The end of a long, hard, satisfying and productive year...
time to kick back and enjoy the festive season... and the
staff Christmas party... well, sorry! If you are a manager
or director of any but the smallest organisation, then you
will find an unsolicited Christmas gift in your Christmas
stocking - vicarious liability; which simply explained
means the second legal responsibility you have for the
actions of your staff. Now the legal logistics of all this
are well known to most. Unwelcome attention of a sexual
nature that offends, intimidates or humiliates and occurs
at work or in connection with work, is sexual harassment.
"In connection with work" is an interesting phrase and may
well include the retirement dinner, the staff social club
BBQ, the residential training program and even drinks after
work between a team of people who work together.
Many landmark cases determined in state and federal
jurisdictions support this premise. However the rebirth of
corporate ethics, the power of the brand and the
consciousness regarding the triple bottom line all point to
a higher order corporate motivation than trying to keep our
collective bottoms from hanging out the window on an
harassment complaint. Those who have managed a case of
alleged or actual sexual or other harassment in the
workplace will vouch for the idea that it is never just
about the incident. It is often the aftermath that is often
so difficult to resolve. Legal right of redress, complaint
procedures, policies, the appointment of contact officers
are only one part of the equation. The indirect costs of
sexual harassment and bullying involve stress, anxiety,
lost productivity, workplace accidents, absenteeism,
polarisation of the workforce, damage to reputations and
relationships external to work and loss of talent. These
costs can apply whether it is the respondent in the case
(alleged perpetrator) who is dismissed or resigns in
disgrace or the complainant who leaves the organisation;
disgruntled or disheartened with the way in which their
issue has been dealt, or their perception that it has not
been dealt with at all.
Three recent cases I have been asked to help manage,
reinforce various salient points. All are factual.
Scenario One
A group of people involved in a key company project went
for celebratory drinks on a Friday evening together upon
completion of a major milestone. Regrettably, several of
them stayed too late and drank too much. One of the men
present who had previously enjoyed a productive and
professional relationship with one of the young women,
decided he'd like to tell her what he'd very much like to
do with her if he wasn't so drunk at the time. Not only was
she mortally offended but so were several of the other
staff members present. I was asked to 'sit with' her on the
following Monday morning. She had bloodshot eyes, looked
haggard and confessed she'd had a very tormented weekend.
She told me she had seen the "offender" that morning and
that he had apologised to her (looking about as dishevelled
as she did). She told me that she realised he had been
drunk, that what he'd said had been out of work hours and
that he was sincere in his apology. But then she asked me
very soulfully how she was meant to forget that when he'd
been drunk enough to tell her how he really felt , he had
told her very crudely and directly that he had sexual
designs on her. In a sense she was grieving over the loss
of a previously safe and enjoyable relationship tainted by
his disclosure that she felt had changed their relationship
forever. She said it would take her a lot of time to be
able to be in his company again, particularly alone,
without feeling highly intimidated and very awkward.
Scenario Two
A General Manager hosted a Christmas party late last year
and went outside at one stage in the evening to have a
cigarette. He observed two subordinates in various stages
of undress, canoodling under a tree some short distance
away. He was immediately outraged as he knew the partners
to which the respective individuals were married. He called
me to debrief the situation, to sort out his feelings and
to establish what was and wasn't his right to pursue in
respect of their behaviour at a work-related function.
After some lengthy discussion he was able to appreciate
that his 'traditional" views regarding their behaviour,
whilst very powerful, ought not influence any decisions
regarding the way in which the situation should be handled.
However he knew that he had every right as their manager to
talk about the inappropriateness of that behaviour at a
work function where indeed any number of others could have
(and may have been) embarrassed and offended, even where
the behaviour of the pair was obviously consenting! Apart
from any personal objections he had to their behaviour, it
took some time before he was able to quell his feelings of
resentment at the lack of respect he believed the couple
had shown for their reputations, their colleagues and the
awkwardness he experienced in having to raise the issue
after what should have been an enjoyable time for all. At a
workshop I ran last week, a participant proclaimed her
belief that 'we have all had too much to drink at a work
function and said /done things we regretted the next
morning' and while I've heard this expressed many times, I
would challenge the assumption that this is inevitable and
universal. Surely this assertion does not appear to give
the rest of us any credit for either self control or self
preservation.
Scenario Three
Several employees attended an in-company residential
training program. Evenings were very social. People stayed
up late, gave the CD's a spin and alcohol flowed freely.
Two people, let's say Bob and Mary, from different
departments spent quite a lot of time together. Some weeks
after they returned from the program Bob complained to
Human Resources that Mary had contacted him at home several
times causing significant awkwardness with his partner,
sent him emails that contained suggestive innuendo. He
wished to know how he could get her "off his back". When
Mary was interviewed she insisted that Bob had shown
considerable interest in her at the program and while
sexual intimacy had not occurred she seemed sure that he
had wanted to pursue a relationship beyond the program.
After a facilitated discussion was held between the three
of us, Mary understood that her attention was clearly
unwelcome and she would do well, under threat of
disciplinary action, to leave Bob alone. However
perceptions and feelings of both parties were very real. It
was clear that a part of her still felt "used"; believing
that Bob had been happy to spend time with her while he was
away and that as soon as he arrived home, Mary had been
dumped. She was highly offended and bitter regarding his
allegation that he was "being stalked". He was angry and
defensive about the aspersions she had cast, once she felt
rejected, on the state of his current relationship and also
concerned that details of the complaint would harm career
prospects in a family oriented, values-driven organisation.
Regardless of the facts of the case, or readers'
perceptions of any rights or wrongs, this case is typical
of situations in which unwelcome attention and
unreciprocated affection, cultivated by overly familiar
settings and poor judgment can lead to significant stress,
feelings of rejection and confusion, strain on important
relationships outside work, considerable workplace
embarrassment for both parties and impact on productivity
and performance. So perhaps the lesson to bear in mind is
to have a good time at the Christmas party, but not too
good a time!
----------------------------------------------------
Leanne Faraday-Brash MMgmt BA Hons(Melb) MAPsS is an
Organisational Psychologist, executive coach, speaker and
facilitator. Leanne has specialised in the area of
Workplace Justice issues for 15 years and consults, trains,
mediates and investigates workplace grievances in
discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment, and
workplace bullying and performance management issues.Visit
Leanne's website at http://www.brashconsulting.com.au
No comments:
Post a Comment