Employers are responsible for acts of harassment by co-workers where the employer or supervisor knew or should have known of the conduct and failed to take immediate and corrective action feasible to the offense.

             The quid pro quo and hostile work environment are the two distinct forms of sexual harassment recognized by the EEOC and the courts. The most common form of sexual harassment is the quid pro quo. The essence of a quid pro quo claim is that an employer who has the authority to alter employment opportunities propositions a subordinate for sexual favors in order to keep their job or receive a promotion. The conduct must be sexually oriented and unwanted. The sexual demand must be interpreted as a proposition for sexual favors in return or exchange for tangible job benefits. Quid pro quo is a Latin phrase meaning one thing in return for another.

             In hostile environment harassment, the offender does not demand a sexual exchange. Instead, a pattern of behavior makes the victim"s job so unpleasant that the person"s work is affected. The harassment may consist of asking sexual favors, making sexual comments, telling sexual jokes, or displaying pornographic pictures. The hostile environment must be sufficiently pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim"s employment and create an abusive working environment. The victim need not be subjected to harassment for any extended period of time; one act of severe conduct may be sufficient to prove a hostile work environment. However, that act has to be quite severe in nature. The more severe the conduct, the less pervasive the conduct needs to be to create a hostile working environment. One rape would be enough; one dinner invitation would not. Trivial unwelcome sexual conduct, such as asking for a date is not actionable unless it is pervasive. Unwelcomed intentional touching of intimate body areas is sufficiently offensive to alter the conditions at work.