Prior to recent developments mostly affecting the entertainment business, there was a sense that work place sexual harassment was on the decline. However, successive public revelations around sexual misconduct revealed a contrasting reality. Now, it is evident that this is a phenomenon that may be managed but not eliminated completely. Thus, examining workplace sexual harassment with the aim of reconfiguring the concept to existing reality should remain a continuous process.
According to the US Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), workplace sexual harassment entails unwelcomed sexual advances, along with sexual behavior that negatively impacts one’s productivity or creates an intimidating, offensive working environment. Possible offenses form part of a broad list, though the most significant examples include incessant sexually offensive jokes, inappropriate contact and public distribution or display of offensive material (EEOC, n.d.). Considering the gravity around the phenomenon, it remains critical for employers to appreciate that both men and women are prone to experience workplace sexual harassment and act appropriately.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Legally speaking, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 sets the framework around workplace sexual harassment, though there may be stricter state level laws on the same. Importantly, Title VII recognizes two primary forms of sexual harassment, that is quid pro quo and hostile work environment (EEOC, n.d.). The former entails superiors positioning sexual harassment as a condition for accessing either employment, promotion, or other work-related benefits. Critically, a single incident of the same qualifies as quid pro quo while an established pattern constitutes a hostile work environment (EEOC, n.d.). Legally, a viable hostile environment claim must be preceded by unwelcomed sexual conduct pervasive enough to generate either offense or abuse. Likewise, validity is determined after an analysis of several elements which include frequency and manner of conduct (physical, verbal, or both); if conduct was hostile and patently offensive; if the alleged harasser was a superior or not; if the harassment was by one or more people and if the harassment targeted one or more individuals.
The effects of workplace sexual harassment are multi-faceted, affecting both the business and individuals. Precisely, sexual harassment claims against a business present risks relating to finance, employee health and productivity, and possible negative market impact (Barker, 2017). At the individual level, harassment victims encounter physical, emotional, and financial challenges. Specifically, sexual harassment is associated with mental and emotional health issues like loss of self-esteem, increased workplace stress and anxiety. Moreover, such mental and emotional challenges manifest as physical health conditions like appetite loss, headaches, and sleep disturbances (McLaughlin, Uggen & Blackstone, 2013). Financially, deterioration of both mental/emotional and physical health translates into lost revenue, unpaid leaves and increased medical expenses. A natural outcome here is reduced job performance resulting from poor confidence and disengaging from colleagues. In addition to the mentioned negative effects on an individual’s job performance, the harassment also has longer-term career development effects (Barker, 2017). This applies more so when victims report the harassment and the outcomes include retaliations, being passed over for promotions and exclusion from crucial meetings.
As mentioned above, companies are exposed to workplace sexual harassment risks as it increases the likelihood of both victims and employees resigning. Not only does harassment create higher turnover, but also increases the recruitment -related costs and complicates the recruitment process due to perceived toxicity of the company (Barker, 2017). Moreover, companies that fail to adequately handle sexual harassment encounter public and expensive lawsuits, negatively impacting both their revenues and reputations. Poor handling of workplace sexual harassment claims publicly engender almost spontaneous negative generalizations reducing the likelihood of potential customers doing business with the affected firm (Barker, 2017). Moreover, there is a tacit link between both personal and business effects of sexual harassment which translate into financial and other costs at both levels.
Historically, sexual harassment cases with an element of power are significant in frequency and therefore more visible. Moreover, there are skewed social norms and values attached to men and women (McLaughlin, Uggen & Blackstone, 2013). Specifically, cultural images around sexual harassment entails male superiors and their female subordinate victims. Combined, these statements along with the fact upper management has been male dominated, sexual harassment is perceived mainly as a “women only problem” (McLaughlin, Uggen & Blackstone, 2013). Almost counteractively, there has been an almost 30% reduction in reported sexual harassment cases the same period has witnessed an increase of about 15% of sexual harassment cases reported by men. According to Quick and McFadyen (2017), the rise of incidents reported by men is the result of both an increased sexual harassment awareness and concurrent reduction of stigma associated with male reporting. Moreover, studies show that up to 30% of working males encountered sexual harassment, though this is still lower than the approximately 50% of working females (Quick & McFadyen 2017).
Changes in workplace demographics are gradually reshaping perceptions around sexual harassment. Specifically, there is an increase in the number of young educated women in the workplace (McLaughlin, Uggen & Blackstone, 2013). Initially, this development led scholars to assert that the creation of superficial workplace equality would translate to an actual reduction of sexual harassment. However, the persistence of harassment cases has discounted that notion. The situation has given rise to yet another notion, the persistence of sexual harassment is rooted in the need to preserve the status quo of the workplace as a male dominated environment (Quick & McFadyen 2017). The veracity of the latter notion is supported by data showing that 1 in approximately 3 women aged between 18 and 34 experienced workplace sexual harassment.
According to the EEOC commissioners, they received approximately 30,000 workplace sexual harassment charges in 2015. Notably, they also observed that out of approximately four workplace sexual harassment victims, only one was likely to report the incident. This implies that workplace sexual harassment will continue unless measures that encourage reporting are introduced. Such measures will have to be designed to address possible information gaps and cultural stigma that prevent more cases from being reported (Feldblum & Lipnic, 2016).
Among LGBT workers, workplace sexual harassment is intertwined with both gender identity and sexual orientation harassment with about 35% of either gay or bisexual workers reported harassment cases (Feldblum & Lipnic, 2016). Moreover, about 60% of LGBT workers have heard derogatory comments about either gender identity or sexual orientation at their places of work. These numbers underscore the culture of both homophobia and transphobia as such harassment most likely occurred in a social setting. Moreover, the reluctance to report may be influenced by the same culture of intolerance which deprives victims of a social support system (Feldblum & Lipnic, 2016).
Workplace sexual harassment remains a reality of the modern age though its understanding is seemingly limited by long standing cultural images and skewed social norms along gender lines. Furthermore, changes in workplace demographics add to the layered complexity. First, by increasing the number of young educated female workers, the most likely outcome is increased frequency. Secondly, generational changes, that is from baby boomers to millennials creates a possible gray area around the concept of workplace sexual harassment as the prevailing interpretation is formed through ideals of the latter. This is important because millennials exhibit different attitudes towards work and sex, therefore it remains highly likely that they will adopt views different from those of their predecessors. Critically, workplace demographic changes have forced researchers and society alike to confront existing cultural images around workplace sexual harassment and find new inclusive approaches to the concept.
References
Barker, C.K (2017). Sexual harassment experience, Psychological climate, and Sex effect on Perception of Safety. Walden University Scholar Works . Retrieved from http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4379&context=dissertations
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Staff (EEOC). (n.d.). Facts About Sexual Harassment . US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission . Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm .
Feldblum R. C & Lipnic A. V. (2016). Select taskforce on the study of harassment in the workplace. US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission . Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/task_force/harassment/upload/report.pdf .
McLaughlin, H, Uggen, C & Blackstone, A. (2013). Sexual harassment, workplace authority and the paradox of power . US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health . Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3544188/ .
Quick, C. J & McFadyen, M. A (2017). Sexual Harassment: Have We Made Any Progress? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22 . Retrieved from http://gradpsych.apags.org/pubs/journals/releases/ocp-ocp0000054.pdf .
