Challenges in Managing and Preventing Sexual Harassment in a Culturally Diverse Workplace.

In recent years the topic of sexual harassment has become one of the most talked about issues in the press. Sexual harassment is a topical problem for many employees that not only leads to discrimination in labor, loss in wages, low productivity and stress, but it also influence the general atmosphere of lawlessness and violence against the comfort of other human beings. The act sexual harassment creates a hostile tense working environment. In this paper we will discuss the challenges in managing and preventing sexual harassment in a culturally diverse workplace. We will also discuss some cases of reported sexual harassment that has occurred in different countries, the laws against sexual harassment and the affect it has on companies as a whole.
The global trend to eliminate any forms of sexual harassment in the field of labor relations is one of the priorities of modern day society. Companies around the world face the task of ensuring there are decent working conditions for employees. These conditions include one free from sexual harassment. When incorporating prevention measures some cultures are harder to implement for than others. Because of this, cross-cultural companies are considered difficult to management because of the peculiarities of the mentality and the differences in cultural practices, but regardless if the structure, sexual harassment requires a solution in order to further a harmonious environment.
There are many definitions to properly describe sexual harassment. It’s the unwanted advances of a sexual nature by any subordinate or superior in a workplace where failure to comply may be utilized as threat such as to affect future advancements and status of employment. This type of harassment is not limited to threats, in which the victim has to submit too sexual demands or suffer the consequences. It also includes scabrous jokes, hints, indecent touching. Any action of a sexual nature that is unacceptable in the eyes of the receiving person may be grounds for sexual harassment charges. All associates regardless of occupation have the right to a benevolent work environment. Sexual oriented behavior and the tolerance of such, does not construct this type of climate. To ensure compliances of all rules and policies are handle according to the law, an agency know as Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was established in the United States.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information. It also protects against illegal discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit. Sexual harassment is a form of discrimination and the EEOC defines it as the following:
- Sexual offers, demands of “sexual services” and other verbal or physical actions of a sexual nature, put forward as a condition of hiring or saving the job;
- When forced consent or refusal of employee from these proposals influence the decision of hiring or saving a job:
- When the purpose or effect of such actions is the impact on productivity or creating of intimidating, hostile or offensive workplace environment.
EEOC examples of sexual harassment include:
Verbal: sexual innuendo, insinuations, insults, threats, jokes about sex characteristics, sexual proposals.
Nonverbal: significant looks, offensive or indecent sounds, obscene gestures.
Physical: touching, pinching, stroking, sexual coercion or attempted rape.
The acts of sexual nature include:
- Unpleasant or undesirable for an employee action and proposals, including sex, slap on any part of the body, tingling, stroking, hugging and kissing, fondling or any other similar physical contact committed without the desire of an employee.
- Unwanted requests and demands of a sexual nature. These are bright or poorly expressed expectations, the demands of a sexual nature (including the requirement of dating), regardless of whether they are accompanied by implied or open promise of benefits or adverse effects at workplace.
- Verbal abuse or jokes, including verbal insults and jokes of a sexual nature, unpleasant for an employee. These include statements about nationality, race, shape or appearance when such comments go beyond common courtesy, "greasy" anecdotes, any vulgar comments, or hints of sexual content, foul and abusive for others.
- Creation of intimidating, hostile, intolerable or offensive working environment by unpleasant or undesirable for the employee conversations, suggestions, requests, demands, physical contacts or displays of attention, sexual or other inappropriate content (Conte 2000).
As stated previously, sexual harassment in the workplace is one of the major topics in media a. Even though this phenomenon is discussed more in the current time, it is not fundamentally new. In the past this issue was considered a personal, individual problem and was vastly ignored. Past ignorance led to dismissal of the victim from their job verses appropriate justices for the person. One of the reasons this happened was due to the very limited number of women in workplaces. In many past cases women in the work place was unfavorable as well. Things have improved drastically since then. The number of women on the workforce has tripled. With this increasing number of workingwomen sexual harassment has become more common and its prevention is top priority. Sexual harassment is handling for what it is a violation of individual rights, and silence surrounding this phenomenon has been destroyed.
Looking back in the history of sexual harassment in the United States, concentration on this particular issue has a relatively short history. In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, which established the illegality of discrimination based on race, religion and ethnicity. Gender discrimination was not originally apart of the Civil Rights Act, but it was integrated later. The Civil Rights Act became the legal basis for the formation of attitudes towards the phenomenon of sexual harassment. The first notion of sexual harassment appeared in 1974 during the review of a court case pertaining to physician’s assistant, who was forced to leave her job because of her boss’s sexual harassment towards her (De Haas 2010).
By mid-1970's, several similar cases appeared in court. In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a form of sexual discrimination. Six years following this, the U.S. experienced its first political scandal on this same basis. In 1992, ten former staff members of Senator Robert Packwood and employees of lobbying companies told the Washington Post, that for several years they had been the subjects of sexual harassment of Packwood. Ethics Committee of the U.S. Senate, which held its investigation, discovered there were 17 victims and recommended to deny Packwood’s eligible to be a representative of the highest legislative organ of the United States. The senator was forced to finish his political career in 1995 and afterwards he engaged in business consulting. The criminal case against him was dismissed (Benavides 2010).
In 1991 Baker & McKenzie the world’s largest law firm was faced with a sexual harassment suit. The irony behind this legal case was is that in 1990 they had established a sexual harassment policy for their firm and often advised their high profile clients to do the same for their company. When one of their superstar lawyers, Martin Greenstein was violating the firms’ sexual harassment policy, and they basically turned a blind eye because he was considered a well like attorney who had very lucrative clients.
Ms. Weeks, the secretary of Martin Greenstein couldn’t handle his rude behavior and sexual advances and filed suit in 1991. When the case became publicized, six other women who were former employees of Greenstein joined suit stating the same accusation which eventually forced them to leave their jobs. They explained to the court how Greenstein made inappropriate and rude remarks on sexual topics, obscene jokes, grabbed below their lower backs and strongly suggested they have sex with him. Greenstein denied all charges, stating that none of the allegations were true. During the deposition it was revealed that Mr. Greenstein had a history of inappropriate sexual behavior towards his female colleagues and staff. It was also revealed that the firm was well aware of his behavior and did little to nothing to stop it.
The court ruled in Ms. Meeks favor and awarded more than $7 million dollars in punitive damages and $50,000 in compensatory damages. In addition to applying Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964, the state of Californian also applied the Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA). The FEHA makes sexual harassment of an employee by any person within the work place unlawful and holds an employer strictly liable for sexual harassment committed by an agent or supervisor employed by his or her company. The Weeks sexual harassment case dealt with unwelcomed physical advances and quid pro quo request for sexual favors. It is the employers’ responsibility to set, maintain and enforce their policies and ensure employees work in a harassment-free environment. This process is ongoing and requires continues education and training because the work place is constantly evolving (Pruett 2001).
In 1995, the American public witnessed another historic sexual harassment trial. Dan Vassong, general manager of the famous company Dell Laboratories, was accused of inappropriate behavior towards his secretaries. He was accused of slapping them on the backsides, making sexual jokes, walking around the office with his pants unbuttoned and publicly scratching his genitals. Because of his behavior, Vassong’s staff changed quit often.
During preparation Vassong’s hearing, more than 30 of his former subordinates claimed his behavior was the cause of their resignations. One of the former employees sued Vassong for his inappropriate behavior. She and several other victims received $1.2 million dollars in compensation. All previously stated cases were reported to the Human Resources managers; but the complaints were not followed up. The court ruled that Dell Laboratories had to conduct special training for the firm’s management to teams in order to properly educate them sexual harassment, inappropriate behavior and the consequences for them. After all acquisitions and the lawsuit, Vassong still retained his employment and remained as the head of Board of Directors for the company. In 2004, the Governor of New Jersey, James McGreevey was accused of sexually molestation of a man. Israeli Golan Tsipel through patronage of McGreevey was appointed as the adviser of security matters for the governor. Tsipel later accused the governor of constant sexual harassment. The issue turned out to be a scandal that resulted in McGreevey resigning after admitting he was homosexual and admitted to having consensual sex with Tsipel (Fairchild 2010).
Case such as the ones stated, haven’t been scarce. According to the U.S. State Commission on Equal Opportunities of employment in 2003 there were 13,566 documented complaints from victims of sexual harassment in the workplace (14,396 claims - in 2002, 15,475 claims - in 2001) an increase of over three thousand case when compared to the 1990, records of 10,532 reported cases. This figures drastic increase in the number of sexual harassment cases within the U.S. was within a 10 year period, showing a 127 percent increase in workplace incidents. Approximately 15 percent of the claims were women harassing men, with the remaining percentage being men to women and homosexual sexual harassment. The statistics also shows that only about half the victims of sexual harassment have been able to produce enough evidence to prove their cases (Toker 2010). In efforts to prevent this issue of sexual harassment, the United States has implemented different precautions, such as laws to protect those who have valid cases. The “Act on Civil Rights” is one of the widely known precautions. Addition to this federal act, each state has its own legislation that defines sexual harassment as punishable discrimination and outlines the rights of the victims’ peace and compensation. The laws and regulations are there to prevent and protect, but the burden of prove is not always on the victims.
According to statistics collected by Commission, not all cases end in court. Out of the 15,475 thousand men and women who have decided to legally prosecute their abusers in 2001, nearly half were unable to prove their claim of sexual harassment. Proving sexual harassment in court is still very difficult. For comparison, in 1990 the number of cases lacking “corpus delicti” amounted 28.5 percent. The results of various polls show that during life 40 – 70 percent of women and 10 - 20 percent of men have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace. The number of men, who have been sexually harassed, according to the EEOC, has risen from 7.5 percent in 1991 to 12 percent in 1999 (men who were harassed by homosexuals are included in these statistics). To hear of woman sexually harassing a man is not too common. When reviewing cases where the women are the perpetrators, the situation of a “hostile atmosphere” is describe as the perpetrator detailing their sexual adventures in the office, to their male colleagues.
Issues with workplace sexual harassment not only exist in the United States, it’s also very common in other countries. According to a joint study of Ipsos and Reuters, sexual harassment in workplace has occurred in the following places with the annotated percentages:
• 26 percent of workers in India (Chaudhuri 2006);
• 18 percent of workers in China;
• 16 percent of workers in Saudi Arabia;
• 10 percent of workers in South Africa;
• 9 percent of workers in Italy;
• 8 percent of workers in Brazil, USA;
• 3 percent of workers in Sweden, France (Koritsas 2010).
Turkey is an interesting country to look at regarding the managing of sexual harassment in the workplace. Despite a series of laws adopted by Turkey to protect the rights of their victims, the issue is still ongoing and at a rapid pace. For the longest (even with the increasing spread of the problem) Turkey held no serious punishment for sexual harassment. A clear definition of sexual harassment was not established until the 2005 amendment to the Turkish Penal Code. Once sexual harassment received attention and was outlined in the Turkish laws, it held a prison term up to four years, but has previously decreased to two (Sakallı-Uğurlu 2010). The change is not due to the decreasing amount of sexual harassment offenses. It’s because the Turkish sees sexual harassment as a minor issue in comparison to other offenses.
In the United States there have been a number of studies on sexual harassment cases. The U.S. Department of Labor Achievements conducted a study in which concluded that 42 percent of women suffered from sexual harassment in the respective workplaces to include women of the armed forces. In 1990, 66 percent of females serving in staff positions suffered sexual harassment violations from those they worked for or with. In one of the leading women’s magazine, Redbook, the results from a 1980 survey was reflected and confirmed 80 percent of female employees had experienced sexual harassment. Five percent of women working in some of the top United States universities reported their superiors offered them promotion for sex, with ten percent claiming they were touched, rubbed, grabbed or kissed (Lang 2009).
Sexual harassment creates a hostile and uncomfortable working environment. In reviewing some 20 percent of reported cases, 30 percent were afraid of the possible problems that would precede their complaints, such as their future success with the company. More than 20 percent did not want to harm the infringer. The majority feared not being believed and having to face slander of attempting to create scandalous act. In investigation conducted on different occupations composed of majority male workers (such as the automotive industry), results show African American women were harassed more frequently and severely, when compared to Caucasian women in this particular environment. Results have also showed that women of other ethnicity groups suffered from sexual harassment more so than Caucasian women. Flagrant sexual harassment cases are more frequent among occupational fields of physical labor, where men are strongly express they’re feelings against the presence of women. These statistics are prime examples of the problem of sexual harassment in culturally diverse workplaces (Benagiano 2010).
The United States has implemented a legislative solution for this problem. In 1991 the Act on Civil Rights amalgamated the laws regarding sexual harassment. The government holds not only the guilty party liable for the act of sexual harassment, but the company is held fully responsible as well. If the verdict of the court announces the company guilty, it is obliged to pay large sums in compensation. Litigation is presented only to the companies in which human resource managers are aware of what happened, but failed to handle the matters properly and according to the law. Their failure to take appropriate measures to try and change the situation may cause the company millions of dollars. Institutions with no knowledge of the alleged sexual harassment issues or doesn’t posses any written complaints of the actions cannot be subject to prosecution for the unknown incidences (Lightle 2007).
With the big risk of lawsuits for sexual harassment incidences, companies take this issue very serious and have implemented proper precautions to try and eliminate it. For example, prior to new employees starting the job, they are required to attend sexual harassment training and to acknowledge doing so by signing documentation, stating their awareness and understanding of the company’s policy on this issue.
A study conducted by the American Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) in 1999, showed that 62 percent of US companies organize special training for their staff with a detailed description of all aspects of sexual harassment, while 97 percent have available written instructions on the same topic in which employees are introduced to by Human Resource managers in the hiring process (Blackstone 2009). This step is important in order to try and manage the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace. This particular precaution is implemented in universities, schools, government agencies, military and private enterprises. Approximately 75 percent of US companies have adequate control measures for sexual harassment that helps in the prevention of it (Boyd 2010).
Sexual harassment prevention is a worldwide struggle and is being handled as studious as possible. Places such as Eritrea, Ethiopia, Morocco and Poland, for instance, reinforced the regulations of their constitution to protect victims of sexual harassment in the workplace. In a report of the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council assessed the actions of various countries to combat sexual harassment in the workplace. It says that in 2006, Council noted with concern the extent, intensity and widespread nature of violence against employees, particularly sexual violence, possibly due to the prevailing gender stereotypes and patriarchal culture. It asked Jamaica to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy of combating violence against employees in the workplace and its eradication, punish offenders and provide services to victims, ensure the implementation and effective enforcement of existing laws and speedy adoption and implementation of pending legislation to establish monitoring mechanisms and evaluation in order to assess regularly the impact and effectiveness of law enforcement and programs to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace (General Assembly Report 2010).
To Manage and Prevent Sexual Harassment in a Culturally Diverse Workplace is not so easy. The main challenge in this process is the need to take into account the fact that there are cultural differences in understanding such phenomena as sexual harassment. Companies can feel difficulties in managing employees from culturally diverse backgrounds. The top managers of culturally diverse companies should pass special training and learn cultural differences in management styles, in particular the manager-subordinate relationship. The challenge of managing of multicultural company includes the understating of cultural differences in the work ethic and business culture. The cases of sexual harassment and other conflicts between employees should be solved from point of view of different cultures. There can be a great cultural difference between employees in a culturally diverse workplace and all employees should be instructed about the differences in communication styles (verbal and nonverbal).
All employers while providing sexual harassment policy in their companies should remember that there is no unique standard expected of employers in “taking all reasonable steps”, but at as minimum all employers would generally be required to have the proper sexual harassment policy which all workplace participants are monitored and communicated and to take right remedial action if sexual harassment occurs.
Policies and procedures that prevent any kind of harassment help employers in maintaining constructive workplace relationships and can improve employee motivation and performance encouraging him. In managing sexual harassment in the workplace an employer may also have obligations under other laws, such as privacy, defamation, occupational health and safety and industrial laws (WorkSafe Act 2010).
Managing and preventing sexual harassment in the workplace is a task that hasn’t been easy to manage, especially in a culturally diverse working environment. Companies are challenged with ensuring all employees are properly trained on what is sexual harassment, the effects it has on the company and employees, the proper channels for sexual harassment reporting, as well as ensuring the company is in compliance with what’s outlined in the state and federal laws. In this paper we have discussed some of these cases, laws and procedures. We talked about issues other countries have experienced with this and their solutions. Sexual harassment is an issue that can destroy the morale of others. With the proper procedures and punishments for violating these procedures, this issue can be very manageable in a culturally diverse work environment and any place else. References
Aggarwal, A. P., Gupta, M. M. (2000).Sexual harassment in the workplace. p. 326.
Benagiano, G., Carrara, S., & Filippi, V. (2010). Social and ethical determinants of human sexuality: 2. Gender-based violence. The European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care. Informa Healthcare, 15(4), 220-231.
Benavides, E. C., & Cunningham, G. (2010). Observers’ Reporting of Sexual Harassment: The Influence of Harassment Type, Organizational Culture, and Political Orientation. Public Organization Review. Springer Publisher, 10(4), 323-337(15).
Blackstone, A., Uggen, C., & McLaughlin, H. (2009). Legal Consciousness and Responses to Sexual Harassment. Law & Society Review. Wiley-Blackwell, 43(3), 631-668.
Boland, M. L. (2005). Sexual harassment in the workplace. p. 125.
Boyd, C. The Debate Over the Prohibition of Romance in the Workplace. (2010). Journal of Business Ethics. Springer Publisher, 97(2), 325-338(14).
Chaudhuri, P., Population Council (India). (2006). Sexual harassment in the workplace: experiences of women in the health sector. p. 19.
Conte, A. (2000). Sexual harassment in the workplace: law and practice. Volume 1. p. 451.
De Haas, S., & Timmerman, G. (2010). Sexual harassment in the context of double male dominance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. Psychology Press, part of the Taylor & Francis Group, 19(6), 717-734.
General Assembly Report. (12 Aug 2010). The Human Rights Council. Compilation prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in accordance with paragraph 15 b) of the annex to resolution 5/1 Human Rights. Jamaica. Retrieved from http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session9/JM/A_%20HRC_WG.6_9_JAM_2_Jamaica_rus.pdf
Fairchild, G. (2010). Context Effects on Women's Perceptions of Stranger Harassment. Sexuality & Culture. Springer, 14(3), 191-216.
Roux, R. L., Orleyn, T., & Rycroft, A. (2005). Sexual harassment in the workplace: law, policies and processes. pp. 78-79.
Haas, S., Timmerman, G., Höing, M., Zaagsma, M., &Vanwesenbeeck, I. (2010). The Impact of Sexual Harassment Policy in the Dutch Police Force. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. Springer Publisher, 22(4), 311-323(13).
Koritsas, S., Coles, J., & Boyle, M. (2010). Workplace Violence towards Social Workers: The Australian Experience. British Journal of Social Work. Oxford University Press, 40(1), 257-271.
Lang, S. (2009). The Women’s Movement Against Sexual Harassment. By Carrie N. Baker. Law & Society Review. Wiley-Blackwell, 43(4), 945-947.
Lightle, J. (2007). Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: A Guide to Prevention. p. 64.
Ménard, K. S., Shoss, N. E., & Pincus, A. L. (2010). Attachment and Personality Predicts Engagement in Sexual Harassment by Male and Female College Students. Violence and Victims. Springer Publishing Company, 25(6), 770-786.
Pruett, K. (2001). Sexual harassment in the workplace: a legal research guide. p. 34.
Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Salman, S., & Turgut, S. (2010). Predictors of Turkish Women’s and Men’s Attitudes toward Sexual Harassment: Ambivalent Sexism, and Ambivalence Toward Men. Sex Roles. Springer Publisher, 63(11-12), 871-881(11).
Toker, Y., & Sümer, H.C. (2010). Workplace Sexual Harassment Perceptions in the Turkish Context and the Role of Individual Differences. Applied Psychology An International Review. Wiley-Blackwell, 59(4), 616-646.
WorkSafe Act. (2010). Preventing and managing harassment in the workplace. ACT Government. Retrieved from http://cdn.justice.act.gov.au/resources/uploads/Worksafe/Publications/Handbooks/WSACT_HB_0011_-_Preventing_and_Managing_Harassment_in_the_Workplace.pdf