Contact employment counsel immediately — ideally before you begin any investigation. Your first obligations are to preserve all relevant documents (litigation hold), ensure the complaining employee is not subjected to any adverse action that could be characterized as retaliation, and initiate a prompt, thorough, and documented investigation. The way you handle the first 72 hours can determine the outcome of any subsequent legal proceeding.

It depends on the type of harassment. For quid pro quo harassment resulting in a tangible adverse employment action (termination, demotion), employer liability is strict. For hostile work environment claims, the Faragher-Ellerth affirmative defense is available if the employer had a reasonable anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure, and the employee failed to use it. This is why maintaining a compliant policy and training program is so critical.

The Faragher-Ellerth defense is a U.S. Supreme Court-established affirmative defense that allows employers to avoid liability for supervisor harassment — when no tangible employment action was taken — by showing (1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct harassment, and (2) the employee unreasonably failed to use the employer's complaint procedure. It requires a documented, functional anti-harassment policy and complaint process. Whether it applies depends on the specific facts of your situation — contact us to evaluate.

Nevada NERC employer responses are typically due within 30 days of receipt of the charge. Missing this deadline can significantly prejudice your defense. Contact us immediately — we prepare comprehensive position statements designed to achieve no-cause determinations.

Terminating the accused employee is legally permissible in appropriate circumstances — but the timing, documentation, and process matter enormously. A termination of the accused that appears to be an overreaction to the complaint, or that is not supported by a documented investigation and clear findings, can create additional legal risks. We advise employers through this decision with the legal and practical consequences in full view.

Nevada's SB 177 limits the use of non-disclosure agreements in harassment settlements — employers cannot prohibit employees from speaking with law enforcement or government agencies. During an active investigation, reasonable confidentiality requests are permissible but must be limited in scope. We advise on appropriate confidentiality practices at each stage of the complaint and litigation process.

Nevada law and Title VII both extend employer harassment obligations to third-party conduct when the employer knew or should have known about the harassment and failed to take reasonable corrective action. Employers in customer-facing industries — hospitality, gaming, retail, food service — must have policies and procedures addressing third-party harassment, not just employee-on-employee conduct. We help you build those systems and defend you when claims arise.