The court has spoken and the definition of sexual harassment in the work place has been broadened.

In an unsually quick ruling handed down Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that women claiming sexual harassment at the work place need not prove psychological injury. Instead claimants only need show they were in an environment which “a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive.”

Through applying this standard, the court overruled the case of Ms. Harris whose boss did such things as call her a “dumb ass woman” in public and make crude jokes about how she obtained customers.

The ruling is being hailed by women’s groups as a Godsend and a strong message to employees that sexual harassment will not be tolerated at the work place any more. It’s a strong message alright; so strong that companies better act quickly to install harassment regulations and guidelines before they find the court doing it for them.

With women still fighting to get into more prominent positions in today’s work world, the stifling effects of sexual harassment should be eliminated, but let’s not open a door for harassment litigation to run amuck.

The only problem with the judgement is that it sets up a very broad spectrum for people to file cases, and we all know how law suit crazy this country is already. In his concurring opinion, Justice Scalia stated the court was forced to set an unclear standard due to the the vagueness of the original law. The court is taking a big chance allowing victims and attorneys to decide for themselves what does and does not qualify under this ruling.

What seems to be a possible solution for companies would be for them to set up some sexual harasssment definitions and standards of their own. If there is a way to take care of such things within the company or office then would be victims might not be so quick to go to the courts to settle things.

The decision did make strides to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace. It is up to companies to keep the rythm going through their own effort.