There have been a few times during the course of my work life in which I have been responsible for managing a team of co-workers, sometimes informally and more often as part of management. As a result, I have been in a position of specific authority over potential sexual harassment claims.
I am not an attorney. However, you don’t need to be an attorney to understand a manager’s legal responsibility in the United States should an employee report to you that he or she feels uncomfortable due to unwanted sexual behavior in the workplace.
To wit: a manager has an absolute responsibility to take any such reports seriously, and to act to resolve them as soon as possible.
I’ve worked in places where absolute adherence to decorum was insisted on, and in other places where the background level of oral sex jokes ran about four per hour, but the rules are really the same: 1) the person who is made uncomfortable calls the shots, and 2) the intent of those people whose behavior is at issue doesn’t matter.
The behavior can be a direct demand for sexual favors, or it can be (as in one case with which I am personally familiar) a perceived slightly flirtatious request to go for a walk, or it can be completely consensual physical affection between two co-workers in the presence of a third person. The specifics matter with regard to the eventual resolution, but not with regard to a manager’s responsibilities.
The manager has to take the report seriously and act on it promptly, either acting to remedy the situation or reporting upward to someone who can. A manager who doesn’t do so becomes a significant legal liability to the employer.
And saying “this person you’re complaining about didn’t mean anything by it, grow a thicker skin” is almost never an appropriate response.
The intent of the behavior really only matters if the behavior lands the person in criminal court. Until that point, the employer’s duty is to either end the behavior, or shield the sensitive person from that behavior without punishing her.
Businesses spend a huge amount of time these days working to shield themselves from liability, and sexual harassment claims are a significant point of vulnerability. It’s worth noting that the couple of times I’ve sat through company-mandated sexual harassment workshops, complete with cheesy films with 1980s hairstyles and bad acting, those workshops have been held as a condition imposed by my employers’ insurers. Sexual harassment is still a serious problem, mainly for women — though the law protects all people equally, and there have been times when I could have availed myself of it had I known — but more and more employers have strict policies on paper, at least. Even if management of rank and file employees still tries to ignore reports or sweep them under the rug, human resources departments are less likely to do so, especially during screening of new hires.
All of which makes me wonder about those people — men and women — who’ve weighed in on the recent Rebecca Watson elevator anecdote to opine that her mild request that men not hit on solitary women in elevators at four in the morning “blew things out of proportion,” or that women asking men not to hit on them is somehow the latest aggressive move in a feminist class war.
What I wonder is whether a prospective employer, faced with two candidates of roughly equal merit, would ever hire the one whose googleable statements indicate they’d make it harder to protect the company against future sexual harassment claims.
I know I wouldn’t.
You make a very good point about the practical aspects of debating this matter, though I’m not sure myself that she was hit on. His actions could just as easily be interpreted as those of a shy, oblivious guy looking for a friend who chose the wrong venue (isolated, enclosed area) and the wrong question to ask (things may have went differently if he invited her to a public place for coffee).
That said, I understand that from the standpoint you’re arguing that this is a technicality (intentions don’t matter, interpretation does) and I would NOT recommend anyone approaching a woman at that time, in an isolated place, and asking her to one’s room, whatever one’s intentions are. Or for that matter to do anything else that violates common sense. I’m making a note of this purely because the debate has largely focused on the assumption that he was hitting on her when I feel that is not a decided issue.
I find it rather of odd that anyone would support the view that Asking men not to hit on them is an aggressive feminist move, or however they wish to define it. I think it nogreat secret that most women have been sexually assaulted at least once, if not numerous times during their lives. If it’s not some man driving up beside you pretending to ask directions while getting his jollies by masturbating in front of you; or a crude-minded co-worker bumping his groin on the back of your chair while you’re on the phone to a customer; or some nutbar falling in behind you while you’re walking through a city, or hiking on a trail; then maybe it’s some person of dubious motive, slipping into an elevator with you late and night and not just watching the floor numbers light up like any *normal* person would do. Because we are women, and because there are enough sexually aggressive or predatorial men in this world, all women are constantly forced to analyze the motives of every unknown (and sometimes known) man she encounters. As you know, I travel a lot in places few women venture alone and isometimes it takes every ounce of willpower to quash what my instincts tell me to do. If all those good men who don’t wish to unnerve lone women would take it upon themselves not to behave weirdly, it would make it a heel of a lot easier to separate the wheat from the chaff. Of course, I’m not telling you or any other emlightened man anything that he doesn’t already know. That is precisely why I am astounded that there is even on person defending the Elevator Man, or accusing Rebecca of over-reacting. Simply amazing.
The issue has nothing to do with whether or not Elevator Guy was actually hitting on Rebecca. although I’d say the chance is extremely small that he wasn’t; the issue is that his behavior creeped her out, which is beyond dispute. Anything else brought up about the incident is a smoke screen.
On what planet is inviting a woman to whom one has never spoken before, to one’s hotel room, at 4 a.m., in a place from which she cannot freely and immediately exit considered acceptable behavior? Certainly not the one I’ve been walking around on for 65 years.
In short, a gentleman is never crass or crude, lewd or rude. At least not in the workplace. I’ve seen people summarily fired, literally told to clean out their desks, turn in their parking pass, and leave the building escorted by security for such things. Naturally, the drastic one I mentioned was a case of overt groping, but the point is, in the workplace, if you can’t say it or do it to your Grandmother, keep your mouth shut and your hands in your pockets.