Whether the negligence standard that applies to Title VII workplace harassment by coworkers also applies to workplace harassment by customers

This case concerns the liability standard under Title VII when an employee experiences workplace sexual harassment at the hands of a customer. The First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits apply the same negligence standard to customer harassment that applies to harassment by coworkers, reasoning that employers are directly liable whenever they know (or should know) about workplace harassment and fail to take appropriate steps to stop it. The Sixth Circuit rejected this consensus in favor of a novel standard holding employers liable only when they intend for harassment to occur. The question presented is: Whether, as ten circuits have held, the negligence standard that applies to Ti tle VII claims of workplace harassment by a coworker al so applies to workplace harassment by a customer, or whether, as the Sixth Circuit held, an employer must have intended for the employee’s sexual harassment to occur?