i worked in WYOMING as a salaried food service director for a contract catering company. i was recently "let go" because of alleged sexual harassment. i supervised employees of the contractor. i had told one he had a beautiful head (he had shaved his head that morning of all hair), his response was thanks. i had told another on another day, he made beautiful toast and that we should mark the settings on the toaster so we could have the same on his days off, he said thanks. another employee i had told i would cook him dinner, he laughed. the company cooks employees dinner every night.

my immediate supervisor and her supervisor, and one of the contractors associates conveyed to me they thought i had done nothing wrong. But my company's office manager tells me i was dismissed because of "verbal misconduct" and that my remarks to the employees were of a "threatening sexual nature" and that i had become a "security risk". prior to this i had received exemplary performance evaluations. i hadn't received any warnings or reprimands prior to being "let go", on this or any issue.

i'm not sure what the employees stand to gain from my dismissal, or to what extent if any this claim of harassment was investigated, other than to inteview the employee staff.

what if any recourse do i have? thanks in advance for a response.

You have no recourse. It may or may not have been unfair to term you but it was not illegal. The law does not dictate that you receive warnings prior to termination.

thanks again for your quick response. it seems odd to me that innocent remarks or comments can be intrepreted as sexually threatening, and get me tossed out the door. no severance pay and a bad mark on my employment record.

i did file an unemployment claim, and was initially denied. i appealed, and my employer failed to participate in the telephone hearing, by not answering the phone. under iowa law i was granted unemployment benefits, as i had not committed any sexual harrassment. i too researched eeoc website about what constitutes sexual harrassment. the info on "reasonable person considerations" was invaluable.

under iowa law i was granted unemployment benefits, as i had not committed any sexual harrassment. Not that it matters all that much but that wasn't actually what the UC Division determined. Because your employer elected not to participate in the hearing and presented no evidence of your alleged misconduct, the UC Division would have concluded that you were not terminated for a reason that would disallow benefits. That is not the same as determining whether or not you were guilty.

au contraire' mon ami! were you able to google my real name, you might find differently. my employer simply not answering the phone contributed to the decision in my favor, but i still had to present my case again fully and with the additional info afforded me on the eeoc site, added to my favorable decision. and again here. paying someone a compliment about their work, in context, and paying someone a compliment about their appearance, in context, and making a joke about my own apparel, by "reasonable person standards" does not constitue sexual harrassment. this underhanded use of sexual harrassment claims by mean spirited peoples is deplorable behavior, and shouldn't go rewarded by someone's dismissal.

Whether you want to hear it or not, the fact remains that the UC commission ONLY determines whether or not you were terminated for a reason that disqualifies you or not. It does not determine whether you were innocent or guilty of the offense you were terminated for, and does not have anything to do with whether you were wrongfully terminated or not.

you are so right!! and excerpt follows from that decision.

"The last incident, which brought about the discharge, fails to constitute misconduct because claimant did not engage in harassing activities. The administrative law judge holds that claimant was not discharged for an act of misconduct and, as such, is not disqualified for the receipt of unemployment insurance benefits."