Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services Incorporated et al.

In regard to the appropriateness of sexual harassment claims when the alleged victim was the same sex as the alleged harasser, the lower courts were extraordinarily inconsistent in their rulings. The District of Columbia Circuit in Barnes v. Costle (1977) acknowledged the possibility of sexual harassment under Title VII where a homosexual employer harassed an employee of either gender. In the Second Circuit case of Saulpaugh v. Monroe Community Hospital (1993), the court observed that harassment is harassment regardless of whether it is caused by a member of the same or opposite sex. In Gliddens v. Shell Oil Co. (1993), a court elaborated that male-on-male harassment with sexual overtones was not sex discrimination unless the employee could demonstrate that the employer treated him differently because of his sex. However, the Garcia v. Elf Atochem (1994) ruling barred all same-sex sexual harassment claims. In a heterosexual harassment case, the Seventh Circuit in Baskerville v. Culligan Int'l Co. (1995) noted that, although sexual harassment of women by men was the most common kind, same sex claims should not be excluded from Title VII consideration. The possibility existed that sexual harassment of men by women, or men by other men, or women by other women could be subject to claims in appropriate cases. However, the Fourth Circuit in McWilliams v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (1996) held that harassment among heterosexuals of the same sex cannot give rise to a hostile environment sexual harassment claim under Title VII. Clearly the lower courts lacked consensus on the whether Title VII applied to same-sex sexual harassment cases.