employment-related disputes. Instead, successful claimants can recover back pay, front pay, emotional distress damages, and sometimes reimbursement for legal fees. This difference in available remedies is one of the primary reasons employees may choose to assert claims under both Title VII and the PHRA. Even if punitive damages are not obtainable under state law, an employee still may secure other forms of monetary or injunctive relief. In addition, an employer found in violation might be ordered to adjust workplace practices or reassign management duties, illustrating that the PHRA can nonetheless impose significant consequences.

Retaliation Protections 

Both Title VII and the PHRA prohibit employer retaliation against workers who file harassment complaints, assist in investigations, or oppose sexual harassment in other lawful ways. Examples of retaliatory conduct might include demoting an employee who cooperates with an official investigation, assigning undesirable shifts or projects, cutting hours, or subjecting the individual to harsher performance reviews or disciplinary measures. An employee might notice a sudden shift in workplace dynamics right after lodging a complaint, such as being relocated to a less visible area or excluded from normal team functions.

Retaliation claims can be easier to prove in certain scenarios, because the central issue often becomes whether the employer’s negative action closely followed the protected activity. When employees show that their circumstances worsened shortly after raising a complaint, it can create an inference of retaliation. Employers, on the other hand, may need to provide legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for taking adverse actions, such as documented performance problems or business restructuring needs. Because retaliation is independently prohibited, an individual can potentially succeed on a retaliation claim even if the underlying harassment claim is not ultimately substantiated—so long as the protected activity is found to be a motivating factor for the adverse employment action.

Same-Sex and Nontraditional Power Structures 

In some workplace environments, the harasser might not be a direct supervisor or might even be someone in a less senior role. The power dynamics in these cases can be subtle but remain actionable under Pennsylvania law if the conduct is severe or pervasive. Same-sex harassment, as previously noted, is also prohibited, and it can arise in environments where discriminatory attitudes, sexual teasing, or hazing behaviors are motivated by perceptions of how a person should or should not present themselves based on gender stereotypes. The law does not limit protection to only hierarchical relationships—co-workers at the same level or clients, customers, or vendors can also create a hostile work environment that violates Title VII and the PHRA. Employers are encouraged to foster a culture where employees understand that inappropriate behavior from any source can be reported and corrected. If you have concerns about workplace harassment, speaking with a Scranton, Pennsylvania sexual harassment attorney can help you understand your legal options.

Remedies and Employer Responsibilities 

Beyond financial compensation, remedies may also include reinstatement, promotions, or a requirement that an employer institute or update official policies. Courts sometimes mandate ongoing reporting or training to ensure the workplace remains free of harassment. Encouraging employees to come forward with complaints can help employers address problems before they escalate into costly legal claims. Having multiple channels for reporting—such as a human resources representative, a higher-level manager, or an anonymous hotline—further underscores a commitment to addressing harassment promptly.

Workplace trainings should cover not only the basic definitions of harassment but also the organizational processes for filing complaints, how to conduct thorough investigations, and what sorts of corrective actions might be taken. These steps help prevent misconduct from persisting. Additionally, clearly defining the confidentiality standards in investigations helps reassure employees that retaliation will not be tolerated. Prompt, even-handed discipline of those found to have engaged in harassment may reduce the employer’s overall liability, as some courts consider whether the employer made a good-faith effort to remedy the situation once informed.

Procedural Consequences and Next Steps 

After filing a sexual harassment complaint and receiving a right-to-sue letter (or an equivalent document) from a governmental agency, an employee’s next step is typically to decide whether to pursue litigation. If the matter proceeds to court, aspects such as discovery, depositions, pretrial motions, and potential settlement discussions come into play. Mediation might also be an option, depending on the court or the preferences of the parties. Even after litigation begins, many cases resolve through negotiation or settlement conferences. Agencies at both the state and federal levels typically encourage early resolution, especially when there is clear evidence of wrongdoing.

If an employer has internal grievance or arbitration policies, an employee should check whether using those channels is mandatory or optional, although forced arbitration clauses can sometimes alter the traditional path of a lawsuit. Some local ordinances may require an initial attempt at conciliation before heading to court. Understanding these rules can be crucial to preserving legal claims and exploring avenues for a timelier resolution. Because sexual harassment claims can be intricate, employees frequently gather documentation—emails, text messages, performance reviews, or notes on incidents—to substantiate their allegations if formal litigation becomes unavoidable.

Concluding Observations on Maintaining Compliance 

A proactive stance on preventing sexual harassment can significantly reduce disputes under Pennsylvania and federal law. By establishing robust reporting channels, offering recurring training, and thoroughly investigating any allegations, employers can cultivate a respectful culture that diminishes many of the risks associated with harassment claims. Harassment is not only unlawful but also detrimental to workforce morale and productivity. Pennsylvania law, through the PHRA, underscores that accountability extends beyond the organization to individuals who aid and abet prohibited behavior. Likewise, the availability of different damage awards under state and federal law encourages employees to pursue all legal avenues if violations arise.

Employers operating in various municipalities must keep abreast of local ordinances and deadlines, while employees should remain mindful of the multiple administrative and judicial actions that may be available. Timely filing preserves claims, and cross-filing can help assert every possible protection. By integrating knowledgeable staff training, supportive policies, and consistent enforcement, workplaces in Pennsylvania can mitigate legal risk and uphold the dignity of every employee. If you have questions or concerns about workplace conduct or need guidance, consider consulting a sexual harassment attorney in Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Assistance With Legal Issues in the Workplace

At Polishan Solfanelli, we understand how workplace sexual harassment can undermine your sense of security, hamper your productivity, and impact your wellbeing. Whether you suspect an imbalance of power, have concerns about co-worker conduct, or face unwelcome remarks that create a hostile environment, our experienced Scranton, Pennsylvania sexual harassment lawyers are prepared to discuss possible legal avenues with you. Together, we can review deadlines, administrative filing steps, and potential remedies under both federal and state regulations. By collaborating with supportive counsel, you can reduce uncertainty and determine how best to proceed with your case. We strive to uphold the dignity of every employee by providing guidance that focuses on achieving fair outcomes. Let us help you navigate legal protocols, gather relevant evidence, and advocate for a respectful, law-abiding workplace. Contact Polishan Solfanelli at 570-562-4520 immediately to start addressing the issues you face and move toward a more secure professional path.