Sixth Circuit Holds Employer Not Vicariously Liable For Actions Of Alleged Supervisor In Title VII Same-Sex Sexual Harassment Case, Affirming Summary Judgment For Employer

by FordHarrison


Executive Summary: Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Hylko v. U.S. Steel Corporation affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the employer in a lawsuit alleging same-sex sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the Michigan Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), finding that the plaintiff failed to establish that the employer was vicariously liable for the alleged sexual harassment. The Court of Appeals found that the alleged harasser was not a supervisor under Title VII, since he “was not authorized to effect a significant change in [the plaintiff’s] employment status.” The Sixth Circuit also rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the employer should be held liable under a co-worker liability theory, since the employer, among other things, transferred and demoted the accused harasser following the plaintiff’s complaint, which admittedly ended the harassment.

Background of the Case

The plaintiff, David Hylko, Jr. (Hylko), and the accused harasser, John Hemphill (Hemphill), worked at a U.S. Steel plant. Hylko, a shift-manager, and Hemphill, the process coordinator, worked closely together. Hemphill trained Hylko and assigned his duties, and both reported to the Area Manager, who reported to the Division Manager. Hylko claimed that Hemphill asked him about his sex life on a regular basis, which made Hylko “uncomfortable.” Hylko further claimed that Hemphill grabbed his buttocks on two occasions, and on one occasion grabbed his penis. Additionally, Hylko claimed that on another occasion, Hemphill placed a banana in his zipper and “poked” another employee with it.

Hylko eventually complained about Hemphill’s behavior to the Area and Division Managers and to human resources. Hylko accepted a transfer to another area of the facility to avoid working with Hemphill. When questioned, Hemphill admitted grabbing Hylko’s behind and the “banana” incident. Hemphill was issued a verbal warning and given a one-week suspension. He was also demoted to shift manager and directed to take a leadership class. Following the discipline, Hemphill did not harass Hylko again. Hylko resigned his employment a few months later and filed a lawsuit against Hemphill and U.S. Steel alleging same-sex sexual harassment in violation of Title VII and the ELCRA. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and Hylko appealed.

The Sixth Circuit’s Decision

The Court of Appeals began its analysis by reviewing the essential elements of a claim for sexual harassment. The court stated that a plaintiff must show: “(i) the sexual harassment was based on his sex; (ii) the harassment created a hostile work environment; and (iii) the employer is vicariously liable for the conduct at issue.” The court then moved to the third element noting that “[a]n employer is vicariously liable for the harasser’s conduct if he is the employee’s supervisor.” The Court of Appeals examined the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Vance v. Ball State University, 133 S. Ct. 2434, 2439 (2013), which established the definition of a “supervisor” under Title VII. The Court of Appeals stated that an employee is a supervisor “if he is ‘empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim.’” Id. at 2454. The Court of Appeals further stated that the Supreme Court in Vance defined “[a] tangible employment action [as] one that effects ‘a significant change in [the victim’s] employment status[.]’” Id. at 2443. The Sixth Circuit found that Hemphill was not a supervisor under Title VII despite his ability to assign work to Hylko and make recommendations as to discipline, since Hemphill did not have the “authority to promote, to demote, or to fire” Hylko. In short, the Court of Appeals found that Hemphill “was not authorized to effect a significant change in Hylko’s employment status.” The Court of Appeals rejected Hylko’s argument that Hemphill should be deemed to be his supervisor because both Hemphill and the employer referred to him as such. In the court’s view this was insufficient, since Hemphill did not meet the “legal” definition of a supervisor. The Court of Appeals also rejected Hylko’s argument that Hemphill should be deemed to be his supervisor since Hylko “reasonably believed” that to be the case, noting that this argument was waived because it was not raised before the district court.

Finally, the Sixth Circuit rejected Hylko’s argument that the employer should be liable for the alleged harassment under a co-worker liability theory, since the employer took appropriate action to end the alleged harassment after Hylko complained. The court noted that that “a response is adequate if it is reasonably calculated to end the harassment.” (quoting Waldo v. Consumers Energy Co., 726 F.3d 802, 814 (6th Cir. 2013)).

The Court of Appeals concluded its analysis by finding that there was no basis to reverse the district court and affirmed the grant of summary judgment.

Employers’ Bottom Line: The Sixth Circuit’s decision in Hylko highlights the restrictive definition of supervisor status adopted by the Supreme Court in Vance. An employee’s ability to assign work and make recommendations relative to another employee, and even workplace references to the employee as a supervisor, are insufficient to confer supervisory status under Title VII without evidence that the individual is authorized to effect a significant change in the purported subordinate’s employment status.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© FordHarrison | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


FordHarrison on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.