The court found that the music created a hostile work environment for the female employees, even though some of the men were also offended by it. The court noted that the music was “not simply offensive or vulgar,” however it was “specifically targeted at women and conveyed a message of inferiority and degradation.” The court also found that the company knew or should have known that music was creating a hostile work environment, but failed to take any action to stop it.

The court noted that “certain practices, such as allowing sexual or racial epithets to be ‘sung, shouted, or whispered, blasted over speakers or relayed face-to-face,’ may ‘transform a workplace into a hostile environment’ and land an employer in court.”

The ruling is significant because it clarifies that employers can be held liable for sexual harassment even if music is not directed at a specific individual. This means that employers need to be careful about the type of music they allow to be played in the workplace, as even music that is not intended to be offensive can create a hostile work environment for some employees.

Employers can defend against claims of sexual harassment by showing that they took reason