Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

It is behavior that is bothersome, irritating, demeaning, and annoying. Sexual harassment is harassment of a sexual nature. But it can be more! It is against the law! It can lead to substantial and embarrassing court fines and significant payments to an injured party. It can mean reduced productivity. It can be measured in lower stock value. It can be a hostile work environment. It is wrong.

Sexual harassment is basically defined as unwelcome sexual conduct that is servere or pervasive and that creates a hostile or abusive work environment. There are two types of sexual harassment claims. The most common in recent years has been hostile environment sexual harassment. This type of harassment is usually motivated by an animus toward women or sexual desire, and takes the form of sexual advances, jokes, comments or actions that alter the work environment. The second type of sexual harassment is called quid pro quo (”this for that”) sexual harassment. Quid pro quo sexual harassment most often occurs where a supervisor or manager threatens some adverse employment action absent relenting to sexual demands or offers employment benefits in exchange for sexual favors.

Landmark Supreme Court judgment on Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at their work place. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing.

This petition was in Sexual Harassment in the Workplace and was brought as a class action by certain social activits and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behaviour (whether directly or by implication) as:

(a) physical contact and advances;

(b) a demand or request for sexual favours;

(c) sexually coloured remarks;

(d) showing pornography;

(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should included rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees steps should be taken to include the prohibition in this standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action.