Harassment Essay, Research Paper
Sexual Harassment
Many companies have instituted formalized sexual harassment
policies. Israel Discount Bank, PepsiCo., Mitsui & Co., and Time
Warner were questioned regarding their sexual harassment policy.
The opening statement of a policy establishes the tone for the
rest of the policy, clarifying a company’s position on the issue.
Three of the above-mentioned companies opened their statements of
policy forcefully and definitively, stating that all employees have
the right to work in an environment free of sexual harassment. The
fourth company, Mitsui & Co., was less explicit, stating that all
employees have the right to equal employment opportunities. It
later proceeded to state that unlawful employee harassment is
prohibited.
Within their policies, each of the companies gives their
definition of sexual harassment. Israel Discount Bank and
PepsiCo.’s definitions were similar, listing repeated sexual
flirtation, unwelcome advances, propositions, verbal abuse of a
sexual nature, suggestive objects, offensive comments, jokes, or
innuendoes as harassment. Time Warner and Mitsui & Co. simply
enumerate unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors,
and verbal or physical contact of a sexual nature under sexual
harassment.
Each company stresses forbids the threat of job loss due to
rejected sexual overtures. They prohibit supervisory staff from
threatening or insinuating, either explicitly or implicitly, that
any employee’s submission to or rejection of sexual advances will,
in any way, influence any personnel decisions regarding employees:
employment, evaluation, wages, advancement, assigned duties, or
compensation.
Sexual harassment can only be dealt with if the victim comes
forth. The willingness of an employee to be forthcoming is
dependent upon the articulated position of a company regarding
sexual harassment. PepsiCo.’s zealous opposition to such
harassment is clear in their written policy which states, “All
employees are STRONGLY URGED and ENCOURAGED to bring such
harassment to the attention of their supervisors…”. The other
three companies were not as strong, in that their written policy
suggests that all employees SHOULD report harassment to their
supervisors.
Other than Mitsui & Co., each company clarified steps to be
taken upon the reporting of sexual harassment. Israel Discount
Bank oddly claimed that there would be no retaliation against
employees reporting sexual harassment, promising a response to the
complaint within thirty days. PepsiCo. and Time Warner assured
that reported cases would be responded to in strict confidentiality
and with a prompt investigation.
Preventative measures such as ongoing educational programs and
group sensitivity sessions can limit the occurrence of sexual
harassment on the job. An effective deterrent to this kind of
behavior is clearly delineated protocol and the consequences for
breaking job-place rules. Israel Discount Bank and Time Warner are
vague in that they state that appropriate corrective actions will
be taken. PepsiCo. and Mitsui & Co. threaten prompt disciplinary
action and possible termination.
The above survey suggests that individual companies have
differing policies and procedures responding to sexual harassment,
from forceful to inexplicit. Yet, each of the surveyed companies
clearly recognizes the problem and has taken steps to curtail the
occurrence of such incidents. There are, however, companies who
either wish to ignore the problem or do not feel it important
enough for them to address. Their r
Sexual Harassment
Many companies have instituted formalized sexual harassment
policies. Israel Discount Bank, PepsiCo., Mitsui & Co., and Time
Warner were questioned regarding their sexual harassment policy.
The opening statement of a policy establishes the tone for the
rest of the policy, clarifying a company’s position on the issue.
Three of the above-mentioned companies opened their statements of
policy forcefully and definitively, stating that all employees have
the right to work in an environment free of sexual harassment. The
fourth company, Mitsui & Co., was less explicit, stating that all
employees have the right to equal employment opportunities. It
later proceeded to state that unlawful employee harassment is
prohibited.
Within their policies, each of the companies gives their
definition of sexual harassment. Israel Discount Bank and
PepsiCo.’s definitions were similar, listing repeated sexual
flirtation, unwelcome advances, propositions, verbal abuse of a
sexual nature, suggestive objects, offensive comments, jokes, or
innuendoes as harassment. Time Warner and Mitsui & Co. simply
enumerate unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors,
and verbal or physical contact of a sexual nature under sexual
harassment.
Each company stresses forbids the threat of job loss due to
rejected sexual overtures. They prohibit supervisory staff from
threatening or insinuating, either explicitly or implicitly, that
any employee’s submission to or rejection of sexual advances will,
in any way, influence any personnel decisions regarding employees:
employment, evaluation, wages, advancement, assigned duties, or
compensation.
Sexual harassment can only be dealt with if the victim comes
forth. The willingness of an employee to be forthcoming is
dependent upon the articulated position of a company regarding
sexual harassment. PepsiCo.’s zealous opposition to such
harassment is clear in their written policy which states, “All
employees are STRONGLY URGED and ENCOURAGED to bring such
harassment to the attention of their supervisors…”. The other
three companies were not as strong, in that their written policy
suggests that all employees SHOULD report harassment to their
supervisors.
Other than Mitsui & Co., each company clarified steps to be
taken upon the reporting of sexual harassment. Israel Discount
Bank oddly claimed that there would be no retaliation against
employees reporting sexual harassment, promising a response to the
complaint within thirty days. PepsiCo. and Time Warner assured
that reported cases would be responded to in strict confidentiality
and with a prompt investigation.
Preventative measures such as ongoing educational programs and
group sensitivity sessions can limit the occurrence of sexual
harassment on the job. An effective deterrent to this kind of
behavior is clearly delineated protocol and the consequences for
breaking job-place rules. Israel Discount Bank and Time Warner are
vague in that they state that appropriate corrective actions will
be taken. PepsiCo. and Mitsui & Co. threaten prompt disciplinary
action and possible termination.
The above survey suggests that individual companies have
differing policies and procedures responding to sexual harassment,
from forceful to inexplicit. Yet, each of the surveyed companies
clearly recognizes the problem and has taken steps to curtail the
occurrence of such incidents. There are, however, companies who
either wish to ignore the problem or do not feel it important
enough for them to address. Their responses follow.