In the Vinson v/S Taylor case, Mechelle Vinson accused Sidney Taylor, her supervisor at the Capital City Federal Savings and Loan, of sexual harassment stating that he was forced to have sexual relations with him as he had fetched the job for her. She testified that after initial denials, she and Taylor began their affair and indulged in sex during and after office hours, in the bank vault and storage in the basement of the bank premises.
She affirmed that Taylor “raped” her many times blackmailing her with jeopardizing her job if she did not oblige him. On the other hand, Taylor testified to never having any sexual relationship with Vinson stating that Vinson had made sexual advances towards him, which he had turned down. He also stated that Vinson had filed charges against him owing to a work dispute between them.
The court ruled that if the two had engaged in any kind of sexual relationship, it was voluntarily done by Vinson, and not related to employment problems.
When Vinson appealed the case, the Court of Appeals pointed that Vinson’s case was the type in which the victim had to tolerate a “substantially discriminatory work environment”. They also stated that Vinson’s acceptance of the sexual acts was voluntary and thus she is not a victim of sexual harassment. They judged that an act of discrimination by the supervisor is attributed to the employer, in this case, Vinson, whether or not she had prior notice.
The court ruled that Vinson voluntarily indulged in the sexual acts which do not classify her case under Title VII, which can be done only when a convict alleges the sexual advancements to be “unwelcome”, which in this issue was not the case. Whether Vinson indulged in sex voluntarily or not does not file for a suitable case inquiry. The court did not provide a ruling on employer liability for sexual harassment but rejected the position that employers are liable for the acts of their supervisors regardless of the circumstances.