Workplace harassment and hostile work environment claims—especially sexual harassment and racial harassment—can be tough to prove. They become even harder when serious incidents happened more than 300 days before filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
What Counts as Workplace Harassment Under Title VII?
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employees must show:
-
Harassment that is severe or pervasive, and
-
Harassment based on a protected characteristic such as race, gender, national origin, religion, or disability.
Minor slights or general rudeness don’t qualify. Harassment must be significant enough—or frequent enough—to create a hostile work environment.
Unlike discrimination claims involving discrete decisions (like hiring or promotion), hostile work environment claims often involve a pattern of misconduct. Even behavior that might not be illegal on its own can become unlawful when viewed cumulatively. The Supreme Court confirmed this in Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) and Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002).
How the Continuing Violation Doctrine Helps Prove Hostile Work Environment Claims
To bring a Title VII claim, an employee must file an EEOC charge within 180 or 300 days, depending on the state. In harassment cases, the question becomes:
What event triggers the deadline when the claim involves months or years of conduct?
In Morgan, the Supreme Court held that a hostile work environment can be one continuous unlawful employment practice made up of multiple related acts.
Why This Matters
If at least one incident contributing to the hostile work environment occurred within the 180/300-day filing window, the employee can also rely on older incidents to support their claim. This is the heart of the continuing violation doctrine.
Case Example: When Older Harassment Incidents Still Count
In Pesce v. Mendes & Mount LLP (S.D.N.Y. 2020), a federal court held that an employer’s alleged multi-year failure to protect an employee from sexual harassment and assault might constitute a continuing violation. Because one alleged incident from March 2018 was timely, the employee could also rely on incidents from 2015 and 2017.
This doctrine often allows employees to reach back years to show the full scope of workplace harassment.
How Courts Differ in Applying the Continuing Violation Doctrine
Courts across the country do not apply the continuing violation doctrine uniformly. For example:
-
The Eleventh Circuit (southeastern states) applies the doctrine more restrictively.
-
The Second Circuit (northeastern states) tends to interpret it more broadly.
This makes location a major factor in the success of a workplace harassment claim involving older incidents.
Key Takeaways on Filing a Workplace Harassment Claim With the EEOC
-
Employees must file an EEOC charge to pursue a Title VII harassment or hostile work environment claim.
-
If any part of the hostile work environment occurred within the 180/300-day window, older harassment incidents may be included.
-
The continuing violation doctrine does not apply to discrete acts like hiring, firing, or promotion decisions.
-
The doctrine’s application varies by federal circuit.
If you have questions about your harassment or hostile work environment case, call us at (202) 769-1681, or start your preliminary consultation online.