Skip to main content

Harassing Facebook Comments Made Off the Clock Can Create a Hostile Work Environment Claim


Maldonado-Catala v. Municipality of Naranjito - United States District Court, District of Puerto Rico


Facts:  Maribel Maldonado-Catala ("Maldonado-Catala") held a position with the Municipality of Naranjito as an emergency medical technician that began in 2008.  In 2010, Maldonado-Catala suffered a work related accident and was ordered to stop working.  Later that year, she accompanied a co-worker to complain about harassment from an emergency medical office director.  Maldonado-Catala alleged that she had been called "machito" (translated to mean "manly") on a daily basis.  Other suggestive comments were made to her as well.  While on unpaid leave, Maldonado-Catala received several offensive Facebook messages and filed a police report.  Afterward, Maldonado-Catala tried to report to work but was informed her EMT license was expired.  She indicated she did not have the money to renew it.

In 2012, Maldonado-Catala suffered another work related injury and was again instructed to stop working.  She returned to work over a year later but was informed she had been terminated because her job had been held open for a year (even though she lacked the EMT certification).  Maldonado-Catala filed suit against the parties and alleged a hostile work environment and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  The Municipality moved for summary judgment on the claims. 

Holding:  (Note, this analysis looks only at Maldonado-Catala's hostile work environment part of her claim).  The District Court looked at Maldonado-Catala's hostile work environment claim and found that sufficient evidence existed to allow the claim to proceed.  In this instance, the Court noted that while some of the incidents which led to the hostile work environment occurred outside the workplace (the Facebook messages), Maldonado-Catala's absence from the workplace did not make her any less subject to attack from the harassing conduct.  Consequently, the Court held that Maldonado-Catala was not precluded from relying upon the Facebook messages she received to establish her claim, solely because they occurred outside the workplace.

Judgment:  The District Court denied the Municipality's motion for summary judgment as to Maldonado-Catala's hostile work environment claim on the grounds that even though the offensive and harassing conduct occurred away from the workplace, there was sufficient evidence to allow her to proceed with this part of her claim.

The Takeaway:  I normally do not come across too many cases from the District Court in Puerto Rico that I highlight for readers.  This one was an exception for a reason:  employers (and employees) should note that harassing conduct that occurs outside the workplace or work hours does not necessarily prohibit a hostile work environment claim from proceeding.  I am not suggesting that employers become monitors of an employee's conduct 24/7.  However, I highlight this case as a way to caution employers that just because certain conduct occurs away from the workplace does not mean that employers can avoid any liability for the effect it has on employees while at work.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge McGiverin

Date:  October 26, 2015

Opinion:  www.theemployerhandbook.com/files/2015/11/MaldonadoNaranjito102615.pdf

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

Happening Tomorrow: Connecticut’s Minimum Wage Increases

For those employers and employees alike in Connecticut, mark your calendars as tomorrow, the minimum wage rate increases in the state from $13/hour to $14/hour. This wage hike comes after Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont had signed Public Act 19-4 into law in 2019 which progressively raised the state’s hourly minimum wage rate every year for five years.  In fact, next year, the hourly wage rate will top out at $15/hour.  Beginning in January of 2024, the hourly wage rate will be indexed to the employment cost index. For additional information:   https://portal.ct.gov/Office-of-the-Governor/News/Press-Releases/2022/06-2022/Governor-Lamont-Reminds-Residents-That-Minimum-Wage-Is-Scheduled-To-Increase-on-Friday
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more