What is Sexual Harassment?

Definition of Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment is defined as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or
physical conduct of a sexual nature when either:
 The conduct is made as a term or condition of an individual's employment, education, living environment
or participation in a University community.
 The acceptance or refusal of such conduct is used as the basis or a factor in decisions affecting an
individual's employment, education, living environment, or participation in a University community.
 The conduct unreasonably impacts an individual's employment or academic performance or creates an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for that individual's employment, education, living
environment, or participation in a University community.
Sexual harassment is defined by law and includes requests for sexual favors, sexual advances or other sexual
conduct when (1) submission is either explicitly or implicitly a condition affecting academic or employment
decisions; (2) the behavior is sufficiently severe or pervasive as to create an intimidating, hostile or repugnant
environment; or (3) the behavior persists despite objection by the person to whom the conduct is directed. The
University considers such behavior, whether physical or verbal, to be a breach of its standards of conduct and
will seek to prevent such incidents and take corrective action when sexual harassment occurs (Office of
Institutional Equity, University of Michigan).

Types of Sexual Harassment

Generally speaking, there are two types of sexual harassment, “quid pro quo” and hostile environment.
Quid pro quo (meaning “this for that”) sexual harassment occurs when it is stated or implied that an academic
or employment decision about a student or employee depends upon whether the student or employee submits
to conduct of a sexual nature. Quid pro quo sexual harassment also occurs when it is stated or implied that an
individual must submit to conduct of a sexual nature in order to participate in a University program or activity.
So, for example, if an employee is made to believe that a promotion is likely if the employee goes on a date
with the employee’s supervisor, the employee is possibly being subjected to “quid pro quo” sexual harassment.
(Office of Institutional Equity, University of Michigan)
Hostile environment sexual harassment occurs when unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature creates an
intimidating, threatening or abusive working or learning environment or is so severe, persistent or pervasive that
it affects a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from a University program or activity. While a person
engaging in harassing behavior most often has some form of power or authority over the person being harassed,
that is not always the case. The harasser can be a peer of the person being harassed. Sometimes the harasser is
harassing a person who has power over them. For example, a supervisee can sexually harass a supervisor or a
student can sexually harass a faculty member (Office of Institutional Equity, University of Michigan).
Examples of Sexual Harassment
The following descriptions, while not all-inclusive, will help you understand the types of behavior that are
considered “conduct of a sexual nature” and that, if unwelcome, may constitute sexual harassment:

Unwanted sexual statements: Sexual or “dirty” jokes, comments on physical attributes, spreading rumors about
or rating others as to sexual activity or performance, talking about one’s sexual activity in front of others and
displaying or distributing sexually explicit drawings, pictures and/or written material. Unwanted sexual
statements can be made in person, in writing, electronically (email, instant messaging, blogs, web pages, etc.)
and otherwise.

Unwanted personal attention: Letters, telephone calls, visits, pressure for sexual favors, pressure for
unnecessary personal interaction and pressure for dates where a sexual/romantic intent appears evident but
remains unwanted.

Unwanted physical or sexual advances: Touching, hugging, kissing, fondling, touching oneself sexually for
others to view, sexual assault, intercourse or other sexual activity.

Organization Sexual harassment

Employees are more likely to report sexual harassment they witness at work when there is a zero-tolerance
policy in place, according to a new study by Florida International University researchers.
Findings show companies where zero-tolerance policies are a top-priority are particularly effective in increasing
the reporting of the most common forms of sexual harassment, whether moderate or severe, including sexually
suggestive remarks that create a hostile work environment. The study is the first to show organizational policies
can actually influence a person's willingness to report sexual harassment they witness.
"We have known for some time that organizational policies around sexual harassment are related
to employee harassment behavior, but it wasn't clear if the policies were actually responsible for employee
behavior," said Asia Eaton, psychology professor at FIU and study co-author. "We now have causal evidence
showing that zero-tolerance organizational policies around sexual harassment, at least in some contexts, actually
increases bystander willingness to report observed infractions."
According to the study, a standard policy statement saying "we are an equal opportunity organization and
subscribe to federal and state laws which forbid discrimination and harassment" is not as effective as a zero-
tolerance policy that provides a clear framework for interpreting and acting on what someone may witness or
experience.
Researchers recommend companies take these steps to implement an effective zero-tolerance policy:
1. Look at your policy: Does your organization have a zero-tolerance policy that explicitly prohibits both
moderate and severe sexual harassment? Does leadership adhere to the policy and frequently ensure it is
understood by all members of the organization? Does it rely too heavily on victim reporting? Optimal policies
bring all employees into the circle and encourage a culture that does not tolerate harassment.
2. Encourage diversity: Organizations and industries that are numerically male-dominated and have less gender
diversity may be more likely to experience sexual harassment in the workplace and substantially more likely if
the policies and culture are not in place. Diversity in leadership is also important.
3. Follow-through: Leaders need to set the tone for the organization and be explicit in their expectations. When
harassment is reported, perpetrators should be held accountable.

For this study, Eaton and Ph.D. student Ryan K. Jacobson conducted two assessments—one with undergraduate
students using a fictitious company and policies and another with human resources professionals using actual
policy statements from a real organization. Student and employee participants in both scenarios indicated they
would be more likely to formally report instances of sexual harassment when they were shown an
organizational policy that was explicitly zero-tolerance.
Results also show a zero-tolerance organizational policy can increase the likelihood that more
severe harassment, including 'quid-pro-quo'—where the harasser offers the employee something in return for
satisfying a sexual demand—would be reported by employee bystanders.
Eaton and Jacobson recommend implementing and repeatedly emphasizing a zero-tolerance policy. By
explicitly indicating all forms of sexual harassing behaviors are completely unacceptable, reports of these
unwanted experiences by both victims and bystanders would likely increase.
Explore further: Gender perceptions of sexual harassment can influence workplace policy effectiveness
More information: Ryan K. Jacobson et al. How Organizational Policies Influence Bystander Likelihood of
Reporting Moderate and Severe Sexual Harassment at Work, Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal (2017). DOI: 10.1007/s10672-017-9309-1

Provided by: Florida International University

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-01-sexual-workplace-organizational-policies-difference.html#jCp