An exclusive insurance agent in Illinois committed blatant acts of sexual harassment against his office manager. After she quit, she sued him and the carrier.
Her employment began in January 2020. One day two months into her tenure, the agent “came up behind her at her desk, grabbed her breasts, and made vulgar comments.” She screamed and ran away. This was the first of a series of incidents. Although she asked him to stop, he would make “inappropriate comments” to her about his female customers. He also shared intimate details of his sex life and those of his customers.
As time progressed, his actions toward her grew in hostility. He would call her “stupid” and openly question his decision to hire her. These outbursts occurred most days.
In May, she had a phone conversation with the previous office manager. She reported that he had treated her in much the same way. Not long after, he groped his new office manager again in the same manner. She grabbed and bent his fingers; he laughed and walked away.
At the end of June, she complained to the carrier’s district manager. The manager said that he “knew how (the agent) talks to people” and promised to relay the complaint to corporate leadership. By then, however, she had had enough. She quit a week later. The next day she filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and followed it with another one the next month. The carrier commenced an investigation and took a statement from her. Later, she learned that the agent had been permitted to resign at the end of November with no remedial action taken against him.
She sued the agent for violations of federal and state law, assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. She also sued the carrier for violations of federal and state law. The court’s opinion did not state the amount of damages she sought, nor did it mention the agent’s response to the suit. It addressed only the carrier’s motion to dismiss the complaint against it.
Her suit against them rested on her allegation that the carrier was a “co-employer” of her along with the agent. In support of this argument, she noted that the carrier performed an investigation of her harassment charges against them. She also cited provisions in the agent’s appointment agreement with the carrier. The carrier argued that the appointment agreement clearly made the agent an independent contractor. Therefore, they were not the employer for either him or her.
In September 2022, the judge dismissed the complaint against the carrier, ruling that they were not her co-employer. Her complaint, he wrote, did not allege any facts to “suggest how (the carrier) exercised any control over her, let alone ‘significant’ control.” If they had no control over her, they could not have been her employer.
He did permit her to amend her complaint in the future if she could produce new evidence showing they were her employer. In doing so, he warned the carrier that the allegations implied that they “knew or should have known” about the agent’s behavior and did nothing to address it.
Lastly, he dismissed her claim that the agent violated federal law because that law applied to organizations, not individuals. There is no further public record of this case, implying that she dropped the case against the carrier and settled out of court with the agent.
The fact that the agent resigned shortly after his office manager quit implies that her allegations were true. He could have had criminal liability in addition to civil, though the judge’s opinion did not mention that. His behavior was inexcusable. He focused on making his employees (and possibly his customers) his playthings rather than focusing on his business of providing insurance coverage. It should go without saying that insurance agencies must not permit this type of conduct by their employees. As this case shows, however, it cannot be said often enough.
