Which of the following statements is true of quid pro quo harassment? Group of answer choices
a. A supervisor can be held guilty of quid pro quo harassment only if the victim refuses to grant the sexual favors.
b. For proving charges of quid pro quo harassment, a plaintiff only needs to prove that the working conditions at a workplace are hostile.
c. A supervisor can be held guilty of quid pro quo harassment if he or she tells jokes that are suggestive or sexual in nature.
d. A company always bears liability for quid pro quo harassment because supervisors are agents of the company.

yes all the points are correct.

Explanation:

Quid pro quo is a latin term which means a favour granted in return for something. In United states there are two forms of labor laws dealing with workplace sexual harassment that are Quid Pro Quo harassment and Hostile work environment harassment. Under this the employers offer higher posts or hiked salaries to the employees as against sexual satisfaction. Its totally the choice of the employee to accept the offer or not. If in case they are not comfortable with it and are forced for it then the victim can file a case against such an issue with the State or the Federal Law.

The Plaintiff have to prove the  charges regarding the hostile working conditions at the owrkplace where once proved right the plaintiff will get remedies like Hiring back , Payment or medical aids etc.

Yes a supervisor is held guilty of misconduct even if he uses a verbal form of sexual harassment like jokes or statements which can be sexual in nature.

Yes a company can be held liable for quid pro quo or hostile work environment harassment on behalf of the supervisors because they are a part of the company where punitive action can be taken against them in the form of demotion or firing.

it was decent, could have been a little better.. how bout you lol.