In and of itself, this is a ridiculous question. Aside from the legal ramifications, aggressive and vulgar name-calling should not be a part of anyone’s work place environment, and employers should investigate any report of similar conduct to avoid potential liability.

But whether the term “bitch” on its own constitutes harassment based on a person’s sex is central to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in Passananti v. Cook County.

A jury awarded Kimberly Passananti $70,000 (among other relief) for hostile workplace sexual harassment against her employer Cook County Sheriff’s Department after hearing evidence of how her supervisor called her “bitch” on a regular basis and in varying colorful epithets. The trial court, however, overturned the award as a matter of law. With regard to the sexual harassment claim, the court reasoned that the term “bitch” on its own requires additional evidence that it is harassment on the basis of a person’s sex.

Spoiler alert: the appellate court overturned the lower court’s decision and reinstated the $70,000 award.

To clarify their holding, the Seventh Circuit stated that the word “bitch” does not constitute sexual harassment in every context. To the contrary, it is the context that matter. However, they specifically disagreed with the lower court that the term bitch on its own can never support a sexual harassment claim without additional evidence that it’s derogatory against women. Is the issue any clearer now?

Apparently the lower court relied on a case where the victim was an ex-lover of the harasser, and that court found that when he called her a bitch it was not because she was a woman, but rather because of the past relationship between the two. The Seventh Circuit noted that while in that case it was appropriate to require additional evidence that the term was used on the basis of the victim’s sex, in circumstances like Passananti’s where the victim is subject to repeated hostile use of the word, it can reasonably be considered evidence of sexual harassment since it is a gender specific term.

Basically, the Seventh Circuit is saying, despite common usage of the term “bitch,” it has not been neutralized out of its meaning as a gender specific derogatory term.

Whether usage of the term “bitch” can support a claim for sexual harassment is another matter entirely since the threshold for Title VII violations and states’ anti-sexual harassment laws is the creation of a hostile work environment. To be actionable, the harassment conduct must be so severe and pervasive as to alter the terms of the person’s employment and create a hostile or abusive environment. Isolated incidents or offhand comments will not suffice. For more information on hostile work place sexual harassment, consult with a sexual harassment lawyer in San Bernardino.

Title VII also makes harassment by a supervisor that culminates in an adverse employment action illegal. Where an employee is being subjected to harassment based on their sex, and as a result of failure to comply with sexual demands (quid pro quo sexual harassment) or as a result of their gender they are demoted, passed up for promotion or denied any other benefits, liability can attach. If you or anyone you know is suffering disparate treatment of any kind on the basis of your sex, a sexual harassment lawyer in San Bernardino can help.