Women are notorious for their struggles in the working world. Among discrimination in job opportunities and pay, they experience turmoil through the presence of sexual harassment in the working environment. It is said that 65-80 percent of women experience some form of sexual harassment in their lifetime (Magley 931). One view proposed by Helen Watson, in an attempt to reveal the underlying source of sexual harassment states, “Despite the perceptions of many accused harassers, sexual harassment is not about sex, not even sex gone awry. It is about power. Many harassers propose that male-female interaction is inherently sexual and that men cannot be blamed for natural instincts (Watson, 1994).” Legally speaking, “Sexual harassment is the inappropriate sexualization of an otherwise non-sexual relationship (Saguy114).” Sexual harassment in the workforce can leave a lasting effect upon the victim as well as a company.
Although a recent poll of 782 workers has revealed that 7% of men claimed to have been sexually harassed in the work force, an astonishing 31% of the women polled claimed to have been victim’s of sexual harassment (Krasas 216). The idea that sexual harassment in the work force lays upon the concept of power is shown through results of this poll. Of the women who claimed to have been sexually harassed at work, 43 % say that they were harassed by their supervisor, hence, their superior (Krasas 218). Another 27% of these women admit that the harasser was an employee who was a senior to them (Krasas 218). Thus, 70% of the harassers are of higher power than those they are harassing. Interestingly, of the men who claimed to be sexually harassed on the job, 59% claimed the harasser was a woman (Krasas 219). However, 100% of the women’s harassers were men. The prevalence of sexual harassment in the work place is frighteningly high.
Sexual harassment is not confined to a certain occupation or career. Rather, it is present in a number of working environments. Some of these occupations include secretaries, lawyers, doctors, and waitresses. However, women in the fields of work dominated by men such as law enforcement, the military and fire fighting tend to encounter more sexual harassment (Gruber 303). According to a study performed by the Department of Defense, 64 percent of women whom are part of the active military have experienced sexual harassment in at least one of its forms (Gruber 303). Perhaps, this relates to the theory that sexual harassment is connected to a need for power. In this case, men may feel as if they have more power over a woman if they appear too “weak” to complete a task. One researcher, James E. Gruber, discusses the idea of “gendering” in regards to J. Acker’s previous work on the issue (Gruber, 302). Gendering, as it relates to this idea, contends that in a field that is gender dominated, that gender, then holds the upper hand in decision making and control over the minority, in this case, women (Gruber 302). As Acker describes, gendering is the result of five interacting processes (Gruber 302).
One such process is the construction of division. This process relates to the division of the organization such as who completes what labor, the amount of work space allotted to certain employees, and the division of power, in regards to gender. According to Acker, another interacting process includes the constructions of symbols and images that aid in articulating and reinforcing these divisions (Gruber 302). This focuses on how the organization’s members accept the divisions, rather than what divisions are present. Another interacting process influencing sexual harassment in the work force concentrates on the gender-based patterns of interaction and communication (Gruber 302). Acker’s contends that another interacting process includes, “the reflection of gender stereotypes in occupational or organizational identities” (Gurber302). In other words, the focus is placed upon whether it seems as if the work environment is based upon men being the leaders and women playing the role of nurturer. Lastly, gendering may occur due to “differential impacts upon women and men of the fundamental, ongoing process of creating and conceptualizing social structures, such as rules of conduct, directives, or job evaluations” (Gruber 302).
Alison M. Konrad has published her own ideas in regards to causes of sexual harassment. One such article, The Impact of Work Experiences on Attitudes Toward Sexual Harassment” appeared in the Administrative Science Quarterly. In this article, Konrad places her emphasis on the idea of work ambiance (Konrad 424). According to Kondrad, the ambiance of the work may become sexualized also referred to as the sexualization of the work place (Konrad 424). According to the article, “The Impact of Work Experiences on Attitudes Toward Sexual Harassment”, the sexualization of the workplace occurs when the work environment tolerates a great deal of talking about sex, sexual behavior, and sexual joking or humor (Konrad 424). Konrad discusses an adverse effect of a sexualized workplace. She explains, once a work place begins to allow such sexual references, these behaviors become normal and acceptable. Thus, the workers may become accustomed to such comments and actions, in turn depleting the amount of sexually related actions considered offensive (Konrad 424).
There are a number or theories explaining the presence of sexual harassment in the work place. Although the theories differ, the effects of sexual harassment are very uniform. These effects can be detrimental to not only the victim, but the company as well. Some of the common effects of sexual harassment include high levels of anxiety, a low tolerance for frustration, depression, nervousness, fear and anger (Koss 22). According to research 96% of sexual harassment victims will suffer some for of emotional distress (Koss 22). Many women who have been sexually harassed feel as if they will be blamed or judged for the incident (Koss 24). Among other concerns these women also feel they may be doubted, socially ostracized, or even in extreme cases, fired (Koss 23). Aside from emotional or job related repercussions of sexual harassment, physically women may even lose or gain weight due to such an experience (Wasti 399). In regards to a company, sexual harassment can have quite a few negative effects. One ramification of sexual harassment that the companies endure is a loss in productivity and output from employees. For example, if a woman experiences sexual harassment at the work place she may encounter any number of adverse effects which could result in the use of sick leave (Rospenda 53). If an employee is absent from work for any period of time, the productivity will be impacted. Another result of sexual harassment in the workplace is that of employee turnover. A company may begin to receive a bad reputation for tolerating sexual harassment, thus leading to female employees transferring job locations, or even quitting (Rospenda 53). Sexual harassment is not only detrimental to the victim but to a company as well.
As sexual harassment cases became more prevalent, a number of laws and policies were implemented at the national, as well as, corporate level in an attempt to tame the issue. One such law was Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Saguy 1093). Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin (Saguy 1093). A second law, Title IX of the Education Act of 1972 authorized federal agents and agencies to investigate complaints of sexual harassment (Saguy 1094). It also allows victims to file lawsuits against schools or employers if in an attempt to end the harassment and obtain monetary compensation (Saguy 1097). With these new laws enacted it made it easier for women to come forward about sexual harassment and easier to punish the accused.
In the mid 1980’s the Supreme Court began hearing sexual harassment cases. Also, they recently began deciding, legally, who is responsible for the incident once a victim proves what occurred (Saguy 1096). Also in the 1980’s the EEOC produced guidelines, attempting to define and enforce Title VII (Raitt 6). However, victims have a limited time to file a complaint with the EEOC. Once someone files a report with the EEOC they begin to investigate, and granted the accusations were true, a victim then receives a “right to sue” letter (Pellicciotti 64). The victim then has 90 days to file a lawsuit against the employer in Federal Court (Pellicciotti 103). Victim’s can potentially receive up to $300,000 compensation for each incident. They also will receive back pay and lawyer fees (Pellicciotti 103).
According to the EEOC sexual harassment is defined as, “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when: 1. Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term of condition or employment, academic progress or 2. Submission to or rejection of that conduct is used as a basis for employment or academic decisions affecting such individuals, or 3. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individuals work or academic performance, or creating an intimidating or hostile environment, or offensive work or education environment (Siegel 17). Another regulation is that of Criminal vs. Civil Harassment. Sexual touching, of the butt, genitals or breasts are considered to be sexual battery (Pellicciotti 102). This type of situation may be prosecuted as a criminal case through the District Attorney’s office (Siegel 19). These laws have improved the issue of sexual harassment; however they have not eliminated them completely.
On June 26, 1998 the Supreme Court altered regulations dealing with sexual harassment resulting in the employers becoming more liable for incidents of sexual harassment (Webb). In two sexual harassment cases, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, and Burlington Industries Inc. v. Ellerth, the Supreme Court stated that, “The employer is responsible for the actions of the supervisor, even when the employer is unaware of the supervisor’s behavior.”(Webb). An employer can no longer claim negligence to sexual harassment incidents, nor can they claim that they were unaware of the supervisor’s behavior (Webb). The Supreme Court also stated that, “The court will no longer heavily rely on the two different forms of sexual harassment, “quid pro quo” and “hostile environment.” (Webb).
The Court claims that these two forms of sexual harassment are limited in their use for assessing responsibility in regards to sexual harassment cases (Webb). As a result from this, an employee that does not accept the sexual harassment of a supervisor yet suffers no adverse job consequences, can still, by law, bring a sexual harassment lawsuit against her employer (Webb). This is if the employee can prove they were discriminated based upon sexual content (Webb).
A civil rights bill was introduced in February of 2004 by democratic members of the House and Senate. The bill, if passed, will, “expand remedies under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Equal Pay Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.”(Webb). In relation to sexual harassment, the bill would abolish the cap on damage awarded under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Webb). According to the guidelines, "These limitations unfairly affect sex discrimination claims because employment discrimination claims based on race and national origin may be brought under 42 U.S.C. 1981 (the 1866 Civil Rights Act), which does not limit damages." (Webb). With guidelines and regulations becoming stricter with regards to sexual harassment, law makers hope to see a downward trend in the prevalence of sexual harassment cases.
Along with at the state and national levels, action is also taken at the corporate level in an attempt to eliminate sexual harassment from the workplace. Many companies large or small have an outline of company guidelines and procedures in the case of sexual harassment. A number of companies will even hire outside sources to train their employees. These employees are trained to know proper etiquette in the work place as well as to understand consequences of inappropriate behaviors (Laband 596). Countless companies have a policy outlining their courses of action and procedures in regards to sexual harassment. In many cases when hired, employees must read this policy and sign their names acknowledging that they have are fully aware of and understand the guidelines. Companies take initiative to ensure that sexual harassment will not interfere with their work place and goals. Through company policies, workers are given an outline of acceptable and non-acceptable behavior, thus leaving no excuse for sexual harassment.
Alison M. Konrad and Barbara A. Gutek attempt to explain, in their literature, why men sometimes commit acts of sexual harassment. One theory proposed by these women is that perhaps men seek work as a place for “sexual conquest” (Konrad 423). For example, men tend to initiate sexual relationships, thus men may view the workplace as a location to pick up girls. At the same time however, Konrad and Gutek explain that women may view these sexual innuendos as “potential threats of exploitation” (Konrad 423). This is because women tend to be receivers when it comes to sexual relationships (Konrad 423). It was found that sexual relations between coworkers tended to enhance a man’s status within his organization (Konrad 423). However, in these situations the status of the women depleted (Konrad 423). According to Konrad and Gutek, women’s perceptions of such sexual overtures in the workplace may stem from women’s prior experiences in the workplace (Konrad 423). Arguably, men have more positive experiences with sexual behaviors at work, thus desensitizing them to some sexual behaviors labeled as sexual harassment by women.
There have been a plethora of sexual harassment cases taken to court in the past 20 years. One such case includes that of women who worked for the Ford Motor Company Plant. Many women in the Chicago area came forward about sexual harassment they had endured (Kane). Women employed at the Ford plants had complained that a number of male supervisors, as well as, coworkers were “sexual predators who preyed upon them” (Kane). The allegations included verbal harassment, such as vulgar language and inappropriate demands for sex and quid pro quo harassment (Kane). Quid pro quo refers to claims of women being forced to have sexual relations in order to maintain their jobs (Kane). After the first complaints by women workers at Ford's Chicago manufacturing plants, Chicago NOW implemented a local campaign (Kane). This campaign strived to pressure Ford into taking action (Kane). The case was settled in favor of the women, whom were received a total restitution of $7.75 million (Kane).
Another high profile sexual harassment case is that of the EEOC vs. Cracker Barrel (Webb). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a sexual ,as well as, racial harassment lawsuit in federal court against Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., CBRL Group, Inc., and CBOCS West, Inc. (collectively, "Cracker Barrel") (Webb). The EEOC's lawsuit is in reference to charges of discrimination filed by 10 workers, employed by three different Cracker Barrel restaurants in Matteson, Mattoon, and Bloomington, Illinois (Webb). It contends that the company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Webb). The violation occurred when female employees in those locations were subject to sexual harassment and retaliation. The federal agency also states that African American employees “were harassed and subject to different terms and conditions of employment because of their race” (Webb).
The EEOC said that its administrative investigation revealed that the women were sexually harassed in more than one manner at the Cracker Barrel facilities. Some forms of sexual harassment included, circulation of pornographic photographs and cartoons, obscene jokes, sexual propositions, groping, and sexual assaults (Webb). The managers neglected to investigate or act upon complaints of harassment (Webb). At one point in the investigation according to the EEOC, the managers became personally involved in the sexual harassment by grabbing female employees, propositioning them, and even laughing at the women’s complaints (Webb). It is necessary that high profile cases such as this one become well known, in order to persuade others to avoid sexual harassing behaviors. It is also important that managers realize that now, ignoring complaints is not only immoral, but illegal.
Sexual harassment is not as rare as some may think, as it was present in two personal work experiences. While employed for a comedy club, which included a restaurant and bar a co-worker, as well as, myself were sexually harassed. The harassment was being done by a co-worker who shared the same job title as did the other female employee and I. After verbally informing the harasser that we did not appreciate his comments, they continued. Following this, the other female worker received yet another sexually explicit comment, leading to her retaliation. She became fed up with his comments and lack of respect and poured the water she had on him. Once the manager was informed of this he neglected to punish the male worker. However, the female coworker was removed from the schedule for 2 weeks following the incident. As for me, following the punishment of my female coworker, the male coworker still continued to make sexual comments to me. Finally, the female coworker and I quit and found new employment elsewhere. It seemed as if the legal route would have been too time consuming, as well as, expensive. Due to the job not being either of our careers, rather temporary summer work, we felt that it was better to just walk away.
Sexual harassment is wide spread and can occur in any work environment. Sexual harassment does not occur in a select setting. Through the implementation of a number of acts, laws, and policies the government, as well as, corporations have attempted to bring an end to sexual harassment in the workplace. Sexual harassment can be acts of physical abuse or it can consist of verbal sexual abuse. Hopefully with the publicity of high profile sexual harassment cases people will begin to realize that sexual harassment needs to come to an end as it affects not only victims but other workers, as well as, corporations. Also people need to be reminded that it is not a light issue if taken to the court level.
