What U.S. court ruling distinguished between supervisor harassment resulting in tangible employment action and harassment that does not?

The ruling in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton is significant because it established a clear distinction between two types of sexual harassment that can arise in the workplace: harassment that results in tangible employment actions (such as hiring, firing, or promotion) and harassment that does not. This case set forth important guidelines regarding the liability of employers for sexual harassment committed by supervisors.

In this ruling, the Supreme Court articulated that if a supervisor's harassment results in a tangible employment action against an employee, the employer can be held strictly liable for that harassment. Conversely, if no tangible employment action is taken, the employer can defend itself by demonstrating that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct any harassment and that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of those preventative measures.

This distinction is crucial for understanding the legal framework surrounding workplace harassment and the responsibilities of both employers and employees in addressing and mitigating such behavior. The case has influenced subsequent rulings and helps define the boundaries of employer liability in harassment claims.

The other options pertain to different aspects of employment law or workplace discrimination that do not specifically make the same distinction between types of harassment in the context of tangible employment actions.