Sample employer position statement to the EEOC

Allegation: Sexual Harassment

In April, 1998, Ms. Xaiver first claimed that she had been sexually harassed. She raised her claim the day after she had been placed on a Corrective Action Plan for poor performance. XYZ immediately assigned a representative from XYZ's Human Resources department to investigate her claims. The person performing this investigation was Jack Perez, Employee Relations Consultant. Mr. Perez spoke with Ms. Xavier at some length to fully understand her concerns and he asked her to provide him with any documents that she thought might support her claims. Mr. Perez also spoke with Joe Smith, Mr. Smith's manager, and several others in the workgroup to determine what had occurred. The results of this investigation are summarized in Exhibit B, a copy of which is attached. As you can see, after speaking with a number of individuals, and after reviewing various documents, Mr. Perez determined that on one occasion Mr. Smith did invite all of the members of his team out for drinks after work. The purpose of the invitation was to celebrate the successful completion of a project. Ms. Xaiver was invited to celebrate after work in the same manner as the other members of the workgroup. There was nothing sexual or inappropriate about the invitation.

Allegation: Retaliation

Ms. Xavier also claims that she was retaliated against for refusing to accept Mr. Smith's invitations. She further claims that the Corrective Action Plan she received is evidence of that retaliation. Again, this claim was investigated by XYZ and a copy of the investigation results is set forth in the Exhibit B. As you will see in the investigation summary, Ms. Xaiver has experienced performance problems for at least eight months. Those problems were documented in her performance reviews by her previous manager, who was a woman. A copy of those performance reviews is attached in Exhibit C. When Mr. Smith became Ms. Xavier's manager, he met with her to discuss his expectations of her performance. He also met similarly with all members of his team to discuss his expectations of their performance. Mr. Smith continued to meet with all members of his team as needed, and at least once each month. At each of his meetings with Ms. Xaiver, he discussed her ongoing performance problems. These problems were similar to those previously documented by her former manager. Beginning as early in February 1998, Mr. Smith told Ms. Xaiver that if her performance did not improve, she would be placed on a Corrective Action Plan. Indeed, when her performance failed to improve, she was placed on such a plan. This was done properly, and in accordance with XYZ's Guidelines regarding Progressive Discipline (See: Exhibit D).

Notification to Ms. Xavier

Ms. Xavier was notified-in writing-of the results of XYZ's investigation into her claims (See: Exhibit E). She was told that if she obtained additional information which she believed could impact XYZ's decision in any way, she should immediately bring that information forward. She was also told that she could appeal the decision to a higher level within XYZ if she chose to do so. Ms. Xaiver did not bring any additional information forward, and she did not appeal the decision.

Conclusion

Upon learning of Ms. Xaiver's concerns, XYZ promptly investigated her claims. XYZ immediately assigned an impartial person to speak with Ms. Xavier, review her concerns, and speak with other XYZ employees, as needed. Based on that investigation, it is clear that XYZ acted properly, in accordance with Title VII and in accordance with XYZ policy. XYZ therefore respectfully requests that these charges be dismissed.

I trust that this will satisfy your request for information. If you have any questions, please contact me at the address listed below or at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.

Very truly yours,

XYZ COMPANY

Mary Smith

Internal EEO Specialist

with attachments