Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: jaw@owlnet.rice.edu (Joseph A. Watters)
Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 17:54:25 GMT
In article , evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
|> So we are back to sexual herassment being a "special" kind of herassment.
Yes.
|> Can someone explain
|> a) exactly what sexual herassment is in a way which will exclude
|> any other kinds of herassment
>From the Rice University sexual harassment policy:
Definition
Sexual harassment may involve the behavior of a person of either sex
against a person of the opposite or same sex, and occurs when such
behavior constitutes unwelcome sexual advances, unwelcome request for
sexual favors, and other unwelcome verbal or physical behavior of a
sexual nature where:
1. Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly
a term or condition of an individual's education or employment;
2. Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is
used as the basis for academic or employment decisions affecting the
individual's welfare; or
3. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially
interfering with an individual's welfare, academic or work
performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, offensive, or
demeaning education or work environment.
A third party may also file a complaint under this policy if the
sexual conduct of others in the educationi or work environment has the
purpose or effect of substantially interfering with the third party's
welfare, academic, or work performance.
|> b) why it should be considered "special"
It is special because the US legal system has determined that it is a
form of sex discrimination, which is illegal in the US.
|> c) do a and b using non-sexist language.
See my answers. The law applies equally to persons of either gender
and does not specify which gender the person subjected to the behavior
must be. In the United States, the overwhelming number of cases are
man against woman. This is not due to the law, but to several
interconnected social conditions, including how men and women are
raised and the distribution of power in our society.
|> : behavior of a sexual nature (some user displaying sexually oriented
|> : images on their screen in a public lab, for example), I think your
|>
|> Please explain how this is aimed at a specific person.
It doesn't have to be. See the hostile environment provisions.
|>
|> : options are much more limited if you wish to reduce the possibility
|> : that the university, and perhaps you personally, will be named in a
|> : sexual harassment lawsuit. The reason that a supervisor would tell an
|> : employee to cease behavior that is of an unwelcome sexual nature is
|> : because the supervisor is trying to defend the institution's interest
|> : in not being sued (and possibly losing the suit) for sexual
|> : harassment. In your list of options above, in the case of sexual
|> : harassment, as opposed to other forms of complaint, you definitely do
|> : not want to exercise option #2. That is probably the fastest way to
|> : get your institution involved in a formal sexual harassment complaint
|>
|> So we have decided that the complainant MUST be right, their complaint
|> MUST be reasonable?
No. I am suggesting that system administrators or supervisors are
elevating the risks to themselves and their companies or universities
by ignoring the complaint or telling the complainant to ignore the
behavior. I am suggesting that system administrators not involve
themselves in determining if a complaint is legitimate or reasonable if
they don't have to.
|>
|> : either with the EEOC or through a lawsuit. Option #4 is only slightly
|> : less risky, since the reason the person complained to you in the first
|> : place is because they probably did not feel comfortable confronting the
|> : person subjecting them to the unwelcome sexual behavior. In your case,
|>
|> Quite frankly this is the problem of the person making the complaint,
|> if they refuse to complain to the alleged herasser, then time for
|> option #2.
|> What is their excuse?
Under the law, they don't need one. Under the law, it is not the
problem of the person making the complaint.
|>
|> : since you are a system administrator and most likely will not be the
|> : supervisor of the user making the unwelcome sexual behavior complaint,
|>
|> Get this straight first.
|> A complaint is a COMPLAINT.
|> By itself it does not mean anything.
Under US law, if the complaint is in regards to unwelcome sexual
behavior, it does mean something. You can disagree and argue all day
about it, but that's the law. I personally don't disagree with you,
but US law does.
|>
|> : the wisest thing for you to do is to take that user's complaint
|> : straight to his/her supervisor and/or the university EEO officer or
|> : whomever is empowered to informally resolve sexual harassment
|> : complaints for students. Basically, in the case of complaints of
|> : unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature, always do option #3 if you are
|>
|> Again that magic concept "sex is special"
Unfortunately, in this country, yes.
|>
|> : not that person's supervisor, because it does have major legal
|> : implications. Option #1 is a good first step if you are the supervisor
|> : of one, some, or all of the parties involved.
|>
|> What do you do if the reaction to #1 is for the user to request an
|> explanation of the complaint from the complainant?
Then you can seek clarification from the complainant and relay it to
the user. The law doesn't say that you have to automatically grant the
complainant's case, nor does it say that you have to pay attention to
it. But the mechanisms provided in the law imply that ignoring the
complaint will increase the risk that the company, and possibly you,
will become involved in, and possibly lose, a judgement by the EEOC or
a civil lawsuit. Every company and employee in the US must decide what
level of risk they are willing to tolerate. I am suggesting to
computer system adminstrators that if they do not have to get involved
in this type of complaint, then don't, because the consequences of
doing the wrong thing can be pretty severe. I am in no way suggesting
that system administrators have to like it.
--
Joseph A. Watters, Jr. jaw@owlnet.rice.edu
Deputy Director, Owlnet
Rice University
Houston, Texas
