Addressing a Gender Hostile Workplace

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

Every person has the right to be protected from any offenses; the latter include various types of discrimination, such as discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, origin, religion, age, or disability (“Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination” n. pag.). However, such discrimination is not a rare thing, and it is important to fight the offenders. This paper scrutinizes the case of hostile environment sexual harassment that took place Love’s Travel Stops and Country Stores, Inc. (Bell 94).

After discussing the laws that were violated by the company which allowed such a situation to occur, we will describe what the victims of the harassment were entitled to expect according to the law. We will also speculate on the organizational factors which contributed to the adverse situation, and offer some possible steps to be taken to both prevent the management failures similar to those which occurred in the firm and encourage the employees to report the cases of offense to the management.

The Laws that the Company Violated

The case described by Bell depicts a situation when the victim experienced the hostile environment harassment consisting of crude remarks, sexual comments, unwanted touching, and intimidation (92-93). Such offensive behavior is illegal (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission par. 1-5).

The sexual harassment practices present in the organization are strictly prohibited by the Sexual Harassment Law, which can be found in Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act (1964); it forbids the attitudes that existed in the company, as well as other types of discrimination based other characteristics, such as race, color, age, etc. (“Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination” n. pag.; “Sexual Harassment Law” par. 1-3).

It is stated that the victims of the abusive behavior are eligible to seek protection under the federal U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Besides, the victims could also seek protection under Fair Employment Practice acts which exist in some of the states and also include regulations concerning the issue of sexual harassment (“Sexual Harassment Law” par. 5).

What Protection Should the Employees Have Expected

According to the Law?

According to the law, the harassed employees had the right to expect the company’s protection from the sexual harassment. First, the employer was obliged to establish clear policies regarding the sexual harassment (and any other type of harassment). The firm had to make it clear that any types of harassment would not be tolerated, and establish the procedure of formal complaint. Such a policy had to encourage the employees to complain about the harassment to the managers before the offense becomes serious.

The company was also obliged to designate more than one person responsible for accepting the complaints in order to avoid prejudice or impartiality on that level; the person had to be reachable by the employees, and must not have been the victim’s supervisor. The confidentiality of the victim was also to be protected. After the complaint had been made, the employer was to investigate the case, interview both the victim and the offender, and the others who might have known about the case.

The employer had then to make sure that the harassment did not continue, and impose disciplinary measures that would correspond to the severity of the offense. The involved parties might have been separated in case of need, but the separation was not to burden the victim.

If the employer failed to resolve the case, the victim was to complain to the state agencies such as the Fair Employment Practices Agencies under the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Questions and Answers for Small Employers” par. 9-27; “Sexual Harassment Policy” n. pag.).

The Organizational Factors by which the Management Failed to Intervene

Apparently, the reasons which contributed to the young women being harassed by the customers were connected to the sexist views of the management. The victims’ supervisors perceived it natural that truck drivers try to harass young cashiers. Perhaps they even had similar thoughts, and took pleasure from young women being humiliated.

The factors connected to the company’s policy that allowed such attitudes to thrive were a result of improper sexual harassment policy of the enterprise. It is likely that such policy was absent in the company at all, and managers were instructed neither that it is their responsibility to prevent such practices from happening nor that such situations were not to happen at all.

It is possible that the managers were also using the famous statement that “the customer is always right” to rationalize their own pervasive views of the situation. It is also likely that the company lacked the formal procedure using which the victims could complain to the enterprise’s officials.

Possible Steps to Prevent such a Management Lapse from Reoccurring

To prevent similar situations from happening again in the future, it is clear that the company, for instance, should follow the recommendations of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Questions and Answers for Small Employers” par. 1-29). Establishing a proper procedure and instructing both the managers and the workers to fight the discriminatory practices in the future is essential to avert similar problems.

It is also crucial to explain to the managers that it is their job to deal with such situations, and that they also will be held responsible should such situations happen again. Perhaps it would be useful to impose fines on them should they fail to avert discriminatory behaviors taking place in the firm without a reasonable cause. It is also important that the administrators need to be given proper tools to deal with such situations, for it is possible that they do not have all the means necessary to deal with customers who behave offensively.

Possible Steps to Make it Easier for Workers to Raise Concerns and Have those Concerns Remedied

Again, the employees should follow the recommendations of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and establish clear and simple formal procedures which would allow the workers to complain (“Questions and Answers for Small Employers” par. 1-29). The workers should also be given the means necessary to fill in the complaint and contact the proper company’s officials.

The employees should be guaranteed that all their appeals will be processed and investigated with due carefulness, attention, and impartiality, and that, should they be found true, they will be resolved and the victim’s losses will be compensated. It is also necessary to shield the victims from retaliation from the offenders or those who associate with them.

Conclusion

It is clear that the management of the firm broke the law by not taking steps towards the resolution of the situation. In particular, the federal Civil Rights Act was not followed. The employees were entitled to expect a proper anti-discrimination policy from their employer, and had the right to be protected by their management. The poor organizational culture and the lack of clear policies regarding the issue resulted in the management’s failure to intervene.

In order to prevent such situations from reoccurring in the future, it is important to create an effective anti-discrimination policy, work with the administrators and instruct them to apply it properly, provide them with the means to implement it, and impose fines on them should they fail to do so without a reasonable cause. The workers should also be guaranteed that all their complaints will be processed and that they will get no retaliation for trying to protect themselves.

Works Cited

Bell, Myrtle P. Diversity in Organizations. 2nd ed. 2012. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Print.

Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination: Questions and Answers. 2009. Web.

Questions and Answers for Small Employers on Employer Liability for Harassment by Supervisors. 2010. Web.

Sexual Harassment Law. n.d. Web.

Sexual Harassment Policy. n.d. Web.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Sexual Harassment. n.d. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!