Misplace for Affections for Sexual Harassment - Article Example

? Human Resource Sexual Harassment [Pick the Part 1. What relevant laws (Federal & NYS) will need to be considered in the context of this case? Evaluate the conduct of Peter Fenning against the EEOC’s definition of Sexual Harassment. Federal and New York State laws have registered apprehensions with cognizant, appeals and voiced its concern about the harassment issues that are constructing blocks of Human Right Laws (Stop Bullying Goverment, 2002). The New York state law is a strong advocate of Sexual harassment at workplace. These policies are created as state model and they are wider enough to cover issues beyond behavior based on characteristics. New York State laws starting from Law No. 10 to Law No.18 all deal with the different bullying aspects that can possibly be constructed in any form (Stop Bullying Goverment, 2002). They hold well defined anti bullying and sexual harassment protective policies that are well equipped definitions of purpose, scope, prohibited behavior and enumerated groups. New York State Law No. 16 directly deals with the sexual harassment cases and that is very well referable to the case of Peter Fenning. At the same time, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sexual harassments include unwelcome sexual advances that do not have to be strictly physical in nature and can also be verbal., and it clearly does not include simple teasing or off hand comments but does include any misbehaving remarks made about the gender (U.S. Equal Emploment Oppurtunity Commision, 2012). As per the definition of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Conduct of Peter Fenning is generally offensive since he did not make any unpleasant or demark able sexual advancements and thus does not contain enough material to be concluded as a sexually offensive act or a sexually harassing deal. 2. Should the intent or motive behind Fenning’s conduct be considered when deciding sexual harassment activities? Explain The case provided that has detailed Fenning’s attitude towards his coworker Beverly Sanger, that gives shots of his attitude and actions that she claimed offensive and marked them as sexual harassment. However, as per the explanations about sexual harassment by the New York State and Federal Laws and Equal Employment opportunity Commission explained above and a further Fenning’s apparent actions cannot be classified as sexually harassing. In fact, according to a survey, most of us nowadays spend most of the time at work, for instance, even if the job is not eight to ten hours long and is five to six hours of business, it yet requires a high level commitment amongst coworkers since the nature of their work requires too much of coordinate works (Lisa Gurin, 2010). This naturally builds cross affiliations and it becomes very natural for the people to like each other. Under certain circumstances, someone would like the extra attention and care while someone else might not. These cannot be classified as sexually harassing advances since they are very strict in nature and they include pushing some coworker or subordinate for physical favors (Lisa Gurin, 2010). Now, since his acts do not qualify the definition of sexual harassment, his actions and intention could be reviewed to assess if he actually meant to harass Beverly Sanger sexually. The case shows that he tried to convey his feelings in a very humble way and later tried to proceed with a flower bouquet instead of appearing physically around her. If he intended to sexually harass her he could have done all the time when they worked together, where, according to the case he stayed humble. He never seemed to have irritated her or touched her annoyingly. The case of Fenning’s and Beverly Sanger is not at all a sexual harassment scene. In fact, Beverly Sanger seems to have over reacted when the case was a simple scene of attraction between two coworkers where one was attracted towards the other while the other had no feelings. 3. If you were District EEOC’s Officer, what would you conclude. If any, what disciplinary action would you take? As the District Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Officer, I would ask Beverly Sanger to explain the case in further detail. I would assess the case deeply by inquiring about Fenning’s attitude towards other female coworkers during his employment history and otherwise his body language with Beverly Sanger. If the findings show that he has tried to get romantically involved with his female coworkers earlier as well, I would opt for issuing him a warning rather than firing since the present case neither shows nor provides any clear act of sexual harassment or unwanted sexual attempts. If otherwise, i.e. his record is clear of any former romantic record, in my view point it is very genuine to develop likings for any coworker you have worked with for a long time period. Fenning has only tried to convey his feelings which could have been deemed offensive by Beverly Sanger, since she had no feelings in return, which is very genuine but she can neither term them as sexually harassing nor does she have any concrete basis to file a case against him. On disciplinary grounds I would rather warn Beverly Sanger to not over rate minor issues and get them registered legally unless she herself is well versed with what law is applicable where. In other words, she has wasted the district officer’s time in a minor personal issue. I would recommend organizations to hold all sessions with their employees about the ins of sexual harassment issues and create awareness about these issues. Part 2 4. Based on the Sexual harassment case study, develop an interview protocol. This section should articulate your approach for interviewing each of the following people: The Accuser The Accused A Witness Before formally getting started with the interview, I would consider doing some homework about the interviewees. That could help me evaluate their personalities the best possible way and the results could be more dependable. I would carry a note taking pad along with a pen and a small recorder to record what they have to say. I would devise question that can deeply investigate for corroborative proof. While interviewing Beverly Sanger, the accuser or the victim, I will watch for sufficient detail, internal consistency and believability. 5. Prepare a potential set of interview questions for each person in the claim. The Accuser What is her job nature at the School? How long have you been with the School? What exactly happened? When did it start happening? What did the harasser do or say? What did she do or say? Does she think she missed any of his signs earlier to this time? She thinks anyone else noticed his attitude? With who has she discussed the issue at workplace? The Accused How would he describe the school’s environment? Does he think the environment is very easy to act around? Are you attracted to Beverly Sanger? Do you prefer thinking of her in physical closeness? Did you offer her any career help I exchange of any physical condition? The Witness What is the general working environment of the school? How do teacher and other staff members interact in the teacher’s stay area or cafe? Did you notice anything in Fenning’s attitude that is questionable while dealing with female coworkers? How closely do you know Fenning? How closely do you know Beverly Sanger? Do you think Fenning can be sexually offensive? Do you think Beverly Sanger can over rate minor issues? 6. Write a brief report based on your assessment of the case. Since the questions I designed were purely based upon the definition of sexual harassment, I got to see if the situation validates the elements of sexual harassment. After interviewing all three i.e., the accuser Beverly Sanger, the accused Fenning and a Witness I have concluded the following: The working Environment of the school is very easy going and friendly. There are a lot of informal friendly groups yet the rate of explicit jokes is nonexistent. Fenning and Beverly Singer are a part of informal group that giggles in the corner of the cafe. Neither Beverly Sanger nor Fenning ever had any romantic involvements at the work place. Even according to Beverly, Fenning did not try to touch her or force or physically. No question was answered as “Yes” that was based on the definition of sexual harassment. In my view, the organization should educate its employees exactly about what sexual harassment is. There should be open awareness about the exact constitutes of sexual harassment. Beverly Sanger should be dealt in person and explained how her mere over rating harmed a gentle employee’s reputation. Moreover, the informal grouping should be strictly looked in and held back from crowding in the corners. And most importantly, the coworkers should be taught to move with a genuine and professional distance that would not hinder their working attitudes. References Lisa Gurin, J. (2010). The Essential Guide to Workplace Investigation. In J. Lisa Gurin, The Essential Guide to workplace Investigation (pp. 175 - 213). USA: Society for Human Resource Management. Stop Bullying Goverment. (2002). About Us: Stop Bullying Goverment. Retrieved from Stop Bullying Goverment Website: http://www.stopbullying.gov/laws/new-york.html U.S. Equal Emploment Oppurtunity Commision. (2012). About Us: EEOC Goverment Laws. Retrieved from EEOC Goverment Laws Web Site: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm Read More