美國最高法院對工作場所性騷擾爭議第一則判決之研究－－Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson一案之評析

The First Decision on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court-A Critical Assessment of the Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson Case

在一九八六年，美國最高法院首度於Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson一案，對日益引人注目之工作場所性騷擾問題加以判決。一般而言，它在本案中不但確認各聯邦下級法院將這類事件視為是一違法性別歧視，而得根據一九六四年民權法第七章（Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964） 尋求救濟之立場，同時，還將該第七章中有關「工作條件，待遇或優遇」（terms, onditions, or privileges ofemployment） 之文義做較廣義之詮釋，而進一步判決任何嚴重而普遍之性騷擾行為，如果不當影響被害人之就業情形，包括其心理安寧福祉（psychological well-being），而造成一惡劣之工作環境時，則被害人即使並未蒙受任何有形之經濟損失，亦得根據該法第七章提起此類就業歧視訴訟。然而，本案對雇主在其管理監督者（supervisor）觸犯敵意工作環境性騷擾行為時之法律責任（employer liability）爭點上，卻仍未能解決各聯邦下級法院相當歧異之見解，直到最近才由該院進一步加以澄清。本文以下分述此案之重要事實、聯邦下級法院之判決、聯邦最高法院之判決、此案判決之直接影響，以及該國專家學者對此判決之正反兩面評論等事項。由於此案屬該院所謂「劃時代判決」（landmark decisions）之一，因此，在我國設法建構工作場所性騷擾法制之際，實值得對之深討。

Sexual harassment in the workplace is a widespread and sreious problem in the United States.In 1986, the U.S.Supreme Court unanimouslyaffirmed in MeritorSavingsBank v.Vinson, one of its landmarkdecisionsin employment discrimination, that sexual harassment based on an offensive work environment is a form of sex discriminationprohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, However, the Court also declinedto issue a definitiverule on the issue of employer liability, thus, leaving unresolved the lower courts have found most troublingincasesofhostileenvironment sexualharassmentcreatedby supervisoryemployees.This papertries to make a detailedanalysisof this importantdecision.First, itoutlinesseveralimportantfederalstatutes governing this type of sex discrimination in the workplace and analyzes a number of earlier lower court decisions.Second, it describes briefly the major facts, lower courts'rulings and the decisionsrenderedby the Supreme Court itself, includingthe majorityand concurringopinions.Finally, it makes a critical assessmentof this important decisions, including its merits, shortcomingsand several unsolved issues.