INTRODUCTION

Sexual harassment at work is an unwelcome or uninvited behavior of sexual natures, which is offensive, embarrassing, intimidating or humiliating and may affect an employees work performance, health, career or livelihood.1 Sexual harassment may take the form of intimidation, bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors. The problem acquired a name and a face through a publication in the United States of two surveys on sexual harassment at work. It proved the existence of unbridled harassment of workers on the basis of gender. Since then, increasing awareness of basic human rights and what constitutes acceptable conduct or behavior in the work or school environment has empowered victims of sexual harassment to come out in the open to assert their claims and seek relief in the law through the justice system. The UN Charter of 1945 and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are the first international documents that proclaim the doctrine of equality of all human beings regardless of race, sex or creed. With the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1979, sexual harassment became an international concern. CEDAW specifically requires the elimination of gender-based discrimination by

Sexual harassment awareness training at workplace:

Can it effect administrators perception? Marican Sabitha1

mandating that all State Parties accept the equality of rights and responsibilities of both men and women and take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women. Its end is to achieve elimination of all prejudices and customs and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.
2

Sexual harassment is a serious workplace problem that has cost the federal government over $267 million in losses during a two-year period. This figure includes lost productivity, absenteeism and replacement costs incurred by sexually harassed public employees. An analysis of three issues, awareness, reporting and satisfaction, in sexual harassment policy implementation is undertaken in a public university. The results indicate that low rates of reporting and inadequate protection for victims are more of a problem than lack of awareness about sexual harassment policy and the grievance process.3 The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action stresses that all forms of sexual harassment are incompatible with the dignity and worth of the human person and must be eliminated by legal measures and through national action, while the Beijing Platform for Action specifically mandates governments to enact and reinforce penal, civil, labor and administrative sanctions in domestic legislation to punish and redress violence against women including harassment and develop programme and procedures

2 3

A.M. No. 03-03-13-SC 2004-12-14 Reese, Laura A., Lindenberg, Karen E. Review of Public Personnel Administration

to eliminate sexual harassment and other forms of violence against woment in all educational institution, workplace and anywhere: For its part, the Congress of the Philippines enacted Republic Act no. 7877 which declares unlawful any act that is calculated to harass an employee within the workplace for the purpose of soliciting sexual favors and provides the appropriate penalty for any violation thereof. Background of the Study Republic Act no. 7877 imposes a duty on the employer or head of office in cases of sexual harassment problems encountered by their employees. It in part provides: SECTION 4. Duty of the Employer or Head of Office in a Workrelated, Education or Training Environment. - It shall be the duty of the employer or the head of the work-related, educational or training environment or institution, to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. Towards this end, the employer or head of office shall: (a) Promulgate appropriate rules and regulations in consultation with and joint1y approved by the employees or students or trainees, through their duly designated representatives, prescribing the procedure for the investigation of sexual harassment cases and the administrative sanctions therefor. Administrative sanctions shall not be a bar to prosecution in the proper courts for unlawful acts of sexual harassment.

Failure on the part of the employer or head of office tom perform the duty above mentioned exposes them to liability which the law states: SECTION 5. Liability of the Employer, Head of Office, Educational or Training Institution. -The employer or head of office, educational or training institution shall be solidarily liable for damages arising from
3

the acts of sexual harassment committed in the employment, education or training environment if the employer or head of office, educational or training institution is informed of such acts by the offended party and no immediate action is taken.

Generally, the law defines the term Sexual Harassment as an act committed by an employer; employee; manager; supervisor; agent of the employer; teacher; instructor; professor; coach; trainor; or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment, demands; requests; or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other; regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said act. When does sexual harassment committed in a workplace? Specifically, sexual harassment is committed in a work setting when the following acts are performed:

1. The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment in the Philippines, re-employment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation, terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate, deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said employee; 2. The above acts would impair the employees rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or

3. The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

Objectives 1. What are the specific form of sexual harassment as defined by its implementing rules. 2. Identify problems in the implementation of the law.

3. What are recent rulings of the Supreme Court regarding Sexual

The Civil Service Commission classified the acts of sexual harassment into grave less grave and light offense to wit;

Grave Offenses

1. Unwanted touching of private parts of the body; 2. Sexual assault; 3. Malicious touching; 4. Requesting for sexual favor in exchange for employment, local or foreign travels, favorable working conditions or assignments, the granting of honors or scholarship, or grant of benefits payment of a stipend or allowance, and 5. Other analogous cases.

Less Grave Offenses

1. Unwanted touching or brushing against a victim s body; 2. Pinching not falling under grave offenses; 3. Derogatory or degrading remarks or innuendos directed toward the members of one sexual orientation or used to describe a person; and 4. Other analogous cases.

Light Offenses 1. Surreptitiously looking or staring a lo of a persons private parts or worn undergarments; 2. Telling sexist / smutty jokes or sending these through text, electronic mail or other similar means, causing embarrassment or offense and carried out after the offender has been advised that they are offensive or embarrassing or, even without such advise, when they are by their nature clearly embarrassing, offensive or vulgar; 3. Malicious leering or ogling; 4. The display of sexually offensive pictures, amterialss or graffiti; 5. Unwelcome inquiries or comments about a persons sex life; 6. Unwelcome sexual; flirtation, advances, propositions; 7. Making offensive hand or body gestures at an employee; 8. Persistent unwanted attention with sexual overtones; 9. Unwelcome phone calls with sexual overtones causing discomfort,

embarrassment, offense or insult to the receiver; and 10. Other analogous cases.

Sexual harassment may be committed either by male or by female individual, however research abounds that male seems to be the consistent harasser. However one major problem in dealing with sexual harassment in organizations is its perceptual nature (Popovich, Gehlauf, Jolton, Somers, & Godinho, 1992) because men and women generally differ in what they perceive to be sexual harassment (Dunwoody-Miller & Gutek, 1985; Reilly et al., 1992; Riger, 1991). Riger (1991) stated that the variable that most consistently predicts variation in peoples definition of sexual harassment is the sex of the rater. In fact there is considerable literature shows that researchers have found a number of differences with the most consistent findings on sexual harassment being gender differences in perceptions of incidents (Booth-Butterfield, 1989; Tannen, 1990; Malovich & Stake, 1990). Findings indicated that women have broader definitions of sexual harassment than males, have more negative attitudes, are less tolerant and consider teasing, looks, gestures, unnecessary physical contact and remarks to be sexual harassment (Mazer & Percival, 1989; McKinney, 1990, Sabitha, 2005a), and see it as a more serious problem (McKinney, 1990). On the other hand men typically do not find the same behaviors to be offensive and label teasing, looks, gestures and comments as normal interactions between males and females (Johnson, Stockdale & Saal, 1991). Men label fewer behaviors at work as sexual harassment and they tend to find sexual overtures from women to be flattering, whereas women find similar approaches from men to be insulting (Konrad & Gutek, 1986; Gutek, 1985).

Similarly Konrad and Gutek stated (1986) men were four times more likely to be flattered by sexual overtures and four times less likely to be insulted. According to Riger (1991) men generally do not perceive the behavior to be offensive and, therefore, they do not see it as a crime or problem. Hence an overall pattern that men and women tend to differ in what they perceive to be sexual harassment. One of the reasons was because men were less likely to report incidents when they face sexual harassment (Konrad & Gutek, 1986, Sabitha, 2003). According to Vaux (1993) the situation maybe those men are constrained by the `sex role they are supposed to fit. As in prior studies (Sabitha, 2005a) the respondent indicated that they would be in more trouble, if they shared their sexual harassment problem with their colleagues, and worst still if they have to tell their family. The study of Aligada (2000) showed that sexual harassment is committed predominantly by males, who exercise power over unsuspecting students victims mostly females and creating a sort of power imbalance. However, the informal power of men over women by virtue of their greater strength, physical size, strength and status is another factor in sexual harassment especially when it involves students.(Sandler and Hoop, 1977) Aligada concluded that in the cases filed and decided upon, what was evidently was its frequent commission by the male harasser. Either a man or a woman may be a victim of sexual harassment. The study by the Manggawang Kababaihan Mithi ay Paglaya(MAKALAYA) concentrated on its survey of 334 industrial and business establishments in five

provinces in the Philippines. The findings show that only small portions, twenty one per cent (21%) has implementing guidelines on anti-sexual harassment law. The study also reveals that the foremost difficulty in the implementations o0f RA7877 is the lack of awareness of the employees about the law. Most of the sexual harassment cases happened in Metro Manila establishments owned by Filipino. Only minute portion of workers verbalized that the anti-sexual harassment law is retarding the status of women in the workplace. As sexual harassment is not only about sex but also about power of superior individual over an inferior one, the government and other institution should to do something lessen the imbalance of power among individuals. It is the prime duty of the government to protect the rights of every citizen as mandated by Section 2, Article II of the 1987 Constitution. The natural and juridical rights are duly protected by the State to uphold the dignity of every human being. The government protects rights of every person through legislation. It is therefore the womans perception about the sexual oriented acts which determines their legal implications. What may appear to be a parental touch or beso beso greetings to t5he harasser may be perceived as acts of sexual harassment by the victim. What may sound to be a light chat may be perceived to a sensual joke and what may appear as picture of art may be perceived as smutty. A friendly touch to an enlightened and fully aware co-employee or subordinate may be perceived as sexual assault or harassment. Any difference between a mans perception about absence of malice in sexually oriented gestures and words and ones perception about how they

affect her will be appreciated in favor of the victim. It is therefore clear that a difference in interpretation about acts of sexual harassment between the suspected harasser and the and the potential victim does not provide a legal ground for the exculpation from criminal and/or administrative culpability. The victims perception prevails over the harasser. Some authors theorized that a person with less power and influence can be easily intimidated by one with more power. For a subordinate or co-employee, promotion, opportunities, fellowship and access to other privileges may be actually at stake, making it difficult to say no or even indicate displeasure. As a result of this, employers have common responsibilities to chart a new direction in controlling acts of its personnel which are offensive to good morals and may constitute acts of sexual harassment. This may be done by formulating policy guideline designed to streamline procedures to be followed by a victim of sexual harassment in seeking administrative justice. These policy guidelines shall form part of the Code of Ethics and Discipline of the organization. Ra 7877 also mandates that the following duties to the employer or head of office: SECTION 4. Duty of the Employer or Head of Office in a Workrelated, Education or Training Environment. - It shall be the duty of the employer or the head of the work-related, educational or training environment or institution, to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. Towards this end, the employer or head of office shall: (a) Promulgate appropriate rules and regulations in consultation with and joint1y approved by the employees or students or trainees, through their duly designated representatives, prescribing the procedure for the investigation of sexual harassment cases and the administrative sanctions therefor.

10

Administrative sanctions shall not be a bar to prosecution in the proper courts for unlawful acts of sexual harassment. The said rules and regulations issued pursuant to this subsection (a) shall include, among others, guidelines on proper decorum in the workplace and educational or training institutions. (b) Create a committee on decorum and investigation of cases on sexual harassment. The committee shall conduct meetings, as the case may be, with officers and employees, teachers, instructors, professors, coaches, trainors, and students or trainees to increase understanding and prevent incidents of sexual harassment. It shall also conduct the investigation of alleged cases constituting sexual harassment. In the case of a work-related environment, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1) representative each from the management, the union, if any, the employees from the supervisory rank, and from the rank and file employees.

11