Situational Analysis
Sexual harassment creates an unhealthy and unfriendly work environment. It is unwelcome sexual advances or sexual favors expressed verbally or physical and allowing or rejecting such conduct by an employee is used as bias for employment decisions affecting certain individuals. The sexual conduct has the aim of interfering with an employee’s performance or establishing an intimidating and hostile working environment. Unwelcome behavior in this context does not mean that the conduct is involuntary but rather the victim may consent to the conduct and participate actively even when it is objectionable or offensive. Sexual harassment includes certain things such as attempted or actual rape, unwarranted pressure for sexual favors, unwarranted sexual looks, unwanted touching and unwanted letters, unwanted sexual jokes, sexual innuendos, sexual comments about personal clothing and turning work discussions to sexual topics. Sexual harassment is therefore any behavior or sexual advance that establishes a threatening, unpleasant or unfriendly working environments (Marshall, 2017). Sexual aggravation is any unwanted behavior associated with an employee’s gender that any sensible woman or man should net tolerate.
Sexual harassment is considered to have occurred in the workplace if it happens at work, work-related events or between individuals performing work related functions or between individuals sharing the same workplace (Marshall, 2017). Sexual harassment is against the law and prohibited under the Equal Opportunities Act. Sexual harassment is a persistent issues in most companies and different businesses have taken preventive policies to counter the consequences of such an issue. There are two basic forms of sexual harassment namely Quid Pro Quo and Hostile Work Environment (Marshall, 2017). Quid Pro Quo sexual harassment normally happens when a harasser forces the victim to give sexual favors to maintain a job or get a promotion, an income increment or to attain some opportunities. This type of sexual harassment may also occur if an employee is avoiding negative consequences such as dismissal and demotion.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On the other hand, Hostile Work Environment sexual harassment happens when individuals experience an hostile work environment due to their gender or sexuality. Sexual harassment has some huge impacts on organizations and individuals involved (Fitzgerald & Cortina, 2018). The ethical dilemma about sexual harassment arises when the stakeholders involved do not really know the right or wrong way to handle the issue. Just because the organization has a code of ethics it does not mean that workers comprehend the behaviors known as harassment. When sexual harassment occurs the victim should not face an ethical dilemma of questioning if they should report t or not on workplace ethical guidelines can work on the gray areas concerning harassment and how to manage the issue. An example of the dilemma is when there is only one woman working on a project and she is patronized by one team member, other members that witness the harassment face an ethical dilemma on how to manage the situation. Other employees know that they should defend the lady victimized but fear the risk of being discriminated against or getting fired if a workplace does not clearly define that sexual harassment is not tolerated other employees may feel that that standing up for another person works against their favor hence creating an ethical dilemma. Sexual harassment hence creates an ethical dilemma for the employer victimized, other employees and the organization since the employees are conflicted about the right thing to do after harassment occurs while the organization is faced by the dilemma of validating the sexual harassment claims and risking the consequences such as decreased success of meeting financial goals.
Stakeholder Analysis
The key stakeholders involved are the employee involved in sexual harassment, employees witnessing the harassment and the organization. Apart from the financial losses, sexual harassment has significant implications on the organization involved. The organizations is faced with a dilemma when confronting sexual harassment claims since it has some negative implications. Admitting that sexual harassment occurred in an organization can decrease productivity among the employees and increase conflict. The employees sexually harassed may experience feelings of anxiety, depression and guilt hence affecting how they perform their duties at work consequently leading to decreased productivity (Fitzgerald & Cortina, 2018). The employees who witness sexual harassment meted on other employees might feel anxious whenever the see the victim of harassment or the perpetrator hence decreasing their ability to perform their duties at work. The employees who witness sexual harassment face a dilemma on whether to report the harassments and face consequences; however within this group there might be individuals with differing opinions and consequently create conflict (Hersch 2018 p. 2). Conflict in the workplace is linked to decreased productivity, poor job satisfactions and absenteeism. Overall job outcome is affected by the ethical dilemma involved in sexual harassment and consequently decreased productivity (Hersch 2018 p. 2).
Sexual harassment causes an ethical dilemma for organizations about whether they should act on sexual harassment since it decreases the success of meeting organizational financial goals. Reputation is everything in business; and gaining the reputation as a company that tolerates sexual harassment is bad for business. Besides the immorality and unethical nature, ignoring sexual harassment claims falls into the category of bullying. The most obvious way that sexual harassment decreases the success of financial goals is the settlement that are made to the victims who bring claims against perpetrators. If the organization accepts liability for sexual harassment the company pays a substantial amount to the victim hence delaying the organization’s timeline of achieving goals. Fox News paid $13 million to five women who made accusations against a manager and they lost some advertisements as well. A hospital in Sacramento lost about $168 million in a sexual harassment suit.
The two organizations are companies that experienced decreased success in achieving financial goals and loss of reputation due to sexual harassment. Sexual harassment causes decreased job satisfaction among the employees a factor that affects the organization negatively. If the employees perceive that the organization is reluctant to act on sexual harassment claims they might develop feelings of resentment towards the organization. The feelings of resentment cause decreased job satisfaction; this is a consequence that happens if the company tolerates sexual harassment. If the employees feel like their sexual harassment issues are not addressed they might take the matter to court hence causing the image of the organization and its financial status to suffer. If an organization chooses to act on sexual harassment they lose financial status due to settlements, reputation, and decreased success of meeting financial goals and decreased job satisfaction but at least they gain the reputation of having ethical standards.
On the other hand if the organization does not accept liability for sexual harassment they experience loss of reputation and decreased productivity among employees. Although it might seem morally wrong, companies who tolerate sexual harassment for fear of consequences save money in terms of settlement for victims. The other stakeholders are employees who are harassed and those who witness the harassment. The employees who are harassed face the dilemma of whether they should report the abuse or not. Employees who are harassed experience psychological and physical health conditions. Migraines, ulcers, anxiety, panic attacks and depression are some of the conditions associated with sexual harassment. The employees harassed feel like their personal lives have been exposed to the scrutiny of the public which could lead to depression, anxiety, shame, guilt and loss of motivation. The employees loose trust in the work environment and colleagues which could cause extreme stress. Some companies and perpetrators might deny a victim’s claim of sexual; harassment resulting to feelings of humiliation.
Discrimination might also occur for employees who report sexual harassment resulting to feelings of guilt and depression. The employees who experience sexual harassment might experience feelings of objectification and humiliation from the public scrutiny and gossip among colleagues. On the other hand, employees who experience Quid Pro Quo sexual harassment might advance their careers as a result despite it being unethical.
Analysis Based on Ethical Theories
The theory that is most relevant to this case is the utilitarian or consequence-based theory developed by John Stuart Mill, David Hume and Jeremy Bentham. The theory proposes that action is determined based on its utility. The action that gives the best amount well-being, or greatest benefit to the higher number of people is the most acceptable action. Consequence based ethics takes a key role in day-to-day life since it is simple and works with common human sense. Jeremy Bentham principle of utility recognizes the key responsibility of pain and pleasure in human life (Miller & Blackler, 2017). Additionally the principle formulates that the approval or disapproval of an act is decided considering the amount of pleasure or pain that result (consequences). The principle proposes a similarities of doing well with pleasure and evil with pain; it also claims that pleasure and pain have the capability of quantification or measure. John Stuart Mill adjusted Bentahm’s principle of hedonistic tendencies by emphasizing that the quantity of pleasure does not matter but rather happiness is key to utilitarianism. Mill proposes that the greatest happiness principle proposes to enhance the ability to achieve happiness for a higher number of people. Act-utilitarianism is applied to each alternative act in a dilemma situation (Miller & Blackler, 2017). The correct act is that which brings the maximum results or least bad results. When an individual is deciding what is right for him/her, they determine their own utility. For example if an individual is harassed and faces the dilemma of whether to report the abuse or not he/she might choose to report since it brings him/her the best results rather than failing to report and suffer consequences such as depression and anxiety. In the case above the decision will only have implications on a single person’s interest therefore it does not determine the interests of other individuals. In a group perspective the people often decide what is best for all individuals. Most utilitarian’s were mainly focused on how decisions and policies would enhance the well-being of a certain group. The method of considering the well-being of the group involves benefits and losses that group members have due to adopting a certain action. For instance when an individual witnesses sexual harassment of a colleague he/she might choose to report for the sake of the victim and prevent anxiety among other employees who might anticipate harassment too. The utilitarian theory needs that moral judgments be considered on similar interests (Cheung et al. 2018 p. 1468). The theory then involves the key notion that when we measure the consequences of actions or policies we must do that from an impartial perspective. The foreseeable consequences utilitarians accept the difference between assessing actions and individuals carrying them out but see no reason to make the moral rightness or wrongness of actions depend of fact presented (Quick & McFadyen 2017 p. 286). For instance if you reported someone for sexual assault and this person gets fired and loses a means of livelihood for their family then reporting the individual was the right action but actual consequences were unfortunate.
Utilitarianism applies to the sexual harassment ethical dilemma. As stated earlier, the ethical dilemma is presented when the stakeholders (organization, employee harassed and employees who witness harassment) debate whether or not they should report or act on abuse considering the implications. The employees who face harassment at the workplace are faced with a dilemma of whether to report abuse or not. If the harassed employee reports he/she might experience closure from the trauma, an occurrence which might result to happiness for the employee hence concurring with utilitarianism’s individual interest theory. An employee who witnesses a colleague getting harassed is often faced with the dilemma of whether to report for the fear of the consequences such as job loss and discrimination however he/she might decide to report the harassment for the wellbeing of the victim and other employees in the organization. The reasoning would be to make the victimized employee and colleagues happy by taking an action that gives the highest degree of happiness to the highest number of individuals. Utilitarians believes that the aim of morality is to enhance life by increasing the number of good things (equality and respect) and reducing the bad things such as sexual discrimination. The decision to report sexual harassment makes life better by increasing equality and respect at the workplace. Morality is justifiable when it makes a positive contribution to human beings. If an organization creates strict measures to avoid sexual harassment their decision makes the lives of the employees better. If an employee reports sexual harassment and the organization act with utmost seriousness then the company would have made a decision that produced the greatest amount of well-being for the organization despite the negative consequences. The decisions therefore made by all stakeholders in the sexual harassment situation show that individuals make decisions according to the actions that produce the greatest amount of utility for the greatest number of people.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Sexual harassment includes certain things such as attempted or actual rape, unwanted pressure for sexual favors, unwanted sexual looks, unwanted touching and unwanted letters, unwanted sexual jokes, sexual innuendos, sexual comments about personal clothing and turning work discussions to sexual topics. The key stakeholders involved are the employee involved in sexual harassment, employees witnessing the harassment and the organization . The theory that is most relevant to this case is the utilitarian or consequence-based theory which proposes that the action that gives the best amount of utility, well-being, or greatest benefit to the higher number of people is the most appropriate action The employee who experienced sexual harassment reporting to managements was a good decision since it produced the greatest amount of utility for the greatest amount of people. The employee avoided consequences such as physical and psychological conditions for herself and avoided the recurrence of the sexual harassment to the colleagues. Companies should ensure that sexual harassment policies are solid and enforceable to ensure that proper channels are available for reporting abuse and methods of enforcing the policies for the victims. The policies should apply for all individuals despite their positions in the company to ensure equality. The employees should not feel like reporting abuse would result to negative consequences therefore there should be open channels where people can report without the fear of consequences. There should be a culture where companies cannot be discriminated when one member of the company engages in sexual misconduct instead the member should be punished and the company continues with business. Only companies that tolerate sexual harassment should be shunned in the industry.
References
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Cortina, L. M. (2018). Sexual harassment in work organizations: A view from the 21st century.
Marshall, A. M. (2017). Confronting sexual harassment: The law and politics of everyday life. Routledge.
Miller, S., & Blackler, J. (2017). Ethical issues in policing. Routledge.
Hersch, J. (2018). Valuing the risk of workplace sexual harassment. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty , 1-21.
Cheung, C., Baum, T., & Hsueh, A. (2018). Workplace sexual harassment: exploring the experience of tour leaders in an Asian context. Current Issues in Tourism , 21 (13), 1468-1485.
Quick, J. C., & McFadyen, M. (2017). Sexual harassment: Have we made any progress?. Journal of occupational health psychology , 22 (3), 286.
