Vote

From the manger’s point of view, the recklessness of sexual harassment activity is unforgivable. The contemporary aspects are well known, defined, and not debatable. The thesis of this essay will be to outline the legal obligations of the company as a whole for the scenarios outlined for an Individual Project; a brief discussion of which will follow in the next paragraph.

Mary, a young female sales professional, is confronted by Frank, a corporate sales supervisor “known for flirting.” Frank intimates to Mary that her expense receipts will not be approved unless she has dinner with him that evening. The scenario ends with Mary contacting Human Resources immediately. The story line being that Frank is known for flirtatious behavior, I am going to assume that this is not the first time that he has demonstrated explicit and unwelcome sexual advances to a junior employee and that the firm’s HR department has heard this same story from other employees in the past. 

The story is at once the classic definition of Quid Pro Quo and only lacks the actual words to detail what sexual favors he desires; that they are entirely understood to be so related, one can be assured. Mary’s sad tale to her HR manger must be something like this, “He told me that if I did something for him that he would do something for me.” And that, for job related matters, is unlawful (Ebert & Griffin, 2007, pp. 306-307). If the incidences of harassment have been documented in the past then the next step to be taken must be the termination of Frank’s employment. No modern U.S. firm can willingly permit credible evidence to go forward without a severe course of action to follow. But if the rumors to Frank’s promiscuity are not documented, then a different course should be considered. I would give him a chance to publicly apologize to Mary. Failing doing that, I would expect his work load to become so overwhelming that he would be forced to resign. Sorry, Frank, but it’s time to update the old resume and find another place to work.

New research has shown a more harmful effect on employees that sexual harassment, however. I have uncovered an article by Jane Kim that provided details of business researchers from the University of Manitoba and the Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada that reviewed 111 cases of workplace social dynamics. They found that as compared to employees who had been sexually harassed, that victims of bullying report feeling angrier and more stressed out; and were more likely to quit their job. The essay by Ms. Kim also quoted statistics provided by the Workplace Bullying Institute, a non-profit organization advocate for victim’s rights, and saw 37 percent of U.S. employees had been bullied on the job as compared to 8 to 10 percent that had been sexually harassed. This cowardly kind of assault comes as: ostracizing co-workers, making office gossip, insulting people about a job performance, or private life. The director of WBI, Psychologist Gary Namie, regards the lack of legal consequences as one reason why the actions cause more harm than sexual harassment does; the victims suffer with little help or sympathy (Kim, 2008). Personally, I have witnessed such aggression passed off or marginalized as ‘personality conflicts’; the objects of ridicule feel delegitimized. One can see the defeat in their faces.

It has come to my intention, because of the research I am doing for this essay, to learn that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has published data to reveal that law suits brought to them by women have steadily declined over the last eight years and allegations filed by men has doubled between 1990 and 2007. This tidbit of information was not the only startling revelation I learned from an article entitled Women Harassing Men. Gretchen Voss reiterated three instances – litigated by the EEOC – to show her point that men are not raised to think of themselves as victims. Now that the times have changed and women have more power in the workplace than they have traditionally garnered, the so-called gentler sex has become predator versus prey (Voss, 2008-06). The amounts of money awarded by juries and the discretely settled out-of-court costs should be enough to warrant corporate attention. So, since complaints about female bosses preying on men have doubled since 1990 it is fair to ask, “What’s going on out there?”

What is going on, in my judgment, is proof positive of the adage that ‘Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ This phrase from the historian and moralist John Acton, further noted that “Great men are almost always bad men.” (Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely, 2008) It seems fair to note now that, whether the injustice of sexual harassment is from men or women, the responsibility of management to mitigate and correct is the same.

References

Ebert, R. L., & Griffin, R. W. (2007). Business Essentials, Sixth Edition.

            Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Kim, J. N. (2008). The cubicle bully. Scientific American Mind, 13.

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. (2008).

            Retrieved July 6, 2008, from The Phrase Finder:

            http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/288200.html

Voss, G. (2008-06). Women harassing men. Marie Claire (US), 96(4).