美國是目前所有工業先進國家中，對工作場所性騷擾事件之防範及處置規定最為 完備者。其平等就業機會委員會早在一九八○年，即已針對這類事件頒布指導原則，將工作 場所性騷擾事件區分為交換 (或回報 ) 性騷擾及敵意性工作環境性騷擾兩大類型， 而認為 應嚴予禁止，同時，並建議對未事先防範或善加處置之雇主科處連帶賠償責任。嗣後，聯邦 各級法院自一九八一年起，也針對這類事件做成各項有利於原告被害人之判決。在一九八六 年，最高法院於著名之 Meri- tor Savings Bank v. Vinson 一案，更進一步判決性騷擾構 成一種性別歧視，因此得適用一九六四年民權法第七章之規定。目前，由於一九九一年民權 法欴修訂，已使得雇主就這類事件所應負擔之法律責任更形吃重。最高法院又在一九九三年 十一月於 Harris v. Forklift Systems 一案中，對性騷擾之定義做更一步之釐清，而柯林 頓總統當局也希望能提高雇主對這類事件之賠償金額度，同時也準備將對同性戀者加以騷擾 之事件一併列入加以保護，這些新發展可說都是其他工業先進國所望塵莫及者。由於工場所 性騷擾事件不但對受雇者 (尤其是婦女 ) 造成各種有形之損害， 而且也直接有礙兩性工作 平等理念之達成，因此，對美國在這方面所從事之努力及累積之經驗，自應密切加以注意。

　　　　　The United States is currently in possession of the soundest system in preventing and combating sexual harassment incidents in the workplace among all industialized nations. In 1980, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued guidelines affirming that sexual harassment in the workplace is a form of sex discrimination and divided sexual harassment in the workplace into quid pro quo harassment and hostile work environment harassment. The guidelines also imposed strict liability on those employers who failed to take reasonable preventive or remedial measures. After-ward, federal courts at every level have been rendering decisions in a number of related cases which are generally favorable to empl oyees-compl ain ts. In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Meriter Savings Bank v. Vinson that a hostile work environment might form the basis of an actionable sexual harassment claim as sex discrimination in Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. With the passage df Civil Rights Act of 1991, employer liability in the incidents of sexual harasSment in the Workplace has been increased considerably. The U.S. Supreme Court also further clarified the definition of sexual harassment in the workplace in Harris v. Forklift Systems in November, 1993. Further more, the Clinton administration also plans to adopt several measures to provide better protection for affected employees such as increasing the amount of monetary damages paid by those employers who lost their cases and treating harassment of homosexuals in the workplace as a form of sexual harassment. All these new developments strongly indicate that the United States will still maintain its leasership position concerning dealing with sexual harassment issues in the workplace in the whole world. Since sexual harassment in the workplace can cause various adverse effects to employee (especially female workers)and directly impede the ideal of attaining gender equality in employment, it is of vital importance to pay close attention to the efforts made and