A recent study suggests that there has been a backlash against the #MeToo movement.
According to the Harvard Business Review, men are treating their females co-workers differently because of #MeToo.
19 percent of men said they were reluctant to hire attractive women.
21 percent said they were reluctant to hire women for jobs involving close interactions with men.
27 percent said they avoided one-on-one meetings with female colleagues.
This isn’t a #MeToo problem. It’s the problem that #MeToo is trying to fix. Indeed, Harvard Business Review could rewrite its headline to read, “More than one in four men admit to discriminating against female co-workers.”
Can women falsely accuse their male colleagues of sexual harassment? Absolutely … just as they could before the #MeToo movement. And just as men can falsely accuse women, and women each other, and men each other.
False accusations of harassment are not a #MeToo problem. They are systemic in any system that relies on employees to self-police and report misconduct via complaints. The remedy isn’t sexually segregated workplaces. The remedy is thorough and complete investigations of all complaints of harassment, and appropriate punishment for those who are found to have lodged false complaint.
The risk of false harassment complaints is not an excuse for sexual segregation at work. Instead, the risk of sexual segregation is the reason to double down on efforts to root out and end sexual harassment and other sex discrimination.
It must be a brave soul who dares to strike up a flirtatious conversation at the workplace microwave these days. Only ten percent of Americans report having met their mate at the office, a level that is half what it was in the 1990s.
But in the post-#MeToo office, unless you send a memo to the guy you fancy, signed with your consent at the bottom, it is understandable that he wouldn’t want to make the first move for fear of being hauled before human resources. While most normal guys are able to tell whether a woman likes them or not, the erasure of any ‘grey area’ in workplace interactions means more and more people are feeling nervous about taking the first step.
At Spiked, Ella adds
Companies are responding to the sexual-harassment panic by banning alcohol from office parties and instituting policies on how long and how close personal interactions should be. Bosses who hug their employees are even making headline news. …
It’s time to rebel against these attacks on workplace romance. So wear your lowest top to your next board meeting and linger too long by your colleague’s desk. We need to make the workplace a humane environment where sparks can once again fly.
Clickbait headlines aside, #MeToo hasn’t killed the office romance; it’s just killed the inappropriate office romance. The boss dating his (or her) subordinate. The co-worker that won’t take “no” for an answer. The improper or otherwise improper texter or emailer.
There’s nothing inherently illegal about co-workers dating each other. In fact, according to a recent survey, 31 percent of people who met and started dating while working together ended up getting married (to each other).
Still, there’s a lot that can (and sometimes does) go wrong when employees get romantically involved.
Conflicts of interest.
Extortion and blackmail attempts.
Uncomfortable conversations with HR and company attorneys explaining your love life.
Have to describing your employee’s private affairs in a deposition or, worse, to a jury.
Office gossip.
Love contracts.
The loss of respect from co-workers and management.
Facing termination for not disclosing a romance.
Harassment and retaliation lawsuits when someone other than an employee’s paramour gets passed over for a promotion, fired, or otherwise thinks you are playing favorites.
Harassment or retaliation lawsuits by a jilted partner when the relationship goes south.
Which doesn’t mean that employees shouldn’t date; it just means that employers need to understand that permitting office romances amplifies the risk of claims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, especially when the parties involved are a manager or supervisor and his or her subordinate.
The question, then, isn’t whether these relationship are illegal (they’re not), but how much risk you, as an employer, want to assume in the event a relationships sours, or other employees feels shunned or mistreated as a result.
Ban them outright?
Ban them only between a manager/supervisor and his/her subordinate?
Permit them with a signed agreement (the “love contract”)?
Do nothing and permit them across-the-board?
I recommend avoiding the first option and not banning them outright because of a knee-jerk reaction to #MeToo. That’s just lazy employee management. Not all workplace relationships are toxic or unlawful, and if you’re diligent in your anti-harassment training and other efforts, you’ll be able to spot, catch, and handle the ones that are.
Atlantic Capes Fisheries agreed to pay $675,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by the EEOC alleging sexual harassment and retaliation.
The allegations that lead to the settlement, and this nomination as the worst employer of 2019?
A male supervisor, Fidel Santos, asked a new female employee, Esdeyra Rosales, about her personal life, stood close behind her while she was working, touching her back, hips, and buttocks. When she objected, he told her there was no work for her. When Rosales asked, and was granted, reassignment to another line, Santos’s harassment did not stop. He continued to make rude comments about her body and solicit her for sex. On one occasion, Santos approached Rosales from behind and asked her to touch his penis. When she refused, he pressed up against her, rubbing his penis against her buttock. Rosales complained to management, but they told her either to ignore it, or that they would “look into it.” The harassment, however, continued.
The harassment was not isolated to Rosales. Santos also allegedly harassed Margarita Fuentes, Mirna Pacaja, and others.
On Fuentes’s first day of work, Santos grabbed her buttocks. When she objected, Santos told her, “Here, anything goes.” Fuentes immediately complained to a manager, who told her that Santos was “crazy” and that she should just ignore him. The very next day, Santos came up behind Fuentes, grabbed her hand, pulled it behind her back, and placed it on his penis. When she resisted, Santos called her a “stupid old lady,” and that she was expected to do what she was told. Fuentes again complained to management, who again told her just to ignore it. The alleged harassment even after Fuentes ultimately secured a transfer away from Santos. He would find her, and call her “stupid” and “good for nothing,” question why she would not submit to him sexually, and hypothesize about her sex life.
Pacaja had worked for the fishery for 4 years before being transferred to Santos’s line. He allegedly similarly harassed her, almost from the start. He would grab her waist and hips, comment on her genitalia and buttocks, complain that she would not submit to him sexually, ask her to touch his penis, rub his hands on her breasts, and rub his erect penis up against her.
When Pacaja and Rosales ultimately complained to the HR manager, and then filed discrimination charges with the EEOC, they started receiving written warnings concerning alleged interpersonal issues with their co-workers. Within weeks they were both fired.
According to EEOC Senior Trial Attorney Sara Smolik, “The brave women who filed discrimination charges with the EEOC in this case alerted the agency to widespread sex harassment that was adversely affecting them and many of their female co-workers in the facility. Because they had the courage to step forward, the EEOC was able to investigate and bring this lawsuit to improve the working conditions for everyone.”
It also might lead to this employer being named the worst employer of 2019.
Sexual harassment has been a constant topic of discussion in the media, in the workplace and around dinner tables since the rise of the #MeToo movement in late-2017. Employers and employees alike have questioned what this societal shift means for their workplace interactions and responsibilities.
Though the issue remains at the forefront of the news cycle, many alleged sexual harassment incidents aren’t widely known or reported. State legislators are working to change that. More than 30 jurisdictions have introduced more than 100 pieces of legislation in 2018 toward sexual harassment prevention.
One of the first goals of these state mandated sexual harassment prevention policies is general education, making sure everyone is aware that sexual harassment is prohibited and to provide a definition of what it may include. Sexual harassment is a broad but very fact-specific form of discrimination that can include:
Unwanted verbal or physical sexual advances.
Sexually explicit statements.
Sexually oriented gestures, noises, remarks, jokes or comments.
Remarks the recipient feels are offensive or objectionable.
Sexual or discriminatory displays/publications anywhere in the workplace.
Other harassing or hostile conduct that’s directed at recipients because of their sex.
All of the above may be considered examples of sexual harassment. Offering such examples is a significant item in the list of minimum standards New York is requiring of all anti-sexual harassment policies. Policies must also outline federal and state statutory provisions, and include remedies available to victims, procedures for a timely investigation and a complaint form for employees.
More than 30 jurisdictions have introduced more than 100 pieces of legislation in 2018 toward sexual harassment prevention.
It’s important to note that sexual harassment can be overt (such as inappropriate touching, unwanted sexual advances or telling of crude jokes) or subtle (including interfering with an individual’s ability to perform their job because of their gender). An employee can be sexually harassed by a supervisor, subordinate, employee, intern, independent contractor, temporary or contract worker, vendor, client, visitor or customer.
Another key principle of much of the anti-sexual harassment legislation introduced this year is training. In New York, for example, all employers must provide annual interactive sexual harassment prevention training for every one of their employees working in the state — including part-time, seasonal and temporary employees. The initial training must be completed by October 9, 2019. The training must be interactive, should be provided in the language the employee speaks, and — according to the guidance — must include the following components:
An explanation of sexual harassment consistent with guidance issued by the Department of Labor in consultation with the Division of Human Rights.
Examples of conduct that would constitute unlawful sexual harassment.
The federal and state statutory provisions concerning sexual harassment and remedies available to victims of sexual harassment.
Employees’ rights of redress and all available forums for adjudicating complaints.
Addressing conduct by supervisors and any additional responsibilities for such supervisors (note that all employees must be trained on this content, not just supervisors).
Though compliance with the new policy and training requirements for sexual harassment prevention can seem daunting, the New York State Department of Labor in consultation with the New York State Division of Human Rights has provided model materials that employers and HR managers can use to comply with the requirements in the state. The potential costs of a sexual harassment complaint against a business can be steep, so it’s in everyone’s best interest to be compliant with sexual harassment prevention training requirements. The typical harassment claim can take nearly 318 days to be settled, according to the 2017 “Hiscox Guide to Employee Lawsuits,” and some estimates place the average legal costs to defend and settle a claim to be upward of $160,000. Not to mention the irreparable damage a sexual harassment claim can have on your company’s reputation and the morale and productivity of the workplace.
In addition to model materials and other guidance that may be provided by enforcing agencies to help employers meet the state’s unique requirements, businesses can also turn to an HR services provider to help them comply with new or existing provisions. State-specific requirements can be both comprehensive and complex. Even the most seasoned HR professional will likely have questions around the specific components of their state-mandated notice, policy and education programs. A reputable HR services provider will have a team of compliance experts on staff to help businesses ensure their policies and practices align with the requirements of their particular state (or states if they operate in multiple locations).
No matter where your organization does business, part of your HR role is to adopt and implement policies and procedures to prevent and address sexual harassment in the workplace. More importantly, promoting an inclusive culture of respect and free from sexual harassment can be essential in maintaining an engaged and productive workforce and even attracting the right talent to the organization.
This content is for educational purposes only, is not intended to provide specific legal advice, and should not be used as a substitute for the legal advice of a qualified attorney in your state. The information in this article may not reflect the most current legal developments, may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up to date.
A hashtag started as a reaction to #MeToo, put forth by those who believe that false accusations of rape and sexual assault against men are common and happen way too often.
Employers, #HimToo is dangerous to your workplace.
If you believe that allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault are presumptively false, your investigation is doomed to fail before it even starts. (Of course, the converse is also true; you cannot presumptively believe that allegations are true, either).
You must engage in a full, fair, and impartial investigation into all allegations of unlawful harassment. And, if you cannot do that, hire a third party to do it for you.
#MeToo has done an amazing job of creating an atmosphere of understanding for complaints of harassment and other sexual misconduct. Let’s not undermine all the good it has done with knee-jerk reactions in the other direction.
It’s not only the right thing to do; it’s also what is legally required.
Atlantic Capes Fisheries agreed to pay $675,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by the EEOC alleging sexual harassment and retaliation.
