Employees are expected to be in submission to their bosses; this is a common knowledge that is recognized all over the globe no matter what the nature of the work process is as recognized by the organization (Cheeseman, 2013). Nonetheless, there are instances when such knowledge is being used to overpower the employees especially based on racial and gender differences. Among the most common cases that impose such abuse of the law is that of the occurrence of sexual harassment in several institutions. Paula is noted to have just started her job at a corporation, and she was noted to be working under the supervision of David. The casual conversations turning into sexual advances that Paula strongly did not approve of particularly caused her to become adamant about ever going back to the corporation. Although she has already notified Anita, David’s supervisor, no immediate actions were taken into account. This failure to respond to the situation has caused Paula to push through with her decision to stop working for the corporation. Regarding her decision to sue David and the corporation about the situation, several torts recognizing the emergence of sexual harassment could be carried into account.
According to the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the case of Ellison v Brady proposes that women are to be given the chance to sue person[s] based on the sexual behavior they have towards the victim (MacKinnon, 1979). This particular case indicates that sexual harassment need not be physical in nature. The verbal attacks that a person may have against the person being victimized in the case could account for particular points of harassment that Paula could use in her case. Given the fact that Paula tried to avoid David shows that she was adamant about the conversations and the actions that her superior was posing on her; this fact could be used to point out that she was indeed being harassed to give into something she did not welcome nor appreciate in any way.
Another law that could be considered is the statement on R.A. 7877 which defines sexual harassment as something that is unlawful in the employment, education or training environment as well as for other purposes (LaLonde, et al, 1998). This particular law indicates that any particular act or verbal advances made by a person towards another based on his or her gender is punishable by the law as such an act could be considered ‘unlawful’ especially if the receiving party does not welcome such behavior. This was very clear in the case of Paula. Although the friendly conversations before the advances happened on the part of the David were welcomed by Paula, it should not be used as a basis of acceptance of any further advances from the accused individual. Assumption of closeness or acceptance could not be used to defend David’s actions, especially when he stood between Paula and the door and ordered her to sit down and forced her to listen to his stories of sexual innuendos.
Following the same tort of law against sexual harassment [RA 7877] insists on the emergence of reactions and actuations against the victim imposing a sense of sexual approach towards indicating superiority on the part of the defender (LaLonde, et al, 1998). It should be remembered how David patted Paula in her bottom when she was about to get out from the office and gave her a hug after. Although David says that this was a friendly act, such movement cannot be considered as so especially considering the situations that came to occur before the said scenario.
In relation to the provisions of the CSC resolution no. 01-0940, sexual harassment could be proven true if the actions of a particular individual is directed towards another to impose superiority or to make a discomfort out of the environment that the victim is working with (LaLonde, et al, 1998). Basing from the calls of David as he said that he would keep on doing the oppressive acts and behaviors towards Paula so long as she works under him could be accounted as a threat to her performance, a discrimination against her position as a subordinate under David’s command. This in itself is a form of harassment that should be given particular attention to by the law.
As for the corporation, given the fact that Anita, David’s supervisor did not act on the matter, but instead sent David a notice about the complaint should impose the fact that the case of Paula is being set aside accordingly. In this case, Paula could use Sec 4 (a) and (b) of the Republic Act of 7877. Section 4 specifically stipulates the responsibility of the employers to provide a distinct course of guidelines that could help their employees become protected against instances of sexual harassment as well as evident sexual advances from their colleagues or from their superiors (LaLonde, et al, 1998). It is the administrators’ responsibility to take note of the fact that their people are well guided in relation to how they are supposed to act towards such hostilities. The company should also note how they are well protected by the management especially in supporting their safety against such occurrences of sexual intimacies coming from their superiors.
Accordingly, section 5 of the same law states that the company should be able to establish a specific committee that will handle sexual harassment grievances in the organization (MacKinnon, 1979); given the reaction and motion of Anita on the case, it was clear that there is no special committee established by the corporation to respond to matters such as the one she presented.
Overall, it could be considered that the case of Paula is strong. Given the right statements and proof to the matter, she has a great chance in putting an end to her dilemma of being treated unfairly especially by a superior who has invoked a distinct desire to either shame her or control her through sexual approaches. Given the chance to be heard and be considered as a victim of the situation, Paula could get payment from the corporation as decided by the court as proper response to the damages that the non-establishment of policies on sexual harassment has caused her and her work conditions. As for David, a settlement of values could be arranged as per agreement between Paula and David, as guided by their legal advisors.
References:
LaLonde, Jane; O'Shea, Tracy (1998). Sexual Harassment: A Practical Guide to the Law, Your Rights, and Your Options for Taking Action. St. Martin's Griffin.
MacKinnon, Catharine A. (1979). Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination. Yale University Press.
Cheeseman, H. R. (2013). The Legal Environment of Business and Online Commerce: Business ethics, e-commerce, Regulatory, and International issues. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
