A Guy’s View: Sexual harassment in the workplace

Ever since the start of the sexual revolution, the issue of sexual harassment has never been far from the top of the subjects of discussion. Sexual harassment in the workplace has now been receiving parliamentary attention.

It seems that all over the western world, men have found it difficult to restrain their admiration for the fairer sex, when that term was limited to women. Women have complained that they are often the beneficiaries of uninvited compliments that they would rather not receive when they pass groups of men, whether or not those men are at work or relaxing.

I recall the story of a former colleague who went into the city very attractively dressed, as she usually was. On this occasion, it appears that she was also provocatively dressed. A man followed her wherever she went throughout the city giving her compliments and declarations of his desires. His generosity overwhelmed her, so she went back home and changed her clothing.

There is no doubt in my mind that the time is fast approaching when a repeat of that kind of behavior will land that man in prison. But what if she were to be so regaled in the workplace, even now? Consequences will soon be attached to less overt behaviour.

Parliament is now debating the Employment Sexual Harassment (Prevention) Act, 2017. The Act declares its purpose as the protection of employees from sexual harassment in the workplace. Importantly, it does not specify women, either in the declaration of its purpose or in the definition of sexual harassment.

Section 3 (1) of the Act defines sexual harassment thus:

“For the purposes of this Act, sexual harassment includes
(a) the use of sexually suggestive words, comments, jokes, gestures or actions that annoy, alarm or abuse a person;
(b) the initiation of uninvited physical contact with a person;
(c) the initiation of unwelcome sexual advances or the requests of sexual favours from a person;
(d) asking a person intrusive questions that are of a sexual nature that pertain to that person’s private life;
(e) transmitting sexually offensive writing or material of any kind;
(f) making sexually offensive telephone calls to a person; or
(g) any other sexually suggestive conduct of an offensive nature.”

This could be a culture shock for some among us. In local circles, it seems to be part of the bravado of manhood to speak in sexually suggestive terms, at least in male circles. Those who cannot change their language must now ensure that they muzzle themselves when speaking to their work colleagues.

Women engage in similar language and general behaviour, but men do not complain, so the relevance is reduced. There is a social restraint that will keep men from complaining about unwelcomed female attention. The complaining man would never be able to live down the condemnation of other men who would laugh him to scorn and term him as foolish.

Sexually suggestive words are central to the daily speech of some persons. Calypsonians like to boast that they are the conscience of the society and the voice of the voiceless. If this is true, this speaks volumes about our society, for all they sing about is politics and sex. If you include the recent addition of rum, there you have the calypso trinity. Yes, from time to time they try to insult our intelligence by telling us that their obvious sexual subject matter is all in our imagination, but that is so nonsensical that it would be a waste of time to discuss that fallacy.

It may not be that all of them are without imagination. They may simply be singing what they know their audience wants to hear. If their sexual songs were offensive to us, we would reject them and they would not sing them. We like it so.

Section 4 (1) of the Act places a responsibility of notification on every employer. According to that subsection,

“Every employer shall ensure
(a) that there is a clear written policy statement against sexual harassment within the workplace for which that employer has responsibility;
(b) that a statement of that policy is presented to each employee on the commencement of employment with the employer; and
(c) that procedures are put in place to assist every employee in understanding the policy statement.”

It will no longer be sufficient for an employer to expect his employees to behave themselves. The employer must now develop a written anti-harassment policy and bring it to the attention of all employees. Further, if it is necessary, the employer must explain that policy to his employees so as to ensure that it is properly understood.

This places another responsibility on an employer: that of ensuring that dimwitted persons do not make it into the workplace. If an employee does not have the capacity to understand the policy, that employee’s default may vicariously lay at the feet of the employer.

One suspects, however, that the major concern may not lie in a lack of understanding the policy, but in the blunt refusal to adhere to it. Given where we have come, how can a red-blooded Bajan man not comment on the well-shaped posteriors that are squeezed into the too-tight skirts that daily traverse the aisle of his workplace? How does one see brown sugar and not salivate? And how do the newly empowered female bosses not act out their perception of male historical behaviour and move on their subordinates, whether male or female? After all, what is the point of having power that you cannot use?

One’s workspace should not be a threatening place. It is unfortunate that we are forced to legislate decency. But here we are.