This is for my future reference BTW. If a man hangs a “girlie” calendar in his cubicle, and women ARE NOT offended by it, is it still sexual harassment? i.e. does its merely PRESCENCE constitute harassment.
IANAL but the short answer is, it depends.
It’s sexual harassment if it creates a “hostile work environment” on the basis of sex. In other words, if someone complains about it it’s sexual harassment, otherwise it’s not. Any company with a brain in its corporate head would instruct employees that the calendar is inappropriate for a workplace and tell the employee in question to take it down.
IANAL, but it seems that this could be a “grey” area, because, even if the women you work with aren’t offended, somebody coming in to the office on business might be. In that case you might risk causing the company to lose business which would be, you know, bad.
If nobody is offended though, it seems like it would be hard to call if harassment.
Okay, Otto’s post came up the same time as mine.
Thanks guys. IANALE, so I asked.
okay, i looked this up on google, and couldn’t find it there. what does “IANALE” mean?
IMHO, it means I Am Not A Lawyer (Either)
If there’s a doubt, its offensive. Even if you are on good terms now with this employee, if things sour for some other reason, she can sue you for this harassment, and the jury won’t care - she’ll say she hid her shame from her loathsome workmates. You have to present the calendar of course - many people have seen it, and know you’d be lying if you said there’s no such nudie calendau.
It’s an alternate form of “NAIAL”.
There was one airline, a few years ago, where the stewardesses got a huge amount of money because the pilots of the plane had a girlie calendar in the cockpit. It only takes one woman to sue.
I would say it also hinges on your definition of ‘girlie’. If they’re not actually nude, and their poses aren’t overtly sexual, and the calender isn’t the size of a movie poster, I don’t see much of a problem.
I take enormous issue with this. Just because someone complains DOES NOT mean its sexual harrassment. There was a time when it did. But in today’s ultra-PC world people will complain just because it gives them power (knowing they can get it removed) not because it really offends them.
Stick with landscapes, 'K?
Here ya go. Much better! 
But what about photos of the Grand Tetons?
It’s too bad this photographer doesn’t publish a calendar. What could be more wholesome than natrual rock formations?
I just had this conversation with a guy who decides “just cause” for proceeding with prosecution from the Labor Board or whatever in central California.
He said that basically it can be construed as harassment just because it wasn’t equal. If you had both genders, it would apparently be harder to prove any discrimination or hostility. But I bet that nudie easily crosses the line.
BTW, he said that a LOT of callers think he’s a government detective who will go out and dig up evidence for them. Actually, you need some very solid leads of evidence or names and numbers of witnesses. Otherwise, it’s just a contest of “Yes you did” and “No I didn’t”.
BUT, he said that many companies run scared and prohibit all kinds of things just because they don’t want to be occupied with supplying him documents for months.
It’s not like women are the only people who might find something like this to be a contribution to a hostile workplace.
I think one could ask how you “knew” that nobody was offended.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Hail Ants *
**I would say it also hinges on your definition of ‘girlie’. If they’re not actually nude, and their poses aren’t overtly sexual, and the calender isn’t the size of a movie poster, I don’t see much of a problem.
**
[QUOTE]
Unfortunately whether you see it as a problem or not is irrelevant. All it takes is for one person to feel uncomfortable because of it, and it becomes a very large problem.
I worked with a man who was asked to take down his “girlie” calendar. It was pretty tame - I think it might have been a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit calendar. Instead, he cut out pictures of Olympic figure skaters and posted them in his cubicle. Those pictures were offensive (to me and many others), not simply because of the poses the girls were in. What was offensive was that the man who did this was completely lewd. If a woman who was interested in figure skating had posted the same pictures, my guess is no one would have been offended. Yes, it’s a double standard and not necessarily right. But I offer this to illustrate a point - better safe than sorry.
I’m not a lawyer, but I believe US laws prohibiting harassment require the plaintiff to establish that the behaviour in question was something a “reasonable person” would find offensive. I know that’s pretty vague, but I think it’s intended to give juries the ability to exercise their judgement.