Sexual Harassment as a Gender Issue in the Workplace - Coursework Example

Running Header: Sexual Harassment Name: Course: Institution: Tutor: Sexual Harassment as a Gender Issue in the Workplace Despite numerous efforts by national and international organizations to eliminate or at least reduce acts of sexual harassment at the workplace, it is very difficulty to come up with a conventionally-agreed upon definition of this behavior. In general, international organizations view sexual harassment as discrimination and violence against women while national laws tend to focus on the illegal nature of the behavior. Nevertheless, all definitions tend to agree that acts of sexual harassment are unwanted and unwelcome, and cause suffering and harm to the victim (Antecola, Barcus & Cobb-Clark, 2009). At the international level, the International Labor Organization has defined the behavior as one form of sex discrimination. According to the ILO, acts of sexual harassment and related behaviors constitute an important problem of workplace health and safety besides creating unacceptable working conditions for both the perpetrator and the victim. On its part, the UN Convention of on Elimination of Discrimination against Women has defined sexual harassment as “The unwelcome sexually determined behavior such as physical contact and advances, sexually colored remarks, showing pornography and sexual demands, whether by words or actions…” At the national and regional levels, the US became the first county to prohibit sexual harassment at the workplace. Under the US laws, sexual harassment is “The unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conducts of a sexual nature” (American Association of University Women, 2001). Besides the national definition of sexual harassment, most states in the US have prohibited sexual harassment in state laws, some of which may be slightly different from the federal definition. Under the Australian jurisdiction, sexual harassment is defined as any comment, conduct or gesture of sexual nature that can potentially cause humiliation or offense to employees (Australia Human Rights Commission, 2012). Although there is no universal agreement on the definition of sexual harassment, there is some agreement on the characteristics that constitute the prohibited behaviour. In order for any act to be sexual harassment, it should be related to sex; be unwelcome by the victim and should affect the terms of employment or the work environment. Generally, sexual harassment is one form of sex discrimination but it is not easy tell whether it is a gender, equality or power issue in the workplace (Rowe, 1990). The basis for this difficulty is that many of the acts of sexual content directed towards individuals may fall within the definition of differential treatments and behaviors based on sex (Antecola, Barcus & Cobb-Clark, 2009). Nevertheless, not all forms of gender-based discrimination can be classified as sexual harassment, yet in some cases, it becomes difficult to make proper separations between what is considered to be sexual harassment and not. According to Antecola, Barcus and Cobb-Clark, (2009), acts of sexual harassment constitutes an important gender issue in the workplace although this does not necessarily relate to the biological differences between men and women but rather to the social responsibilities and roles attributed to men and women. Antecola, Barcus and Cobb-Clark (2009) have further noted that sexual harassment in any setting is closely related to the social perceptions about male and female sexuality. As a form of sex discrimination, sexual harassment manifests inequalities and disparities in power relations. As such, sexual harassment can be an important equality and power issue in the workplace. This is because in most cases, the perpetrators of sexual harassment are usually in senior positions in the organizational hierarchy and wield huge decision-making authority or some other power influences that can greatly influence their desire to exercise control and power over the victims (Kamir, 2005). On the other hand, most victims of sexual harassment tend to have limited powers and decision-making authority (Dodier, 1987). For this reason, sexual harassment, in addition to deriving sexual pleasures out of the behavior also tends to help in asserting the perpetrator’s power over the victim. Antecola, Barcus and Cobb-Clark (2009) have described workplace harassment as a violation of the rights of employees, a form of violence and a safety and health hazard in the workplace. Although both men and women are equally susceptible to sexual harassment, majority of qualitative and quantitative research studies indicate that men are much more likely to be perpetrators ad women victims in any workplace setup (Dodier, 1987). Numerous researches have been done to determine the extent of sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. A common finding is that although Australia has had the anti-harassment legislation for 24 years, sexual harassment is still rife. Acts of sexual harassment in Australian are treated under the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984. Over the last three decades, an increasing number of women have joined workforces in Australian and this has increased their vulnerability to unwanted attention in the workplace. In most of these workforces, the problem of sexual harassment is acknowledged as a serious management issue and an occupational hazard. In the last few years, the Australian Commission on Human Rights has actively pursued incidences of sexual harassment. Some of the statistics revealed by the commission indicate that about 20% of complaints launched at the Commission relate to sexual harassment. In 2009, the Commission conducted a telephone poll and realized that almost 30% of women were victims to sexual harassment compared to 7% for men (Australia Human Rights Commission, 2012). The biggest sexual harassment case in Australia’s history was settled for AU$850, 000 in 2010. The case involved the country’s oldest departmental store David Jones and a junior publicity, Kristy Fraser-Kirk. In the case, Fraser claimed that the Chief Executive Officer in the departmental store chain Mr. McInnes had waged a campaign of sexual harassment against her which included several attempts to touch and kiss her, as well as, invitations to his house for sex. She further claimed that although the company (David Jones) was aware of the Chief Executive Officer’s behavior, it took no step to stop the behaviour. Neither did the Chief Executive Officer stop his unwelcome behaviour despite having been warned severally by the claimant. Miss Kristy originally sought compensation of 37 million dollars but pledged to donate a substantial part of it to charity organizations that advocated against sexual harassment in the workplace. Negotiations between David Jones and Kristy saw the case settled out of the court for $850,000. As could be expected, Mr. McInnes resigned and had to bear the embarrassment of being the first Chief Executive Officer in Australia to resign over claims of sexual harassment. The case severely dented Davis Jones reputation (Australia Human Rights Commission. 2012). In the United States, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits acts of workplace harassment. This legislation was originally meant to combat acts of sexual harassment against women in the workplace and other public or private situations. The 1964 Act has been amended severally since it was enacted to incorporate other forms of sexual harassment such as sending sexual messages on emails or cell phone (American Association of University Women, 2001). In early 1980s, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued new regulations, which defined sexual harassment as an issue of gender-based discrimination. In the past two decades, hundreds of cases have been brought before the United States courts in respect of sexual harassment, although most of them have disproportionally been launched by women (Dodier, 1987). Perhaps the most notable sexual harassment case in the United States was that of Vinson against Meritor Savings Bank in 1986. The plaintiff was fired from Meritor Savings Bank and she sued the bank’s vice president, Sidney Taylor claiming that her dismissal was a form of sexual harassment. She claimed that Sidney had coerced her into having sexual relations with him, which created a hostile working environment. The court ruled that indeed Vinson had been sexually harassed at her workplace. The facts of this case were so compelling that the Supreme Court recognized some forms of sexual harassment to be a violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Dodier, 1987). Elissa, Perry, Kulik and Marina (2009) have explained that perceptions on what constitutes sexual harassment vary greatly among and within communities and, therefore, make it difficult to tell whether it is a gender, equality or power issue. Some of the most important factors which influence perceptions of sexual harassment include existence of socio-economic hierarchies and gender stereotypes that may exist in people’s public and private lives (Rowe, 1990). For instance, a kiss on the cheek during greetings in the United States is considered a normal behavior. This can however be considered a form of sexual advance in the Arab countries (Newman, Jackson & Baker, 2003). It is, therefore, difficult to develop an exhaustive list of sexually harassing conducts that should be prohibited. Owing to the different interpretations of sexual harassment, it is ambiguous to state conclusively that it is a gender issue in the workplace or a power issue. References American Association of University Women. 2001. Hostile hallways. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation. ISBN: 1879922010. Available: www.aauw.org/k-12 Antecola, H and Cobb-Clark, D 2006, The sexual harassment of female active-duty personnel: Effects on job satisfaction and intentions to remain in the military, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 61, p. 55–80. Antecola, H., Barcus, V and Cobb-Clark, D 2009, Gender-biased behavior at work: Exploring the relationship between sexual harassment and sex discrimination, Journal of Economic Psychology, vol. 30, p. 782–792. Australia Human Rights Commission 2008, Effectively preventing and responding to sexual harassment: a code of practice for employers, Canberra, Australian Human Rights Commission, viewed 2nd May 2012 from http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sexualharassment/employers_code/COP2008.pdf.nbvww Australia Human Rights Commission 2012, Sexual harassment in Australia, viewed 2nd May 2012 from http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sex_discrimination/programs/sexual_harassment.html Dodier, G 1987, "Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson: Sexual Harassment at Work", Harvard Women's Law Journal, vol. 10, 203-204. Elissa, L., Perry, T., Kulik, and Marina, P 2009, Sexual Harassment Training: Recommendations To Address Gaps Between The Practitioner And Research Literatures, Human Resource Management, September–October vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 817– 837. Kamir, O 2005, "Israel's 1998 Sexual Harassment Law: Prohibiting Sexual Harassment, Sexual Stalking, and Degradation Based on Sexual Orientation in the Workplace and in all Social Settings." International Journal of Discrimination and Law, vol. 7, p. 315-336. Newman, M., Jackson, R & Baker, D 2003, Sexual harassment in the federal workplace, Public Administration Review, vol. 63, no. 4, p. 472. Peirce, E., Smolinski, C & Rosen, B 2002, Why sexual harassment complaints fall on deaf ears, The Academy of Management Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 41–54. Rowe, M 1990, "People Who Feel Harassed Need a Complaint System with both Formal and Informal Options," Negotiation Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 161–172. Read More