Workplace: The Shank V. CRST Case

When it comes to the workplace there isn’t much leeway in what you can and cant do to your fellow coworkers, yet cases of physical and verbal harassment are appearing at an alarming rate. It is safe to assume that your physical and emotional wellbeing will be protected and upheld by management while in the workplace, although with all of these harassment cases popping up lately it is clear that this is a huge misconception. This leads me into the Shank V. CRST case. The Shank V. CRST case is a sexual harassment lawsuit that was filed against CRST (Cedar Rapids Steel Transport) by one of their trainees Karen Shank. In 2005 Shank went out on the road with her assigned trainer John Wilson to learn the basics of truck driving in a 28 day session.

According to Shank, CRST wouldn’t pay for separate motel rooms for the two drivers, so she felt economically pressured to spend the night in the same motel room as Wilson.
According to Shank, Wilson continuously took all of his clothes off in front of her and would make sexual comments to her while touching her inappropriately. This continued for the entirety of the 28 days and eventually Wilson raped Shank. After the horrific 28-day training session Shank quit CRST and filed a sexual harassment lawsuit. In the lawsuit Shank claimed that CRST allowed a hostile work environment by failing to prevent Wilson’s unwanted touching and sexual comments. Since CRST would not purchase for separate hotel rooms for two different gender workers Shank had a solid case on her hands. The lawsuit was filed in 2006, and eventually the case ended up in front of a California jury in March. CRST stated, “What we said to the jurors was, “It’s not like our client expected to go there and have tea. She knew what she was getting into, but then you cross a line.”” The jury felt that CRST and its trainer’s behavior were insidious and disregarded Shank’s rights as a human being and she deserved to win the case. Shank filed the lawsuit for $391,328 but the jury awarded Shank $1.17 million in punitive charges. The extra money awarded for punitive charges was allowed under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
CRST even tried appealing the verdict stating, “We’re very disappointed in the jury’s findings and have a lot of grounds for appeal”. CRST also claimed that Shank went into the truck driving business knowing it wouldn’t be easy work and that truck driving was typically a male dominated industry. CRST appealed the verdict and lost once again because the jury felt that CRST management was still at fault for their incompetence when it came to overnight training sessions. Shank is currently in college preparing for a different occupation, one that she hopefully won’t be sexually harassed at.
When management knows of harassment being conducted in the workplace but remains idle in their actions a lawsuit can arise.

Sometimes a member of management is the person responsible for the harassment and the victim may feel as though they’re defenseless against the harassment. The victim might be worried that they may be fired if they speak up about the harassment so they remain silent. This leads me into the next case, Steinhoff V. Hooters. Sarah Steinhoff began working for the Newport Hooters in August of 1996 as a server. Steinhoff claims that she was sexually harassed on multiple accounts by Tom Bredenberg who was a manager at the Newport Hooters. Steinhoff stated that Bredenberg constantly subjected her and other waitresses to a plethora of sexual comments that seemed to never stop. Steinhoff also stated that Bredenberg didn't seem to be able to talk to the girls without some kind of sexual innuendo and that he always had to be touching and invading their personal space. In the trail, Steinhoff stated some of the comments that Bredenberg made to her. Bredenberg constantly asked her to go home or to a hotel with him and would state that he wanted to take her home and tie her up. She said that comments like these were "nonstop and they were very offensive" and that they made her feel "like a piece of meat, degraded, and

violated."
Every Hooters has a strict policy against sexual harassment that Steinhoff knew about because it is included in the orientation package that all waitresses receive when they become employees at Hooters.

The packet even stated that sexual harassment could be reported confidentially to an "800" number or to a supervisor. Steinhoff realized that some customers would be talking to her in a sexual manner but she never thought she would be getting it from a manager. Steinhoff reported the sexual harassment to another manager Solomon Makonnen, who blew it off and told her to talk to a branch manager. Steinhoff told Makonnen that she just wanted Bredenburg to be reprimanded and for the sexual conduct to stop. Unfotunately Bredenburg continued harassing her so she decided to take the case to court. The jury came to a verdict awarding Steinhoff $25,000 in compensatory damages, and $250,000 in punitive damages.

As you can see sexual harassment in the workplace is alive and well. In most cases if a sexual harassment situation comes up in the workplace a manger will usually fire the harasser although in some instances that isn’t always the case. As a worker you may feel trapped if management does nothing to stop the sexual harassment being conducted but it is good to always remember that you need to tell someone because that is the only way that the sexual harassment will be

stopped.