Hostile Work Environment in Nevada: What the Law Actually Says

By Lex Tecnica attorney, Tabetha Nakagawa, Esq.

We've all heard the stories about a hostile work environment in Nevada workplaces. A friend dreads going to work because his supervisor constantly belittles employees. A family member complains about favoritism in her office. A coworker says management creates a “hostile work environment,” and everyone seems to believe that the employer must be breaking the law. However, the reality is much more complicated than that.

Not every toxic or unpleasant workplace violates the law. Similarly, not every rude

supervisor or abrasive coworker creates a cognizable legal claim. While it is true that poor management can lead to low morale and high turnover, federal and Nevada employment laws prohibit only certain types of workplace conduct.

Therefore, understanding which types of behaviors are legal and illegal are important for

both employers and employees. On one hand, it can help employees recognize when they may have enforceable rights. On the other hand, it can help employers understand their obligations to maintain a workplace free from unlawful discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.

Hostile Work Environment Nevada: A Legal Term of Art with a Specific Meaning

One of the most commonly misunderstood phrases in employment law is “hostile work

environment.”

People often use the term to describe any workplace that is stressful, poorly managed, or filled with personality conflicts. Although those conditions can certainly make going to work miserable, they do not necessarily violate the law.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and corresponding provisions of Nevada

law under NRS Chapter 613, a hostile work environment generally exists when an employee is subjected to unwelcome conduct based on a protected characteristic (e.g. race, color, religion, sex, or national origin), and that conduct is sufficiently “severe or pervasive” enough to alter the terms and conditions of employment.

In other words, the law does not prohibit a difficult boss. Rather, it forbids unlawful

discrimination and harassment based on protected characteristics. For example, an employer who disciplines every employee equally for poor performance is generally not violating Title VII simply because the employees dislike the supervisor’s management or communication style. Conversely, repeated discriminatory comments, offensive conduct, or unequal treatment directed at a single employee based on a protected characteristic may give rise to various colorable claims.

Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation are Different Claims

Although these claims are often discussed together, discrimination, harassment, and

retaliation claims protect employees from different forms of unlawful conduct.

Discrimination occurs when an employer takes an adverse employment action, including

but not limited to refusing to hire, demoting, disciplining, or terminating an employee

altogether because of a protected characteristic.

Harassment involves unwelcome conduct based on a protected characteristic that

becomes sufficiently severe or pervasive, which either creates a hostile work environment or results in a tangible adverse employment action.

Retaliation occurs when an employer takes adverse action against an employee because

the employee engaged in a legally protected activity, such as reporting discrimination or

harassment, participating in an investigation, or filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or the Nevada Equal Rights Commission (“NERC”).

Notably, retaliation claims are one of the more commonly asserted employment claims.

This is because an employee may still have a legitimate retaliation claim, even if the underlying discrimination complaint is ultimately found to be unsubstantiated, provided the employee acted in good faith and was engaged in protected activity.

Before Filing a Lawsuit, There are Important Procedural Steps to Follow

Many employees assume that once they believe discrimination or retaliation has

occurred, the next step is filing a lawsuit. However, for many claims arising under Title VII and Nevada’s corresponding state law statutes, that is not how the process works.

Instead, employees generally must first file what is called a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC or NERC within 180 calendar days from the date the alleged unlawful conduct took place. However, Nevada is what is called a “deferral state,” meaning that employees would actually have 300 days from the date of the alleged unlawful act to file their Charge of Discrimination.

Then, after reviewing the allegations, the applicable agency may investigate, request

additional documents, interview witnesses, facilitate mediation, or attempt to resolve the dispute before litigation becomes necessary.

Once the administrative process has concluded, or in certain circumstances before the

investigation is complete, the agency may issue what is called a Notice of Right to Sue letter. For many Title VII claims, obtaining this notice is a necessary procedural step before filing a lawsuit in court. Once a Notice of Right to Sue letter is issued, employees generally have 90 days from the date they received the notice to file a lawsuit in court.

Given these strict deadlines that employees need to meet in order to exhaust their

administrative remedies, employees should seek legal advice promptly to avoid inadvertently forfeiting potential claims.

The Bottom Line

Not every unpleasant workplace is an unlawful one. However, when workplace conduct

crosses the line into unlawful discrimination, harassment, or retaliation based on protected characteristics, both federal and Nevada law provide important legal protections.

Thus, understanding the distinction between a difficult workplace and an illegal one is

the first step that (1) employees can take toward protecting their rights; and (2) employers can take to ensure their business complies with the law. Whether you are an employer responding to a workplace complaint or an employee trying to understand your options, recognizing the legal standards and following the required administrative process can make all the difference.

About the Author: Tabetha Nakagawa is an attorney at Lex Tecnica whose practice includes corporate law, labor and employment law, litigation, government and municipal law, and real estate law. A Las Vegas native and graduate of the William S. Boyd School of Law, she is committed to providing practical, strategic legal guidance with a strong focus on client service.