Sexual Harassment Behaviors and Their Direct and Long-Term Consequences - Essay Example

Sexual Harassment of the of the Answer Harassing a person is always unlawful, regardless of form, manner, environment or situation. In general, harassment does not confine itself to a particular sexual nature. It can, however, include various aspects such as, offensive remarks about a person’s gender, creating a hostile or uneasy environment for a person and even pressurizing one to do certain things against his or her will (TWU counseling center, n.d.). Harassment has become highly prevalent in working environment. In the earlier times, as laws and regulations were not strict or defined, most cases of sexual harassment were either dropped voluntarily or simply neglected by the authorities. Nonetheless, with increasing awareness among women as well as government initiatives to guard men and women against malfeasance of the society, more and more people are rising to protest against sexual harassment cases. As a result, the policy makers have also started developing more stringent and defined rules and policies in order to ward off criminals, who escape through loopholes in policies and amendments. The EEOC has set explicit guidelines so as to define sexual harassment. Any unwelcomed sexual advance, physical or verbal conduct or requests for sexual favors will be considered as sexual harassment, when; Compliance to such conducts are made either implicitly or explicitly, or Rejection or submission of such conducts by individuals is used as a criterion for making employment decisions affecting such employees, or If such conduct has a purpose or an effect of unreasonable prying on the work performance of an individual or creates a hostile, offensive or intimidating working environment (TWU counseling center, n.d.). In a detailed manner, sexual harassment can be physical, verbal or non-verbal and even, psychological. It can also be in form of unwelcomed gestures or postures. Most of the activities performed by Peter Lewiston fall under the EEOC’s definition of sexual harassment; for instance, giving unwanted letters or materials, which are of sexual nature. Lewiston was constantly giving flowers to Gilbury without informing her and before she arrived in the school, which made her uncomfortable. Another act of sexual harassment pursued by Lewiston was that of pressurizing Gilbury for a date. Even after her rejection, he incessantly asked her to have lunch with him. Lewiston also deliberately touched her head, while having conversation with Gilbury, which made her further uncomfortable and uneasy. Peter also blocked her path, when she was returning from work. All of the above gestures, postures as well as actions pursued by Peter were unwelcomed by Gilbury and can definitely be considered as a case of sexual harassment. Answer 2 Dealing with complaints of harassment is never easy. Situations get more difficult in grey or blatant conditions, involving implicit offensive expressions. Sexual harassment brings in very harsh conditions for the victims. These situations can range from physical, mental, psychological to emotional torments. Regardless of the intent or motive behind any act of sexual harassment, if the activities are unwelcome, they will definitely create a negative impact on the victim. For instance, in this case, giving regular gifts and cards to the victim ultimately had led to a hostile environment for the same and also, affected her mental and psychological state. In such situations, even policy makers such as, EEOC, opts for several levels of investigations. Non-physical harassments are even more difficult to counter. Here, both victim and perpetuator have different conceptions and perceptions regarding harassment and most of the time, the statements also seem to differ. For instance, statements made by Peter and Gilbury were very different from each other (Burke, 1995). While Gilbury treated the gifts and letters as unwanted and unwelcomed, leading to a hostile environment; for Peter, it was merely an act or gesture of friendship. Even so, it is very clear that the person who is harassed is the sole victim in such situations and therefore, all considerations should be on the victim’s side. A difference between intent and impact is generally considered, while judging or evaluating sexual harassment cases. In most of the courts, intended harassment is generally not considered as offensive, while determining the occurrence of harassment (Bar-David, n.d.). For instance, if a colleague or boss asks for sexual favors and follows it with ‘I was joking’, then the court of law will not consider it as a case of sexual harassment. Several differences lie between the perception of harassment by government officials, victims as well as perpetuators. However, strict regulations are required even in the minutest case of sexual harassment. From the case study, it is clear that the intent or motive of Peter Lewiston was to derive sexual favors from his colleague, Gilbury. It is evident from his constant badgering for lunch and dinner as well as giving her gifts and letters, even when such acts clearly made Gilbury uncomfortable. Additionally, Peter also made sexual comments on Gilbury, which were unwelcomed and treated as offensive and intrusive by her. Thus, intent or motive behind Peter’s sexual advancements should be considered, not to defend him, but to make a clear judgment while evaluating the conditions and issues faced by the victim. Answer 3 As the district’s EEOC officer, my first step would be to terminate Peter Lewiston from his current work, as suggested in the case study. According to me, any act of sexual inflictions, whether verbal, non-verbal or psychological, should be considered as a crime, if it creates any kind of negative impact on the person at whom these advances are directed. The consequences of sexual harassment are very traumatic and are overlooked in many cases, thereby weakening the victim internally. For instance, in the case study, even though Gilbury was feeling uncomfortable and intimidated by the acts of Peter, she was not able to open up or confess her discomfort to Peter, fearing the consequences on employee-employee relationship (Nielsen, 1996). This internal intimidation was clearer when Peter had tried to stop her on her way back home and had deliberately touched her head, which was regarded as an offensive act for Gilbury. Thus, actions of Peter will be deemed as those comprising a case of sexual harassment and proper actions should be taken. Apart from terminating Peter Lewiston, I, as the EEOC officer, would also set some immediate policies and rules regarding harassment at workplace, which would be circulated in all work stations in the district (Echiejile, 1993). These circulars will enumerate general sexual harassment behaviors as well as their direct and long-term consequences. This will not only reduce the occurrences of sexual harassment, but will also enhance knowledge among potential victims; so that they can immediately complain without being confused or scared. In order to avoid these scenarios of sexual harassment in future, I will also include classes and campaigns, through which employees will be informed about basic and necessary facts related to work ethics, sexual harassment, proper and improper ways to work, employee-employee relations, employee-employer relationships as well as fundamental rights and duties of employees. In case of Peter Lewiston, though he will be allowed to work in a separate office or company, after serving a certain period of house arrest, he would still need to sign a legal document stating that in future, if he is found guilty in any case of sexual harassment, he will be barred from all kinds of legal employment activities. In addition, he will also have to pay a certain sum of fine to the victim as well as appear in criminal law courts at frequent intervals. References Bar-David, S. (n.d.). Harassment: Distinguishing ‘Intent’ from ‘Impact’. Retrieved from http://www.eapat.org/PDF/Harassment.pdf Burke, J. (1995). Incidence and consequences of sexual harassment in a professional services firm, Employee Counseling Today, 7(3), 23 - 29 Echiejile, I. (1993). Dealing with Sexual Harassment at Work. Employee Counseling Today, 5(4), 21 – 29. Nielsen, W.R. (1996). Perceptions of sexual harassment: A female office professional’s perspective. Employee Counseling Today, 8(4), 6 – 14. TWU counseling center. (n.d.). Sexual Harassment: The Facts. Retrieved from http://www.twu.edu/downloads/counseling/G-7_Sexual_Harassment_The_Facts.pdf Read More