Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment Research Articles

Seksistinių nuostatų reikšmė seksualinio priekabiavimo atpažinimui

Sexual harassment is one of the most commonly experienced forms of sex-based discrimination. Over 55 percent of women in Europe and over 35 percent of women in Lithuania endure any form of sexual harassment since the age of 15 (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights survey 2014). However, despite the frequent sexual harassment experience, in the past six years, only four sexual harassment complaints had been filed in Lithuania and to this day there isno information on men’s sexual harassment experience. According to the research, the lack of sexual harassment data and the low number of complaints can be related to the differences in perception of this phenomenon, which leads to a poor recognition of sexual harassment. There is a lack of data on the perception of sexual harassment and its related factors in Lithuania; therefore, the purpose of the study is to assess the relationship between sexist attitudes, gender,age, socioeconomic status and the recognition of sexual harassment of Lithuanian men and women. The research consisted of 345 participants (98 men and 247 women). The average age was 27.1 years (SD=8.478). Fourteen self-report vignettes were created based on the Bursik (1992) vignettes and consultations with the Office of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson to measure the participants’ perception of a hostile environment (Cronbach α 0.804) and quid pro quo(Cronbach α 0.728) sexual harassment. Sexist attitudes were measured using the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick, Fiske 1996) (Cronbach α 0.943). Questions related to participants’ age, gender and socioeconomic status were also included in this survey. The results have shown that participants with higher ratings on the sexism scale were less likely to rate situations as sexual harassment than the participants with lower such results. It was found that men evaluate all types of sexual harassment situations as significantly less severe than women. All participants tend to evaluate situations where the victim is a female as more severe than situations where the victim is male. Hostile sexism was a major factor predicting lower ratings when evaluating the severity of quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment situations.
 Keywords: sexual harassment, perception of sexual harassment, sexism, sexist attitudes, gender differences

Why Don’t We Report Sexual Harassment? An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior

ABSTRACTThe study found that an individual’s attitudes toward the behavior, normative beliefs, and perceived behavioral control predicted an individual’s intention to report an incident of hostile environment sexual harassment. Even though women indicated a greater intention to report, there was not a gender difference in whether an individual reported an incident of hostile environment sexual harassment. Our findings provide support for the theory of planned behavior as a model for predicting an individual’s intention to report sexual harassment. These findings provide insight for the formulation of policy and procedures and the development of training programs to facilitate reporting of incidents.

Third Generation Discrimination: The Ripple Effects of Gender Bias in the Workplace

Third Generation Discrimination: The Ripple Effects of Gender Bias in the Workplace

Blowing the whistle on workplace sexual harassment

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate service workers’ intention to report the “customer harasses colleague” and “colleague harasses customer” problems, and how the intention is influenced by the service workers’ perception of conflict, company integrity and criminal evidence. Design/methodology/approach – Questionnaires were used as the research instrument, and full-time life insurance salespeople were taken as a research sample. The research design helps us to see to what extent the respondents rely on the harasser's status and the types of sexual harassment to form their whistle-blowing intention. Findings – The main findings showed that: sexual harassment problems are likely to be evaluated from a “who is the harasser” perspective. The respondents appeared more tolerant of the “colleague harasses customer” problems as opposed to the “customer harasses colleague” problems. The respondents exhibited higher intention to report the hostile environment sexual harassment as opposed to quid pro quo sexual harassment. Originality/value – Sexual harassment has been described as an extremely harmful behavior in organizations. However, relevant discussions about the “customer harasses colleague” problems and “colleague harasses customer” problems are rare. The research provided an examination of these issues.

The Impact of Psychological Injuries on Sexual Harassment Determinations

Although a plethora of studies focus on jury decision making in sexual harassment cases, few studies examine damage award assessments in such suits, and even fewer explore the impact of psychological injury on jurors’ liability and damage award assessments. In the present study, 342 undergraduates read a hostile environment sexual harassment case that manipulated the plaintiff’s psychological injury level (severe vs. mild vs. control) to investigate whether males and females made different damage decisions. Males using a reasonable person standard found more liability as the severity of the plaintiff’s psychological injury increased. However, males using a reasonable woman standard found less liability with the addition of any psychological injury information. Similarly, for mild and severe injuries, males using the reasonable woman standard awarded lower damages than males using the reasonable person standard. Females tended to find more harassment than males, but psychological injury and legal standard had little impact on females’ legal decisions. We discuss these findings in light of the positive relationship often observed between the plaintiff’s injury severity level and pro-plaintiff verdicts.

The effects of harassment severity and organizational behavior on damage awards in a hostile work environment sexual harassment case

Community members reporting for jury duty (N = 128) read a sexual harassment trial summary in which harassment severity and the organization's sexual harassment policy and response were manipulated. Jurors who read the severe harassment scenario were more likely to agree that the plaintiff had suffered and should be compensated for her suffering and that the organization should be punished than were jurors who read the mild harassment scenario. When the organization had and enforced a sexual harassment policy, jurors believed that the plaintiff had suffered little and the organization should not be punished compared with conditions in which the organization did not have an enforced sexual harassment policy. Harassment severity influenced jurors' compensatory awards, and organizational behavior influenced jurors' punitive awards. These results have implications for plaintiffs, who must decide whether to claim specific or garden-variety damages; organizations, which could create or modify sexual harassment policy to limit damages; and trial lawyers, who could tailor arguments to maximize or minimize awards.

Sexual harassment in the workplace: A literature review

Sexual Harassment (SH) is one of the challenging human resource management problems in the work environment. It usually has a great impact on individuals and affects the image and profitability of the organisations. It can be classified into two; the quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment. Apart from its effect on the victim's psychological, economic, and physical stability which influences their ability to work effectively, it also causes incalculable harm to their families. Although the majority of sexual harassment complaints come from women, the number of complaints filed by men is swiftly increasing. In order to mitigate SH in the Ghanaian work environment, clearer policies and laws should be formulated and enacted so that perpetrators and victims alike will know what constitutes SH, and the corresponding punishments. Both employer and employees have a role to play to curb its effect; while the onus lies on employers to draw SH policies, employees must acquaint themselves with it, and discourage the act immediately it starts. This paper discusses sexual harassment in the work environment from the literature review perspective and provides an in depth review of the issue from different countries and institutions. It also examines some trends in the issue, and explores some causes of SH in Ghana. In addition, the paper provides precautionary measures that can be adopted by both victims and organisations to curb the menace and enhance stability and growth in organisations.

Women treated differently: why the “reasonable woman” standard might not be reasonable

Sexual harassment law addresses hostile environments by evaluating whether the workplace environment would be considered hostile by a “reasonable woman”. But who is a reasonable woman? Defendant‐employers may present one group of women employees as representative “reasonable” women and assert that any of these women’s co‐workers who have had different experiences with regard to sexual harassment are not “reasonable”. However, when male employees categorize various groups of female coworkers differently and, subsequently, treat them differently, the experiences of women from one of these groups would not be indicative of the experiences of women from an other group. This “selective sexual harassment” was present in the workplace I studied: while both groups of women were “reasonable”, they had very different experiences, only one of which might be confirmed by a court as the perspective of “reasonable” women. This article advocates for a version of the “reason ble victim” standard to facilitate a closer analysis of hostile environment sexual harassment suits.

Selective sexual harassment: differential treatment of similar groups of women workers.

If male workers categorize different groups of women coworkers and, subsequently, treat them differently, the experiences of women from one of these groups would not be indicative of the experiences of women from another group. When this different treatment involves hostile environment sexual harassment of one group, but not the other, then the law must recognize the possibility of "selective sexual harassment." Without this understanding of the nuances of the workplace dynamics, a court could mistake the women of the unharassed group as representing "reasonable women" and the women of the harassed group as simply oversensitive. This paper draws on empirical data to demonstrate such a situation and advocates for a version of the "reasonable victim" standard to facilitate a closer analysis of hostile environment sexual harassment suits.

The reasonable woman standard: effects on sexual harassment court decisions.

Some federal courts have used a reasonable woman standard rather than the traditional reasonable man or reasonable person standard to determine whether hostile environment sexual harassment has occurred. The current research examined the impact of the reasonable woman standard on federal district court decisions, controlling for other factors found to affect sexual harassment court decisions. Results indicated that there was a weak relationship between whether a case followed a reasonable woman precedent-setting case and the likelihood that the court decision favored the plaintiff. The implications of our findings for individuals and organizations involved in sexual harassment claims are discussed.

Women and workplace discrimination: overcoming barriers to gender equality

Common forms of sex discrimination - Discrimination against older women - Discrimination against African American and other women of color - Discrimination against women in the professions - Discrimination against pregnant women - Discrimination against women with children - Sex discrimination at various points in the employment relationship - The increasing incidence of sexual harassment in the workplace - Legal issues in hostile environment sexual harassment cases - Varying forms and modes of sexual harassment - Employer liability for workplace sexual harassment - Employer retaliation against workers - Proving sex discrimination in the courtroom - Compensatory and punitive damages - Back pay, front pay, and other remedies

Here comes the judge: the influence of judge personal characteristics on federal sexual harassment case outcomes.

This study explored the effects of judges' personal characteristics (gender, race, age, and political affiliation) and case characteristics on the outcomes of federal cases of hostile environment sexual harassment. Results revealed that even after controlling for the effects of relevant case characteristics (e.g., severity of the harassment), judges' personal characteristics influenced case outcomes. Specifically, younger judges and Democrat judges were more likely to find for the plaintiff (the alleged victim of harassment). The probability that the decision would favor the plaintiff was only 16% when the case was heard by an older judge but 45% when heard by a younger judge. The probability that the decision would favor the plaintiff was only 18% when the case was heard by a judge who had been appointed by a Republican president but 46% when the judge had been appointed by a Democrat president.

ASSESSING PERCEPTIONS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT BEHAVIORS IN A MANUFACTURING ENVIRONMENT

This pilot study, conducted in a manufacturing plant, investigated employee perceptions of the behaviors of supervisors and co-workers that constitute quid pro quo and hostile work environment sexual harassment. Responses indicated that the majority of employees can accurately identify behaviors that are frequently associated with quid pro quo harassment, but cannot identify behaviors that are used to establish evidence of a hostile work environment. Comparisons of employees' scores demonstrated that male workers, relative to female workers, were more frequently accurate in identifying behaviors of both supervisors and co-workers that constitute sexual harassment. Perceptions of harassment varied according to job classification. Women in white-collar jobs were significantly more knowledgeable about what behaviors constitute sexual harassment than women in blue-collar jobs.

The Paradox of Complaining: Law, Humor, and Harassment in the Everyday Work World

This article addresses the question of women's seeming rejection of sexual harassment law by refusing to apply the label “sexual harassment” in the face of incidents that would easily qualify as such. Building on the work of Bumiller (1988) and the tradition of sociolegal studies focusing on understanding the power of the law in its everyday context (e.g., Merry 1979; Engel 1987; Sarat and Kearns 1993), this analysis explores the “tactical milieu” in which both hostile work environment sexual harassment and tactics for its resistance are produced. Using in-depth interviews with both women and men, the author explores the ways a particular form of hostile work environment harassment–dubbed “chain yanking”–poaches on the realm of ambiguous humor to effect male group solidarity and women's disempowerment. A common countertactic–”not taking it personal”– is analyzed for its simultaneous power as resistance and unwitting collaboration. The contradictory effects of this tactic-countertactic pairing on the naming and claiming of the harm of sexual harassment are examined, as well as the implications this has for combating sexual harassment in the workplace.

The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination.

The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination.

The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination.

The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination.

Arbitration, mediation, and sexual harassment.

The 1998 Supreme Court decisions in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth recognized an affirmative defense to hostile environment sexual harassment claims based in part on the existence of an effective policy prohibitiong sexual harassment in the workplace. The promulgation or refinement of policies prohibiting sexual harassment will likely lead to an increase in complaints of sexual harassment. This article concludes that mediation and arbitration procedures which follow recognized standards of due process are appropriate means to resolve these claims and may substantially contribute to the Title VII goal of eradicating discrimination from the workplace.

A theoretical integration of sexual harassment models

Reports research statistics that reveal that half of all working women are likely to suffer some form of sexual harassment during their careers, particularly those in non‐traditional posts. Outlines different explanatory theories for sexual harassment proposed in current literature, focusing in particular on socio‐cultural, organizational and individual differences models, and seeks to examine the interaction between various factors identified. Discusses the main effects of power distance, attitudes towards women and gender/job match on sexual harassment, and develops models of sexual harassment behaviour to examine the interaction between these three factors for women with male supervisors in traditional and non‐traditional roles, identifying the circumstances in which quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment are most likely and most unlikely to occur. Illustrates how the different factors involved foster different kinds of sexual harassment at different levels of severity, and concludes that multiple strategies are required to address such behaviour.

Putting Your Body on the Line: A Meditation on ?Hostile Environment? Sexual Harassment in Working-Class Perspective

Listening to Anita Hill's testimony about pubic hairs on Coke cans and Long Dong Silver, I was immediately sure that she was telling the truth. When friends said, But it's all so goofy. Who would really say things like that? I replied that the goofiness of the stories was exactly what made me sure of their credibility. I had experienced such hostile environment sexual harassment, and that's how it was: unsettling but oblique, causing one to pause, confused and disbelieving, thereby insulating the perpetrator from direct counterattack. That he was only joking or making an innocent observation or engaging in collegial horseplay, are all defenses that the harasser calculatedly wants to keep available to himself should his target make a fuss. My own experience of such harassment occurred in 1978 and 1979, when I worked for the United States Postal Service as a letter-sorting machine operator. On this job, we spent perhaps forty-five minutes of every working hour keying (machine-sorting letters) and perhaps fifteen minutes (removing the sorted letters from the machine's bins and placing them in trays for delivery to local post offices). Keying was done at the front of the machine, where one was part of a long line of workers, with many people around; sweeping was done at the back of the huge machine, where one was out of sight, in relative isolation. Frequently, when women went to the back to sweep, we would find hand drawings of penises-some erect, some not-or other such offerings waiting for us on the ledges of the machine, left there by the male coworkers who had been sweeping just before us. The drawings weren't signed, nor were they addressed to anyone in particular; they were just there, unsettling, confusing, and conveying a hostility that was impossible to ignore. Still, how and whether to respond to them was not, to any of us, obvious. We didn't want to come across as prudes or as unsophisticated-certainly we'd seen things like this before-and, more important, we didn't want our male coworkers thinking we were crybabies who were thrown by little things (no pun intended). So we never mentioned the drawings-none of us. We just threw them under the machine or in the trash and went on about our business. No one ever told a supervisor (which would have been disloyal tattling on a fellow worker), no one ever told the union (actually, a shop steward was among our leading suspects), no one even much talked about it.

Perceptions of sexual harassment: the effects of gender, legal standard, and ambivalent sexism.

This research tests the possibility that the reasonable woman as compared to the reasonable person test of hostile work environment sexual harassment interacts with hostile and benevolent sexist beliefs and under some conditions triggers protectionist attitudes toward women who complain of sexual harassment. We administered to a sample of undergraduates the ambivalent sexism inventory along with the fact patterns in two harassment cases and asked them to make legally relevant decisions under either the reasonable woman or person standard. We found that those high in hostile sexism, and women, found more evidence of harassment. However, those high in benevolent sexism did not exhibit the hostile sexism effects. Although men were less sensitive to the reasonable woman standard than women, under some conditions the reasonable woman standard enabled both genders to find greater evidence of harassment. The results are discussed from the perspectives of law and psychology.