Sexual harassment: green examines the risks to residents, property owners and maintenance professionals for allowing sexual harassment to occur. While some in the multifamily housing industry would abuse their positions, at times the community's staff will be the victims, not the victimizers.

Fair housing and sexual harassment? Do they really have anything to do with one another? Absolutely they do, and the courts continue to expand on the connection. Housing law recognizes two types of sexual harassment claims:

* a "conditioned tenancy" or "quid pro quo" claim, which in non-legalese means making a sexual demand on a resident in order for that resident to gel needed maintenance on the apartment, to get a rent concession, or to avoid an eviction; and

* a "hostile environment" claim, which can give rise to claims concerning the psychological well-being of a resident who can demonstrate such a situation.

Furthermore, fair housing law has been broadly applied to define sexual harassment as being in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) prohibition against sex discrimination. And, of course, the FHA provides for significant financial punishment and penalties for violations. So in theory, sexual harassment within the context of the owner-resident relationship can be financially costly to the owner.

And, if the fear of losing vast sums of money is not a motivating factor, what about the possibility of doing jail time? Some creative lawyers and advocates are now going beyond the fair housing arena. One idea is to charge owners under laws related to prostitution. How? With the argument that requiring sex for rent or other benefits is in effect an act of being coerced into prostitution. And some fair housing lawyers have presented cases that work to charge owners with criminal battery, as well as for violations of sexual predator laws. In fact, one owner was successfully convicted of the latter.

Now, the thought might be that perhaps this is an issue with smaller, less sophisticated property owners and managers. Yes, sometimes that has been the case. Just look at what some residents have been subjected to:

* A wife and husband rented a home under the Section 8 program; the wife allegedly was told that if she wanted to keep the rental, she would have to have sex with her property owner once a month; and the property owner supposedly threatened to shoot the husband when he complained;

* A property owner went to a resident's apartment to clean spots on the rug; as he left he placed his hand under her shirt, fondled her breast, and attempted to kiss her; the resident rejected these "advances" and was subsequently evicted; these liberties cost the owner more than $36,000; and

* Similar dollars were spent by yet another property owner who began calling one of his residents, asking her out, and coming to her apartment at all hours of the day of night; he went as far as to enter her bedroom while she was asleep and threaten to change her locks if she did not do what he wanted; after she filed complaints, he removed her front door, turned off her heat and hot water and threatened to blow up the building with her in it.

But larger and therefore supposedly more sophisticated property owners have also engaged in wanton and improper behavior, including one in California. In that case, 15 single women (and 25 children) were verbally and physically harassed by a resident manager who asked for sexual favors, grabbed their breasts, entered their apartments in the middle of the night and tampered with their mail.

The well-organized women (with documentation in hand) went to the property owners and were ignored. They were not, however, ignored by the legal system. A settlement was for $1.65 million in a case where the defendants included the resident manager, the property owners, the management company, the president of the company and a general partner.

No one, property manager or otherwise, in an organization should abuse the power that they have over residents. A company can be held responsible for the acts of maintenance technicians or leasing agents. Every community should have a sexual harassment policy in place, and all staff should be trained to follow it on a regular basis. Property managers should respond to any hint of sexual impropriety, investigate, take action as necessary and communicate to all involved. All the while, they must document, document, document.

Sexual Harassment From the Owner and Maintenance Perspective

Aren't there two sides of every coin, including sexual harassment? Absolutely! Because while there are those in the multifamily housing industry who would abuse their positions, a likely scenario is that the community's staff could be the victims, not the victimizers.

Leasing agents are aware of this and many companies have policies in place to better protect these professionals from what is potentially the scariest of their job requirements: going into empty apartments with strangers. But fewer companies have addressed the issue for maintenance professionals, notwithstanding the scariest of their job requirements: going into occupied apartments when the residents are home.

Perhaps this is because of a double standard: more leasing agents are women, while more maintenance professionals are men. And, some people seem to think that sexual harassment does not bother the maintenance professionals (or that they in fact enjoy it). But sexual harassment by definition is unwanted attention, and for those willing to listen, maintenance professionals in the industry have stories to tell and ideas to share about how their workplace can be made safer.

So, with a tip of the hat to all of those maintenance professionals who opened the eyes of this author and shared their stories, here are the ideas that they have on this very topic.

* Consider a policy that encourages and allows maintenance professionals the opportunity to leave a unit at any time if they believe the situation is inappropriate. If a resident is making comments or making gestures or touching, or if the environment itself is threatening (hard core porn video being played, as a real-life example), no employee should have to stay and take it.

* In return, the maintenance employee should be required to immediately notify management of the scenario and advise management that he (or she!) has left the apartment and why.

* Respond to the input from your maintenance professionals that they are uncomfortable with a particular resident, and either send someone else to complete work orders, or send someone to accompany the employee.

* Insist that no maintenance professional be in an occupied apartment unless there is a written work order (emergencies such as fire and flood are exceptions!). If a resident entices an employee into the apartment and the employee does not respond as hoped for, that resident is likely to contact management and accuse the employee of wrongdoing. Without a written work order, the employee could be in a most dangerous situation.

* Make it clear to residents and maintenance professionals alike that unless there is an emergency (fire or flood), no maintenance professional will be allowed to be alone in an apartment with someone's minor child. To require otherwise is potentially to have the employee's professional and personal life ruined.

A wise owner will consider these ideas and develop a written policy to incorporate them. Why?

1. It is the right thing to do, is it not?

2. If the first reason is not motivation enough, then how about this: the failure to protect employees from sexual harassment (or worse, to expect them to take it) can result in a lawsuit involving your own employees!

3. Industry surveys consistently show that the No. 1 resident retention tool is providing a professional maintenance staff And isn't it just good business to protect such great assets?--N.G.

Nadeen Green is Senior Counsel with For Rent Magazine[R]. The information contained in this article is not to be considered legal advice, and the author and FRM strongly recommend that you consult with your own counsel as to any fair housing questions or problems you may have.