Wal-Mart Helps to Define Re-Training Time Parameters

Today, the world's largest retailer agreed to pay $315,000 to settle two EEOC sexual harassment lawsuits.

The lawsuits charged that company employees subjected 3 female employees to sexual harassment at a store in Bradenton. As part of the settlement, Wal-Mart must post its non-discrimination policy and provide annual harassment training for managers.

As almost everyone in our industry is aware, Wal-Mart also faces a class-action lawsuit in federal court filed on behalf of as many as 1.6 million female employees alleging sexual discrimination. The company has appealed a decision in that case that allows the women to sue as a group.

So to state the obvious, all eyes are on Wal-Mart. The institution of annual harassment training sends a strong message to the employer community – harassment training is critical, and needs to take place on a regular basis.

Following the landmark US Supreme Court decisions in Faragher and Ellerth, employers have struggled with what constitutes “periodic” training under federal law. The Wal-Mart settlement suggests the highest standard – every year. California’s AB 1825 requires a standard not far behind – every two years.

So non-California employers should take note. Federal law expects you to conduct ongoing, “periodic” harassment prevention training. Training less than every two years will raise an uncomfortable question. Why not follow the trend of more regular training?

That’s not a question you want to have to answer in court.

Tags: Federal Harassment Training, harassment training, sexual harassment, sexual harassment lawsuit, sexual harassment training,