Sexual Harassment Relating to Women under the 2010 Equality Act - Essay Example

?Sexual harassment relating to women under the Equality Act Harassment has been a major problem in the world for a long time. The most victimized group has been women. Harassment to women has really changed over the years as civil rights evolve. While physical aggression and harassment to women has declined over the years, sexual harassment has been on the increase. Sexual harassment nowadays is through sexual advances to women to be offered favours in the work place or for things that are of interest to the women.1 The United Kingdom legislators know this only too well. They have embarked on protecting women within their jurisdiction against such harassment, through the 2010 Equality Act. This act puts on notice to all people who deal with the group termed as protected individuals, which women are covered. Any organization, business, schools and institutions of higher learning as well as government offices have to be aware of this rule. Disregarding this act can lead to severe penalties and adverse consequences. The equality act 2010 promises to safeguard the rights of women against any form of harassment and it is the responsibility of all institutions having women employees or students to be aware of it, what needs to be done and the possible consequences of disregarding this law. The 2010 Equality Act The equality act 2010 is one of the key milestones the United Kingdom legislatures have achieved in the last few decades. It has come to attention to them that some people in the society are discriminated to some extent. Since they are in the developed and modern world, they should have equal opportunities. Women are discriminated against in so many ways; for example, most of the high ranking jobs are mostly men dominated. Looking at the United Kingdom for example, more than half of United Kingdom populations are women. However, more than 80% of the United Kingdom parliaments in both houses are men.2 Although men maybe capable of passing laws and policies that impact the whole jurisdiction, would it not be better for women to be better represented in the Parliament? This is not any different in the other sectors of the economy. At the same time, women are exposed to a lot of harassment including sexual harassment in their places of work. 3 Women are constantly harassed by men in their work places. The managers and directors may not harass women in their quest for employment but when they get the job, they may be harassed by the male colleagues they get in their new place of work. Some of the highest management officials may be aware about such behaviour but do nothing about it. These findings were important in the inspiration of making the equality act 2010. 4 The ideas of equality in the United Kingdom started well back in the 1970s. However, there are some laws and policies made in the 1960s that had an impact in this act for example the commonwealth immigrants’ act in 1962 and the race relations act in 1965. 5The United Kingdom parliament passed the equal pay act in 1970. This was followed by the sexual discrimination act in 1975, the Race relations act in 1976, the disability discrimination act in 1995, the equality act part two in 2006, the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003, the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 and the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. Despite the passing of these laws and regulations, it seems like the United Kingdom parliament was just but mincing words. Little differences were reported in all the sectors involved in this. Some even went from bad to worse, for example the salaries disparities between men and women. BBC reported recently that the salary gap between men and women has been increasing recently. That would not be expected even in 1975, after the passing of the equal pay act in 1970 assuming that the five years were used for implementation of the policy. 6 Experts claim that the United Kingdom Parliament has been relaxing in implementation of the most important laws. These comments and the widespread studies by experts and independent researchers in the United Kingdom and beyond have put a lot of pressure on the legislators in the country. The equality act 2010 means business for the United Kingdom parliament. Legislators would like to see the act given the attention it needs in the country. This act is very categorical on harassment in section 26. Sexual Harassment According to the equality act 2010, harassment can be categorized into three. A person can be said to harass another person if they engage in unwanted conduct which has an effect on the dignity of the second party or creates intimidating, humiliating, degrading and hostile environment for a person. 7 Second is when a person engages in unwanted conduct that is sexual in nature and third when a person engages in conducts related to the sexual orientation or reassignment. Sexual harassment may also be considered when a person treats another person less favourably when they reject their sexual advances. It is important to note that sexual harassment included verbal and non-verbal actions. For an action to be termed sexual harassment, the perception of the victim has to be considered. Some people may not take offense, when some things, which may be taken as sexual by others, are done to them. Such a person is likely to say they were not sexually harassed. Sexual harassment can only hold water when the presumed victims state so. 8 Sexual harassment precisely to women maybe perceived differently depending on the nature of the action and the place it takes place. Employment Employers discriminate many employees and potential employees basing on several factors. There are many such cases reported in many parts of the United Kingdom. In the case X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau, the Supreme Court was to decide whether volunteers can fall under the discrimination act of the equality act 2010. The case revolved around a volunteer who informed her boss she had contracted HIV. The boss responded that she could no longer work there as she posed risks to the other employees. She sued her boss on grounds that she was discriminated against in the work place. True, she was discriminated as it would be explained under the disability clause under the equality act 2010. However, the case was challenging because the compliant was not employed full time and did not receive any form of remuneration. The way the discrimination act is put does not include volunteers and interns making it a challenge to define whether there was actual case of discrimination or not. 9 In another case, Mr Andrew Martin Jones v Miss Philippa Owen, presiding judge His Honour Jeffrey Burke confirmed that Miss Owen was dismissed from employment as a result of sexual harassment and discrimination towards her. In this case, the court was responsible to charge Miss Owen employer because they broke the law according to the equality act 2010 clause on discrimination. Miss Owen was awarded 10,000 pounds compensation. 10 It has also been noted that some employers discriminate women on grounds of pregnancy. Some employers argue that pregnant women do not work well. At the same time, they have to go for maternity leave which may make the employer to incur cases. While these are rare, several cases have confirmed their occurrence. The Warby v Wunda Group Plc (Harassment) [2012] UKEAT 0434_11_2701 case indicates what women undergo when they are pregnant in the work place. The employer stated humiliating and offensive words to Mrs. Warby on informing him she was pregnant. The court ruled in favor of Mrs. Warby as there was sufficient evident to confirm the manager of Wunda group stated so. 11 In other cases involving pregnancy, husbands and spouses to pregnant women may find themselves on the receiving end. The Kulikaoskas v Macduff Shellfish and another confirms that the cases actually occur. This case was interesting in that the husband informed his manager that his wife was pregnant and was dismissed from work. This case falls under associative pregnancy and was covered under the discrimination act of 1975. In that case, the employer was guilty of discriminating. 12 Managers from all businesses, institutions and companies are advised to appreciate the changes in the equality law 2010. They should ensure that their employees do not harass each other sexually within their premises. If there are any cases of sexual harassment, the managers ought to take action against the harassers.13 Managers and directors who have not appreciated these changes may learn the hard way. The manager of the West Belfast, Autism Initiatives learned this the hard way. Noeleen McAleenon, an employee at the institution was harassed by a male employee sexually for a period of twenty days. She reported the issue to the employer but was like nothing much was done which compelled her to resign from the work. McAleenon claimed that she felt violated and degraded by the harasser to the point that she could not concentrate on her work. The equality commission which was working on the case awarded McAleenon 12, 293 pounds for sexual harassment. 14 In another case retrieved from Westlaw United Kingdom, a line manager Mr. Kelly was sued by his junior Ms Hurst. The two worked at the PH Jones Ltd (PHJ) call centre in Stevenage. Ms Hurst was retrenched from her work and had reasons to believe she was dismissed inappropriately. Ms Hurst also claimed that it was possible she was dismissed because of the several cases which she had been harassed by Mr. Kelly sexually. Though the employer had gone extra lengths to prevent Ms Hurst from suing the company, the court allowed proceedings to continue. 15 Third Party Harassment Third party harassment can take many forms including where a parent discrimination because they have needy children. The Coleman v Attridge Law case confirms these fears. A mother claimed she was harassed by her employer and fellow work colleagues because of the disability of her child. She also claims that her boss denied her flexible work schedule to give her enough time to take care of her child. The mother postulates the employer allowed other parents in the same work place to have flexible schedules to take care of their children yet the children were not needy. The employer suggested that the case did not hold any water as the mother was not discriminated against directly. What the employer did not know is that denying a parent permission to take care of the needy child and making negative comments about the child’s disability is direct discrimination to the parent. A judge involved in the case claimed that the employee’s claims were irrefutable under the law considering the disability act under the equality act 2010 presently. 16 Harassment basing on Religion There are many cases of women and men discriminated against and harassed basing on their respective religion. In the case Mba v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Merton ET/2350743/10, the complainant claimed she was denied time to go to church. The employer required her to report to work on Sundays despite the fact that she informed her employer about her faith and needed time to worship on Sundays. The employer did not appreciate that the equality act 2010 clearly postulates employees cannot be discriminated against because of their faith. Her employer, Mr. Deegan did not like that Ms Mba would not work on weekends. The manager involved Ms. Lawson assigned Ms. Mba Sunday duties but substituted with the annual leave for Mba. The case took many twists and turns and in the end it was confirmed that Ms. Mba had the right to worship but also had an obligation to request changes to contracts before starting to work to avoid problems with the employer. 17 Gender Reassignment In these modern times, there are people who feel they are more of the opposite sex. In this case, a man may state that they feel more like women and women may state they feel more like men. These people are there in the society but they have become subject of controversies and prejudice.18 United Kingdom government has been concerned about the issue for a while. Legislators were at cross lines not knowing exactly what to do. People within the jurisdiction have freedom of speech, life and expression. As such, there was no way the government could stop such people from expressing what they feel and how they would like to live their lives. While the government was okay with this, the society was reluctant to embrace this new norm. This realization made the legislators to put such people in the protected category especially in the equality act 2010. Under this act, any person who comments negatively about a person’s sexuality like gender reassignment can be punished under law. It is termed as sexual harassment under equality act 2010. 19 20 Protection from sexual harassment is also extended to the Gay, Lesbian, Heterosexual and Tran’s people under the equality act 2010. Sexual jokes, advances and any form of harassment should be avoided in public institutions, companies and businesses. These people can sue anyone who they deem has harassed them sexually. 21 22 The English v Thomas Sanderson Ltd [2008] is a good example of sexual harassment basing on gender reassignment. A heterosexual employee was harassed sexually by the co-workers. The employer found out early enough and took action which saved the situation. The court dismissed the case basing on the discrimination act of 975. However, the situation would have been different with the enhanced equality act 2010. 23 Application of the Equality Act 2010 Upon signing of the equality act 2010, some acts from the past change and are included in this act. 24For example, if a woman was harassed sexually before October 2, 2010 when the act was signed into law, and the case or investigations are ongoing, they would have to be covered by the previous regulation on sexual harassment for example the Sex Discrimination act of 1975. On the other hand, if someone is harassed for a time before the act but the harassment proceeds after October 2, 2010, then they are covered under the equality law 2010. 25 Conclusion The equality Act 2010, promises to protect the people that are subject to harassment all the time for example women. They are protected from unwarranted harassment in their places of work and in the mainstream society. Though these Acts started to be passed more than four decades ago, it is time for the government to put more emphasis on them to ensure equality in the society. Many cases regarding the violation of the equality act 2010 and the preceding acts are documented. References BBC News Northern Ireland. ‘Woman awarded ?12,293 for sexual harassment at work’ (BBC.com, 19 April 2013). accessed 23 November 2013. Case No. UKEAT/0167/13/DM Ms S Hurst v Mr. M Kelly 920130 WL 3450797. Case UKEAT/0091/13/RN, Mr. Andrew Martin Jones v Miss Philippa Owen (2013) WL 6148241. Communications Workers Union. ‘The Equality Act 2010’. (Cwu.org, 2013) Accessed 23 November 2013. Equality Law. ‘A woman's place is in ...... the board room?’ (Equality-law.co.uk, 28 September 2011). accessed 23 November 2013. Equality Law. ‘Sexual orientation claims on the rise’. (Equality-law.co.uk, 27 October 2011). accessed 23 November 2013. Expert Human Resources United Kingdom, Law Cases. Mba v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Merton ET/2350743/10. (xperthr.co.uk, April 2012). Accessed 23 November 2013. Government Equalities Office. ‘Equality Act 2010: What do I need to know?’ (gov.uk, 2012) Accessed 23 November 2013. Government Equalities Office. ‘Gender Reassignment’ (gov.uk, 2012). Accessed 23 November 2013. Government Equalities Office. Explaining the Equality Bill: Harassment protection for lesbian, gay, bisexual and Trans people. (pfc.org.uk, 2013) Accessed 23 November 2013. Hepple, B. The New Single Equality Act in Britain. (2010) 5 ERR. International Labor Organization. ‘Report I (B) - Equality at work: The continuing challenge - Global Report under the follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work’ (ilo.org, 27 April 2011) Accessed 23 November 2013. Jacobson, B. ‘Discrimination and the equality act 2010’ (brownejacobson.com, 2013) accessed 23 November 2013. Reya, M, D. ‘Equality Act 2010: what employers need to know’? (inhouselawyer.co.uk, 10 June 2010) Sargeant, M. ‘Sexual orientation and reassignment’ in Malcolm ed, Discrimination and law. (Routledge, 2013). Stammering Law United Kingdom. Coleman v Attridge Law. (stammeringlaw.co.uk, July 2008). Accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Court of Justice. ‘Kulikauskas v Macduff Shellfish (Scotland) Ltd and another XA141/10’. (practicallaw.co.uk, 11 January 2012). accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal. ‘Warby v Wunda Group Plc (Harassment) [2012] UKEAT 0434_11_2701’ (bailii.org, 27 January 2012) accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Government Legislation. ‘Equality Act 2010’ (legislation.gov.uk, 2013) Accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Government. ‘Equality Act 2010: Guidance.’ (gov.uk, 2013) accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Parliament. ‘Towards Equality’ (parliament.uk. 2013) accessed 23 November 2013. United Kingdom Supreme Court. ‘X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau’ 9 supremecourt.gov.uk, 12 December 2012. accessed 23 November 2013. University of Minnesota. ‘Stop Violence against Women Sexual Harassment: What is sexual harassment?’ (umn.edu, 2013) Accessed 23 November 2013. Wadham, J., Ruebain, D Robinson, A, Uppal, S. Sexual Harassment in John Wadham Ed, Blackstone's Guide to the Equality Act 2010 (Oxford University Press, 2012). Workplace law group. ‘Bullying and Harassment’ in workplace law group, Employment Law and Human Resources Handbook 2012. (Kogan Page Publishers, 2011). Read More