A female employee had her contract terminated by her employer. The employee went on to claim unemployment benefits, but her employer appealed this. At the tribunal, the employer explained that she had discharged the woman after discovering that she had not approached her about an alleged sexual harassment from a male colleague at work and had, instead, formed a petition to drive out the colleague (Texas Workforce).
The claimant contested that she had approached a supervisor, and had been passed on to a different manager, who she believed to be the male colleague’s direct superior. The employer had not used the usual disciplinary procedure of two written warnings and then discharge, as she felt the case was serious enough to warrant immediate discharge (Texas Workforce).
The Commission rules that the employer’s reasons for stopping the claimant’s benefits were sufficient. The employer did not have evidence of the claimant forming a petition, so this part of the case was closed. Furthermore, the employer’s accusation that the claimant did not report the sexual harassment to herself was deemed insufficient, do to various testimonies from other staff members, admitting that information was not passed on where it should have been.
Furthermore, the employer failed to provide a good reason for her not following the usual disciplinary procedure.
A man claimed that he had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace. He alleged that a male colleague had unexpectedly shown his anus to him, had slid a piece of splintered wood in between his legs, and had touched the claimant in between his buttocks with his hands. When the claimant demonstrated objections to the actions, his colleagues began to harass him by calling him offensive names, on a regular basis. In tribunal, the claimant reported that he had seen many young men being treated in the same way at the place of work. He went on the explain that most of these young men ended up leaving their jobs, and one man had even attempted suicide. When the claimant approached his foreman about the harassment, he was told to ignore the behaviour of the other men. He also claimed that his supervisors and management had known about and seen the behaviour but had not acted to eradicate the harassment (Anti-Discrimination Commission Queensland).
At the conference, the accused men admitted to the behaviours but insisted that they were just acting jovially to make the workplace more fun. The senior managers claimed to be unaware of any bad behaviour. The company admitted that young men didn’t tend to stay in the job for very long, but claimed they believed it was because the young people simply didn’t want to work, and not that there was any other reason.
Once the accused men had admitted their behaviours, the company issued warnings to the individuals and told the conference that all staff would receive training on sexual harassment and that there would be a zero tolerance policy on such behaviour from then on. The complainant was satisfied with this outcome, and with the apologies he received from the individual men involved, and so the complaint was resolved without further action (Anti-Discrimination Commission Queensland).
A woman started a new job as a delivery person, and two months into her role she attended the staff Christmas party at a hotel. She alleged that when she and her sister arrived at the party, a group of around ten male colleagues made sexual comments and wolf-whistled at them. Soon after having gone inside, a male colleague approached the table the woman was sitting at and exposed his stomach and chest, and then his buttocks. Later on, the same male colleague approached the woman from behind as she was playing pool, and pulled her top down, exposing one of her breasts. The woman claimed to have hit the man with her pool cue, as she was worried and embarrassed by what had happened. At this point a second male colleague came up to the woman and tried to snatch the pool cue away from her Australian Human Rights Commission).
The following working day, the woman complained to her employer about both of the incidents that had occurred at the party. Her employer launched an investigation and found that the assertions were validated. The first male colleague was transferred to work at a different site, and the second colleague was reprimanded. However, after complaining, the woman claims that her colleagues acted in an unfriendly manner towards her and, furthermore, her contract was not renewed. She therefore filed a complaint with HREOC asking for monitory compensation and for a well-structured sexual harassment complaint and discipline procedure to be introduced in the company. The woman’s employer chose to privately settle her complain, before the case went to a conference (Australian Human Rights Commission).
Works Cited
Anti-Discrimination Commission Queensland. “Sexual Harassment Case Studies.” 2011.
Web. 8 July 2011. http://www.adcq.qld.gov.au/Cases/Sexual%20harassment.htm
Australian Human Rights Commission. “A Bad Business.” 2011. Web. 8 July 2011.
http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sex_discrimination/workplace/bad_business/media/case.htm
l
Texas Workforce. “Case Studies in Sexual Harassment.” 2011. Web. 8 July 2011.
http://www.twc.state.tx.us/news/efte/case_studies_in_sexual_harassment.html
