In this blog post, we explore how the threat of retaliation through the use of forced arbitration and NDAs is actively working against speak-up culture and has no place in the modern workplace.

What is Forced Arbitration?

Forced arbitration is a contractual clause that can prevent judges and arbitrators from addressing the full extent of an organization’s wrongdoing. Individuals are often unknowingly tied to forced arbitration clauses that forfeit their right to go to court if they witness or experience misconduct in the workplace. 

What is an NDA?

A non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a legally binding contract where one party agrees to give another party confidential information about its business or products and the second party agrees not to share this information. While NDAs can be used to protect sensitive information and intellectual property (IP), they can also be misused to prevent details of misconduct from being shared or released to the public by silencing reporters. For example, Harvey Weinstein used NDAs to evade accountability for claims of sexual harassment and assault, while Ifeoma Ozoma was forced to stay silent about discrimination at Pinterest. 

Legislation to Prevent Misuse

On 3rd March 2022, US President Joe Biden signed the historic Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (HR 4445), a bipartisan bill that eliminates the use of forced arbitration to silence reporters of sexual harassment and abuse in the workplace.

There are also laws that attempt to restrict the scope of NDAs, including rules issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Defend Trade Secrets Act. However, it’s currently up to each state to determine whether or not to prevent the use of NDAs to silence employees. In California, for example, the Silenced No More Act (SB-331) gives employees the right to talk about workplace discrimination, harassment, or retaliation without breaking their NDAs. Washington’s Silenced No More Act (ESHB 1795) goes one step further by making it unlawful for employers to request that workers sign NDAs or non-disparagement provisions that restrict the employee’s right to talk about workplace discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and more.

Pressure on Leading Tech Companies 

Following the introduction of SB-331 in January 2022, many large tech companies have caved to pressure from Investors, lawmakers, employees, and the Transparency in Employment Agreements Coalition to implement similar clauses for all of their employees, not just those based in California. This highlights the growing pressure on businesses to focus on building employee trust rather than relying on forced arbitration and NDAs to silence would-be reporters.

The Importance of #SpeakUp

NDAs were exposed as a tool for sexual predators to hide their behavior during the #MeToo movement, and while some steps have since been taken to limit their use in silencing reporters, there is still much that can be done.

Organizations such as Lift our Voices are actively pushing for further changes at the Federal legislative level, calling for the banning of NDAs and forced arbitration clauses. The wider ambition is to transform the workplace, making it safer and more equitable for everyone.

True speak-up cultures go beyond the legal frameworks and consider reporters as trusted employees looking to protect both the organization and the public. Employees are more willing and able to ask questions and raise concerns about misconduct when they aren’t facing retaliation or legal ramifications of breaking NDAs and forced arbitration clauses.

Our platform can also help organizations effectively deal with reports of potential or actual misconduct, including providing safeguards for confidentiality and anonymity that encourage reporters to report internally first, facilitate getting to resolution efficiently and identify and address risk patterns and trends through analytics.

Discover more about the costs of misconduct and the importance of rebuilding trust with employees in our game-changing Trust gap survey.

Ready to revolutionize misconduct reporting and resolution for your employees? Book a demo today.

The post Why Forced Arbitration and NDAs Work Against Speak-Up Culture appeared first on Vault.

Lift Our Voices is a nonprofit initiative (started by Gretchen Carlson and Julie Roginsky) dedicated to creating positive, systemic change in the US workplace by eradicating the laws and business practices that prevent employees from disclosing toxic workplace conditions. They give a voice to those silenced by arbitration clauses and NDAs, raising public awareness through advocacy and education.

Neta Meidav, CEO of Vault Platform, said: “Lift Our Voices support those people silenced by NDAs and arbitration clauses, raising public awareness through advocacy and education. It’s crucial that mission-aligned organizations at the forefront of the workplace revolution come together and make our voices heard, which is why this partnership is so close to my heart.

“At Vault, we’re on a mission to change the world of work by giving companies and their employees a safe place to record, report and resolve misconduct in the most human, confidential, efficient, and legally sound way possible. We’re all passionate about speak-up culture and believe the use of NDAs and arbitration clauses are simply a way for individuals and companies to skate around systemic issues that are harming the public and their own employees.”

ENDS

About Vault Platform

Vault Platform is pioneering “TrustTech,” a new category of workplace technology. Designed to enable risk detection, build a culture where it is safe to Speak Up, and drive operational efficiencies, the Vault products create a confidential space for employees and third parties to submit records of misconduct they experience or witness. With an enterprise-grade case management hub and insights dashboard, Vault Platform is key to supporting the productive growth of enterprise businesses. Vault was founded in 2018 and is based in London, UK with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Tel Aviv, Israel. For more information, visit

www.vaultplatform.com 

About Lift Our Voices

Lift Our Voices (LOV) was launched in December 2019 to create positive, systemic change in American workplaces through the eradication of forced arbitration clauses and nondisclosure agreements for toxic workplace issues. Created and launched by Gretchen Carlson and Julie Roginsky, LOV’s mission is to protect American workers by giving those in toxic work environments the freedom to speak freely about their workplace experiences and free them from the laws and business practices that prevent employees from publicly discussing toxic workplace conditions.

https://www.liftourvoices.org/

The post Vault Platform and Lift our Voices Join Forces appeared first on Vault.

Conversely, in companies where the culture is toxic, where bullying and abusive treatment are considered leadership strengths, where intimidation is a tactic to prevent employees from speaking up, and where the compliance program is window dressing only, misconduct is not just an isolated act, it is woven into the fabric of the company. 

What is Workplace Bullying?

According to Verywell Mind, workplace bullying presents as verbal, nonverbal, psychological, or physical abuse. It involves a range of behaviors including threats; intimidation; being humiliated in front of co-workers; unjustified criticism; excessive monitoring; dismissal of someone’s efforts; pressure to do things they don’t want to do; and taking credit for other people’s work, to name a few. Workplace bullying can be all-inclusive or may target victims based on their gender, race, disability, or another characteristic, but it is always about maintaining power and control.

In some cases, workplace bullying may be condoned or encouraged by a Leadership team and perpetuated by company norms. A hierarchical reporting structure may produce a certain leadership style that is akin to workplace bullying. An employee working under the pressure of unrealistic goals or a compensation structure that incentivizes the wrong behaviors may relieve stress by bullying a co-worker or junior employee. 

Sometimes the hiring process doesn’t screen for candidates with a cultural fit or for character and lets in individuals who don’t prioritize treating employees with respect. Regardless of why or how workplace bullying exists, it continues so long as leadership figures don’t understand its root cause, turn a blind eye to red flags, or worse, are its torchbearers.

Toxic Workplace Culture in the News

A New Republic article claims that the Theranos story is more a cautionary tale about the impact of bullying than it is about the sufferings of rich investors or even the cost to patients and employees. It states: “The real crime, as opposed to the legal one, is what CEO Elizabeth Holmes did to the people on her payroll who tried to tell the truth.”

The first Theranos employee to Speak Up was the company’s CFO who, in 2006, told Holmes that he was concerned they were fooling investors with false promises about their technology. He was fired on the spot and rumors were spread that he was terminated for embezzlement. Over the next nine years, other employees tried to raise the alarm with Holmes and Ramesh Balwani, COO, many of whom were fired too. According to a Daily Beast article, some described themselves as survivors of a startup ruled by “paranoia, subterfuge, bullying, and retaliation.” The environment was one of high turnover, bizarre loyalty pledges, fears of legal retaliation, and the tracking of employees’ hours, email, and computer activity – even those they had lunch with. 

In 2014, Tyler Schultz, grandson of former Secretary of State George Schultz and an intern who had only joined the company eight months prior, sent an email to Holmes telling her that all was not right with the company. After a threatening response from Balwani, Schultz quit and subsequently reported Theranos to New York State’s public health lab under a pseudonym and spoke confidentially to the Wall Street Journal. Like other active and former employees who tried to alert investors, government regulators, and the press, he was also threatened with financial ruin.

The ultimate demise of Theranos came because it was built on a vision of something that did not exist. Workplace bullying and toxicity were used to silence employees’ voices for years and dupe investors and patients, but Theranos’ downfall was inevitable. 

Many other companies like Volkswagen, Activision, and Wells Fargo, which may not have been doomed to failure from the start like Theranos, have nonetheless fallen prey to fraud schemes and misconduct, negligence, and hubris. Toxic cultures and workplace bullying in these companies covered up fraud and misconduct and ensured that the schemes went unchecked and unreported. These behaviors caused harm to employees, customers, third parties, investors, and the environment.

These companies may still have a fighting chance to escape a hole that they dug themselves, but their reputations are still tarnished, and their troubles are far from over.

The Impact of Workplace Bullying

As these examples show, workplace bullying is detrimental to employers, the employees who experience bullying firsthand, and bystanders who bear witness to the bullying of co-workers. It is a negative-sum game.

For employers, workplace bullying leads to a host of headaches, not least of which are costly legal fees resulting from hostile work claims; decreased productivity resulting from disengagement and erosion of employee morale, loyalty, and commitment; high absenteeism and turnover; and a difficult landscape for recruiting new talent. 

For employees – the victims of bullying or their witnesses – workplace bullying erodes their trust and sense of safety and perpetuates their fear of speaking up. In the absence of a healthy speak-up culture, misconduct goes unchecked, and issues that may have been nipped in the bud grow to brand and reputation-damaging proportions. Frustrated employees may eventually walk away, but some will also Speak Up externally to the media, regulatory authorities, or to lawyers. They do so not because they’re defiant troublemakers, but because they’re disappointed believers. 

All of us who have experienced workplace bullying first-hand or who have seen co-workers we care about being targeted by it also understand its impact on mental health; stress, anxiety, difficulty sleeping, fatigue, low self-esteem, hopelessness, and depression.

Moving Towards a Better Workplace

Corporate leadership must defend and protect the dignity of its employees by setting the right example at the top, and role-modeling truth, transparency, trust, respect, inclusiveness, and safety. They must also develop a cadre of managers who can listen, communicate clearly, act ethically with respect and compassion, and think on their feet.

Leaders and managers should have their ears to the ground for signs of trouble and be prepared to hear it, process it, and act on it. They should continuously assess the company’s culture, utilizing the troves of available data to connect the dots and identify red flags. Most important of all, they must act swiftly and with urgency to address any pockets of toxicity.

When employees have confidence in leadership’s willingness to listen, take their concerns seriously, respect and protect them in the process, and fight for organizational justice, they will utilize the processes and tools made available to them to Speak Up for themselves, and on behalf of others, when they have concerns or when they suffer.  When they do, they hold corporate leaders accountable for their actions. Only then can the needle move toward businesses doing the right things and doing things right.

Looking to develop a speak-up, listen-up culture at your workplace? We can help.

***

Frequently asked questions

how to handle bullying in the workplace?

Corporate leadership must defend and protect the dignity of its employees by setting the right example at the top, and role-modeling truth, transparency, trust, respect, inclusiveness, and safety.

How to report bullying at work?

When employees have confidence in leadership’s willingness to listen, take their concerns seriously, respect and protect them in the process, and fight for organizational justice, they will utilize the processes and tools made available to them to Speak Up for themselves.

What is toxic behavior in the workplace?

Toxic cultures and workplace bullying harm employees, customers, third parties, investors, and the environment.

How do you handle a toxic work environment?

Hold corporate leaders accountable for their actions. Only then can the needle move toward businesses doing the right things and doing things right.

The post Moving the Needle on Workplace Bullying appeared first on Vault.

In November, the FCA banned three men convicted of sexual and, in one case, domestic violence offenses from working in the financial services sector ever again. Although the serious nature of the offences makes the decision seem like a no-brainer, it is unusual for the watchdog to take such an interest in non-financial incidents. That said, the FCA has put several flags in the ground over the last few years which paved the way for these developments.

In an open letter to CEOs almost exactly one year ago Jonathan Davidson, Executive Director of Supervision, Retail and Authorisations, at the FCA, warned that “non-financial misconduct and an unhealthy culture is a key root cause of harm,” and said it would be a key focus for the body in its supervisory capacity. 

“Poor culture in financial services can lead directly to harm to consumers, market participants, employees and markets…How a firm handles non-financial misconduct throughout the organisation, including discrimination, harassment, victimisation and bullying, is indicative of a firm’s culture. We view both lack of diversity and inclusion, and non-financial misconduct as obstacles to creating an environment in which it is safe to Speak Up, the best talent is retained, the best business choices are made, and the best risk decisions are taken.”

Among other things, the FCA said it expects firms “to have strong whistleblowing processes and appropriate incentive structures,” in place to expose and resolve misconduct. 

In a further indication of the growing focus on culture in the financial regulation community, Davidson also gave a speech towards the end of 2020 in which he focused on the business of social purpose and purposeful, diverse, safe and inclusive cultures as a driver of profitability. 

He identified the ‘permafrost’ of trust lacking between employee and employer and noted that in cases where this permafrost has melted it is due to trust being recognised as “a two-way thing” and employee trust in senior management has been reciprocated by senior management trust and empowerment of middle management. 

But he also warned of a persistent challenge in “the domination of a compliance box-ticking mindset at the expense of a systems thinking outcome and learning mindset.”

Something we have spoken about time and again is the end of the line for ‘canned compliance’. It’s no longer enough to do the bare minimum required to operate legally, businesses now have to go above and beyond to ensure they behave ethically and with integrity. And a key component of this model is being able to accurately gauge the ethical temperature of your workplace culture. We know that incumbent models don’t encourage employees to Speak Up and this leaves businesses blind to systemic misconduct, whether of a financial or non-financial nature. 

This is also something we discussed in depth with compliance expert Tom Fox and the LSE’s Chief Risk Officer, Maxine Gee, at the end of 2020. We covered:

• The difference between ‘conduct’ and ‘culture’
• The changing nature of ethics
• The increasingly interconnected relationship between Compliance, HR, and Legal around ethics and culture

The post Financial watchdog cracks down on non-financial misconduct  appeared first on Vault.

by Richard Miskella, Joint Managing Partner, Lewis Silkin

In January 2020, right at the very beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published guidance for employers on preventing and dealing with sexual harassment and harassment at work. 

Employment tribunals can consider the EHRC’s guidance itself in harassment claims but, more importantly, it is expected to form the basis of a new statutory Code of Practice which will have greater legal force. A draft Code is now expected in 2021.

What are reasonable steps to prevent harassment?

The guidance makes many recommendations, but we consider the most significant ones are the following:

• Effective policies and procedures. The guidance sets out best practice for what anti-harassment policies should contain. This includes clear examples of harassment and commitments to deal with it, including harassment which takes place outside of the workplace (for example, on social media) or which is committed by clients or other external third parties. Policies should not overemphasise the possibility of malicious complaints. The guidance stresses that policies need to be made freely available to workers, not just those who can access internal IT systems. (One suggestion is that employers could publish their policies on an easily accessible part of their external-facing website.) Policies should also be reviewed annually, taking account of feedback and lessons learned. 
• Central records. The guidance recommends that employers create a centralised record of all harassment complaints in a level of detail that allows trends to be analysed. This could involve capturing dates, business area, roles of complainant and harasser, the type of harassment complained of and the outcome and reason for it. 
• Risk assessments. These are an important new feature of the guidance. It recommends that employers carry out an assessment of the harassment risks in their organisation, potentially by using risk-management frameworks traditionally used in the workplace health and safety context. Assessments should identify the risks and the measures in place to minimise them. Risk factors may include, for example: power imbalances; job insecurity; lone working; the presence of alcohol; customer-facing duties; events that raise tensions locally or nationally; lack of diversity in the workforce; and workers being placed on secondment. The guidance places special emphasis on power imbalances and the need to address them. Workplace risk assessments have taken on a whole new significance during the Covid-19 pandemic, and it will be interesting to see if this approach to harassment now becomes more commonplace. 
• Proactive detection. In the context of research showing how harassment remains prevalent and often goes unreported, the guidance puts the onus on employers to find out what is happening. It suggests a range of methods for doing this, including carrying out regular staff feedback surveys and giving workers ample opportunities to raise issues. The issue of detection has become harder in companies where employees are working remotely. 
• Training. Employers should train all workers in the different types of harassment and victimisation and ensure the training is refreshed at regular intervals. 
• Guardians/champions. The guidance says that employers should make sure there are nominated, trained workers who can support a complainant through the process of making a complaint. These could be members of the HR team or may be nominated guardians or champions within the workforce (for an example, see the Old Vic’s Guardian’s programme). 
• Reporting systems. The guidance says that employers should consider introducing a reporting system that allows individuals to make complaints on either a named or anonymous basis, and which makes clear what the employer may do with the information provided. Many employers historically offered access to third-party hotlines, but those sorts of solutions often prove ineffective because they fail to allow for two-way communication. 
• Responding effectively. A good anti-harassment procedure should tell workers how to make a complaint and define multiple channels for reporting, ensuring that workers are not required to report an incident to the perpetrator or someone they may not feel will be objective. Employers should offer a range of approaches to dealing with harassment, signpost sources of support and advice, and be clear that victimisation or retaliation against complainants will not be tolerated. 
• Reporting outcomes. To be effective in encouraging those with complaints to come forward, the outcome of a formal complaint of harassment should be as transparent as possible. Wherever appropriate and possible, complainants should be told what action has been taken in response to their complaint.

How technology can turn compliance and culture into a strategic asset

by Neta Meidav, co-founder and CEO, Vault Platform

Public revelations of workplace harassment are not unusual and it’s widely accepted that the reality is significantly worse than what is publicised. Almost half of all people who experience harassment at work don’t report it, citing a lack of appropriate, effective, and secure reporting procedures as a key barrier.  

Vault Platform can ensure you meet the Code by:

• Enabling employees to securely report incidents of harassment in-name or anonymously through a highly accessible mobile app
• Creating a safe and confidential space for people within your entire business ecosystem to voice concerns internally instead of going to external channels like the press, social media, or regulators
• Introducing an enterprise-grade Resolution Hub for efficient case management, with innovative time-stamping, security, and two-way communication with anonymous reporters previously unavailable in legacy solutions
• Establishing a central case management system to keep records, investigate cases, and get a company-wide bird’s eye view on the reporting and resolution of harassment

This is a summary of the full paper jointly produced by Lewis Silkin and Vault Platform. To get a line-by-line review of the guidance and what to expect from the forthcoming Code, download the full paper using the form below.

The post EHRC guidance on harassment at work and how digital reporting tools help appeared first on Vault.

Although there is extensive research examining sexual harassment in male-dominated occupations, gender harassment — harassment that is not necessarily sexual in nature but is targeted at individuals, or a group of individuals, because of their sex or gender — has received relatively less attention. 

But gender harassment is a significant challenge and women in male-dominated occupations face a daily barrage of belittling jokes and demeaning comments from colleagues, managers, and customers.

Professor Rae Cooper, co-Director of the Women & Work Research Group, notes that gender harassment is not necessarily sexual in nature, but the uncivilized and gendered harassment women face “threatens to drive them out of these industries. Businesses urgently need to take action to keep these talented women in the sector.”

The study recommends businesses and policymakers need to do more to not only recruit more women into these sectors but also to make the work environments more equitable so they stay.

“Good practice in terms of workplace policies is a magnet for talented women in these sectors. But recruitment is only half the answer – the other half is retention,” Professor Cooper said.

There’s already evidence that the pace of change is slowing – derailed by COVID. In 2019, the proportion of women in senior management roles globally grew to 29%, the highest number ever recorded. In 2020, this percentage remains the same, despite a significant jump the year before, according to the World Economic Forum.

A 2020 analysis by Mercer of over 1,100 organizations across the world speaks to this by highlighting a leaky pipeline, revealing that women are overrepresented in support functions and underrepresented in leadership:

Executives: 23%

Senior managers: 29%

Managers: 37%

Professionals: 42%

Support staff: 47%

Both the US and the European Union count women as almost half the total labor force, yet both also count just about a third of women in managerial positions. For Black women, this number shrinks to 4% and for Asian women to 2.5%. 

Before they even get to the glass ceiling, these women have to break through the glass floor. 

At Vault Platform we believe equality is not a gender issue, it’s a business issue. We are firm believers in using technology, not on its own, but as an enabler to rebuild trust between humans in situations where the balance of trust is not always equal to cultivate a more inclusive and diverse culture.

Read more about the discrimination issue in our eBook

The post Breaking the status quo of gender harassment in business appeared first on Vault.

It was a New Yorker article chronicling the allegations of 13 additional women including three accusations of rape against Weinstein, which ultimately caused a snowball effect with many others speaking up and calling for accountability. 

Although Weinstein’s demise may have seemed fairly swift, in the Hollywood community his notorious behavior was well known for years. Once the articles were published about Weinstein, a Pandora’s box was unleashed with women no longer afraid or embarrassed to Speak Up against the misconduct, harassment, and bullying they encountered in their workplace. 

The confidence to Speak Up spread, and at least 200 prominent men across diverse industries lost their jobs after public allegations of sexual harassment. Hundreds more are still under investigation or being held to account. To put this in perspective, a year prior to the Weinstein revelations, according to the New York Times, fewer than 30 high-profile people made the news for resigning or being fired after public accusations of sexual misconduct. Victims and witnesses were now seeing corporate America and its boards beginning to take steps to hold perpetrators accountable for their actions as well as consider their own culpability in nurturing a culture of silence. As a result more people have been emboldened to report workplace harassment and workplace bullying across all industry sectors. 

#MeToo movement provides a platform to speak out against harassment

The #MeToo movement, in the wake of the predatory behavior of Bill O’Reilly, Weinstein, and others, raised awareness of the prevalence and impact of sexual misconduct in the workplace. It gave survivors a platform to share their stories and work on effecting change in the workplace. Sexual misconduct victims began to feel more comfortable that they would be believed without judgment and not face contempt, blame, or retaliation if they reported and disclosed workplace incidents. 

In fact, employers paid a record $68.2 million for sexual harassment violations through the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 2019. This shattered the all-time record by more than $10 million at $56.6 million in 2018, and nearly doubled the total of $35 million from 2014. Additionally, while the number of claims dipped slightly from 7,609 in 2018 to 7,514 in 2019, this figure remains the second-highest mark for claims in the past seven years. Many view the #MeToo movement as continuing to be a major influence on workplaces across the country regarding the uptick in harassment reporting.

The attention from the #MeToo Movement is also helping to change some of the systemic problems with workplace sexual harassment and misconduct, making it easier for more employees to feel comfortable filing reports. For example, the Weinstein case put the spotlight on Nondisclosure Agreements (NDAs), which basically forces people into silence and makes it impossible to legally report incidents of harassment. Several states subsequently passed laws prohibiting the use of nondisclosure agreements in sexual misconduct cases. In September 2018, California banned the agreements in cases involving sexual assault, harassment, or sex discrimination. New York and New Jersey enacted similar laws. (NDAs have recently made headline news again in the political arena with presidential-hopeful Mike Bloomberg’s use of them at his company.)

In addition, last year, the “Bringing an End to Harassment by Enhancing Accountability and Rejecting Discrimination in the Workplace Act” (BE HEARD in the Workplace Act) bill was introduced in Congress. The bill’s intent is to strengthen and expand the reach of US anti-discrimination laws, removing barriers that prevent individuals from accessing justice, and helping employers create harassment-free workplaces—while at the same time holding them accountable when they fall short. The bill will also prohibit employers from demanding that workers sign blanket NDAs upon accepting a job.

Time’s Up provides funding to assist victims of sexual misconduct

In 2018, Time’s Up was formed by a group of Hollywood women to provide a legal defense fund to help victims of workplace sexual harassment. The fund pairs alleged victims with a team of more than 700 lawyers, and helps pay their legal fees. According to Time’s Up, it has linked an estimated 4,000 survivors with attorneys.

Even with more individuals speaking up against sexual misconduct in the workplace and filing claims, how a company handles harassment reporting and workplace bullying is critical to the entire process. One of the most important aspects that these high-profile cases have illustrated is that victims of workplace harassment, discrimination and bullying need to feel safe in coming forward and confident that management will investigate incidents and take the appropriate measures to hold those accountable for their actions. 

Vault Platform is revolutionizing the process of workplace misconduct reporting and resolution. Hotlines have been ineffective and underutilized for too long. Vault Platform is designed to support a culture of trust and safety, with a mobile application that creates a secure and confidential space for employees to file records of misconduct they experience or witness. The Resolution Hub then triages these reports to the most appropriate team, so action can be taken swiftly and effectively before employees take their grievance elsewhere. 

Download our magazine on trust and accountability in the workplace

The post Why the sudden boom in sexual misconduct claims? appeared first on Vault.

Workplace sexual harassment and discrimination contribute significantly to a workplace lacking in respect and unwanted advances, requests for sexual favors and undesirable verbal or physical conduct all constitute sexual harassment when the behaviors impact an individual’s work performance or create a hostile or intimidating work environment.

Wondering how do you identify sexual harassment in the workplace? Here is a quick guide to help you navigate this space.

In the US, sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates the federal law known as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The harasser may be someone of the opposite or same sex and may be – a manager, supervisor, co-worker or non-employee (e.g. contractor, customer) – and the target of the harassment may be of any gender.

There are two basic forms of sexual harassment: quid pro quo and hostile work environment.

Quid pro quo: Latin for “this for that,” is harassment that occurs when power is used to obtain sexual favors from an employee in ‘exchange’ for some kind of benefit, such as a promotion. If the victim does not comply, a punishment may result.

Hostile work environment: This type of harassment occurs when unwelcome sexual advances are sufficiently pervasive as to interfere with an employee’s work performance or create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment for the employee or for others.

Sexual harassment behavior comes in several forms, so it is important to understand what may or may not be considered sexual harassment.

Behavior that may be considered sexual harassment includes:

• Using one’s position at work to gain sexual favors (either directly or implied)
• Threatening, bullying, teasing (e.g. with regards to what someone is wearing)
• Using derogatory words or stereotypes (e.g. saying “she’s hot” may be considered sexual harassment even if it is not directly at an employee)
• Roaming eyes: e.g. if an employee or manager is known to stare down a female co-worker’s blouse instead of looking them in the eye
• Making unwanted sexual or romantic advances at any time: e.g. unwanted contact under the table or “social kissing” at work parties
• Posting suggestive pictures online
• Telling or circulating inappropriate jokes
• Appearing to stare or spy on someone

In light of the #MeToo movement, it is vital for organizations to find more effective ways of dealing with these issues and avoiding the reputational damage caused by larger-scale backlash (such as the mass walkouts at Google as one example). Aside from that, the liabilities for an organization include significant financial penalties from watchdogs and large legal expenses.

Litigation of harassment claims tends to be more expensive. One estimate of settlement
payments and court judgments solely in 2012 for harassment lawsuits clocked in at over $356 million, according to EEOC. While the largest sexual harassment jury award in recent history totaled $168 million.

In fiscal year 2015, EEOC filed 33 lawsuits containing a harassment allegation. During the same time, it resolved 42 lawsuits involving harassment, recovering over $39 million in monetary benefits for employees. At the ‘lower’ end, Walmart recently paid $100K to resolve a federal disability discrimination lawsuit. In addition to the monetary relief, the settlement will provide important equitable relief to provide deaf and hard-of-hearing employees and applicants with effective accommodations so they can participate in workplace communications and have equal employment opportunities.

Simply put, the direct financial costs of workplace harassment are significant. But by no means are financial costs the only repercussions. So vigilance and an increased understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment is therefore key in prevention and in dealing with cases as they arise.

Want to talk in greater detail? Get in touch here

*The information in this article does not constitute legal advice and should not replace a consultation with a lawyer with expertise in your country/state

The post How to identify harassment and discrimination in the workplace appeared first on Vault.

To maintain this trust, or help reestablish it should it be found lacking, it’s essential to implement a misconduct reporting and recording system that employees also trust. The legacy tool for this purpose is the anonymous hotline, a system that has remained unchanged for decades and is in dire need of an overhaul. Hotlines, for the most part, are outsourced to a specialist provider that will have a call center handling the inflow of calls. Your organization is just one of many customers accessing this shared resource, which brings with it sixteen inherent challenges:

1. Your employee has been calling the hotline but there is no agent available
2. Your employee has to make time in their day to make the call. This can prove inconvenient and time restrictive
3. Your employee has to find somewhere private to make the call and is afraid of being overheard
4. The conversation is difficult and frustrating as the agent doesn’t understand what the employee is trying to say, or the employee doesn’t understand the agent
5. English is not your employee’s first language and it’s difficult to articulate the incident report in real time
   
6. The agent doesn’t work for your organization and doesn’t understand its particularities. This can make it challenging to establish context for the incident
7. The agent is a call center representative employed by the hotline provider and has no investment in your organization. This can make them seem disinterested or impersonal
8. Your employee may be feeling vulnerable and traumatized and may find it embarrassing to speak on the phone
9. Your employee has no visible assurance that the communication is confidential and secure. If it is an anonymous report they may worry about their anonymity
10. The experience can feel like shouting into a well as the employee has no tracking or follow up options and may feel like no action was taken
11. If no action appears to have been taken (even though it has been in the background) then the employee may feel the case was not handled fairly
12. By calling a hotline the employee may feel like they need to report a ‘major’ incident but in reality, reports might be made up of lots of smaller incidents over a period of time. The employee might feel discouraged from reporting a ‘smaller’ incident
13. The employee cannot submit visual evidence such as screenshots of messages or photos over the phone
14. A reporting mechanism that allows written entries into a report over a period of time allows the employee greater clarity of thought and means they can revisit their entries when they are feeling less emotionally vulnerable
15. Hotlines were first introduced decades ago when telephones were the most obvious means of communication. Times have changed and the telephone is not necessarily the preferred medium especially for Millennials and younger generations
16. Hotlines are not particularly efficient for your organization either. The HR professional or similar tasked with investigating the claim will be given a report collected by a third party supplier and will then have to invest time and resources into their own investigation

Cultivating a Speak Up Culture

There is also the cultural impact to consider and various psychological phenomena that apply here and raise the barrier to create a ‘Speak Up culture’. One of these is the diffusion of responsibility, whereby each individual believes they only have limited power to make an impact resulting in them thinking it won’t make a difference. Kickstarting the entire reporting process by having employees call into a third party with no vested interest in the organization (other than being a paying customer) already sends the message that misconduct incidents are not something dealt with in-house. While only offering an anonymous hotline suggests that if you speak publicly, you’re likely to be punished. 

The design of the anonymous hotline compounds the problem by isolating people submitting reports – incident reporters do not know whether they are a lone voice or one of many, which makes the process more intimidating.

Already, employees are afraid of being targets of retaliation or reporting an incident having an impact on their job. Trust works both ways – to gain your employee’s trust, you should develop relevant policies to encourage a ‘Speak Up culture’ and in return, they will trust you have their best interests and the ethical interests of the business at heart. 

Finally, you can always buy tools to help you build a healthy culture, but you can’t buy culture itself. If you don’t support the creation of that culture organically, there aren’t any tools that will save it.

The post 16 Reasons Why Anonymous Hotlines are Broken and Outdated appeared first on Vault.

The post Meet the tech entrepreneurs tackling sexual harassment appeared first on Vault.