International Employment Lawyer
While the Finn decision may point to a broader interpretation of sex harassment, Littler’s Deborah Margolis notes that, in some ways, it may actually be limiting.
“This case confirms that for something about an individual’s physical appearance to relate to their protected characteristic, such as their gender, it needs to be more prevalent in those sharing the protected characteristic, than in those who do not,” Margolis explains.
“This might, therefore, leave some individuals without the ability to bring a claim where comments made about their physical appearance are not necessarily more prevalent in those sharing their protected characteristic, for example if a woman was teased for having facial hair.”
