Harassment in the workplace is defined as any unwanted behaviour motivated by a person’s race, gender, caste, religion, age, or other personal characteristics. Such conduct can be physical, verbal, or nonverbal, resulting in a hostile, intimidating, or insulting workplace atmosphere. Some examples are workplace bullying, sexual harassment, and discrimination.
Discrimination in the workplace happens when an employee is treated unfairly because of their colour, gender, caste, religion, age, or other personal characteristics. It can show as uneven compensation, rejection for promotions, or denial of certain advantages or opportunities. Discrimination may also occur during recruiting, where individuals are accepted or rejected based on personal characteristics rather than qualifications.
Harassment in the workplace remains a prevalent issue that offers considerable difficulties to employee well-being and organizational efficiency. Harassment is defined as any unwelcome or aggressive activity, which can take many forms, including sexual approaches, verbal abuse, intimidation, and discrimination. Its influence extends beyond individual experiences, frequently infecting business culture and destroying reputations.[1]
Forms of Workplace Harassment
Harassment can take many different forms, including, but not limited to:
Verbal harassment: Includes offensive or abusive words, insulting remarks, insults, and threats.
Sexual harassment: Defined as unwanted sexual approaches, demands for sexual favours, or any sexually motivated verbal or physical behaviour that creates an unpleasant or hostile workplace.
Discriminatory harassment: Occurs when an individual is targeted based on protected characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity, religion, handicap, or sexual orientation.
Bullying: Defined as persistent and purposeful behaviour that aims to intimidate, humiliate, or undermine an individual’s confidence or self-esteem.[2]
Workplace Harassment in India
Statistics provide an upsetting overview of the incidence of workplace harassment in India. According to a poll performed by the Indian Bar Association, nearly 68% of working women in India have faced harassment or violence at work. This disturbing number emphasizes the extent of the problem and the critical need for effective intervention efforts.
Real-life examples highlight the effects of workplace harassment on individuals and businesses in India. Consider the scenario of a young professional who is subjected to repeated sexual approaches and vulgar remarks from her supervisor, leaving her powerless and dejected. She struggles with the destructive effects of harassment on her job and mental health because she is afraid of reprisal and does not have proper support channels.
Similarly, a corporation plagued by uncontrolled harassment and discrimination creates a grim picture of a poisonous work culture, resulting in high turnover, decreased productivity, and reputational harm.
The repercussions of workplace harassment go beyond individual misery to have greater societal ramifications. Harassment reinforces systemic prejudice and prevents women from fully participating in the workforce.
Impact of Workplace Harassment
Workplace harassment may have a significant and long-term impact, impacting not just the immediate victims but also the broader work environment and company culture. Some frequent implications are:
Victims may endure stress, anxiety, depression, and other mental health problems.
It can result in diminished job satisfaction, lack of confidence, and unwillingness to engage in work-related activities.
Chronic stress from harassment can lead to physical symptoms such as headaches, muscular tightness, exhaustion, and sleep difficulties.
Career progression may be stymied, reputations tarnished, and absenteeism or attrition may increase.
A harassment-tolerant culture can reduce employee trust, morale, and productivity, while increasing legal risks, reputational damage, and talent loss.
Importance of Dealing with Workplace Harassment Through Legal Means
Addressing workplace harassment through legal regulations is essential for several reasons. Legal frameworks define harassment and provide rights and protections for victims. They ensure a safe and respectful work environment, free from discrimination and abuse.
Such laws deter harassment by enforcing consequences on perpetrators, promote accountability, and encourage employers to take proactive steps to prevent harassment. They also enable victims to seek justice and compensation. Legal provisions support reporting mechanisms, investigations, and corrective actions.
Additionally, laws that prohibit harassment based on protected traits—such as gender, ethnicity, or disability—foster workplace equality, diversity, and inclusion. They help create a level playing field where all employees are treated with dignity and respect.
Key Legal Provisions in India
India has enacted several legal provisions aimed at combating workplace harassment and promoting gender equality. Notably, the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) includes the following sections:
Section 74: Penalizes those who intentionally outrage a woman’s modesty by assault or criminal force. Punishment includes imprisonment for 1 to 5 years and a fine.
Section 75: Defines sexual harassment and prescribes penalties for acts such as unwanted physical contact, sexual favours, pornography display, and sexually suggestive remarks.
Section 76: Addresses assault or criminal force intended to disrobe or expose a woman. Offenders may face 3 to 7 years of imprisonment and a fine.
Specialized laws, like the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013, and the Vishaka Guidelines, offer additional protections tailored to workplace harassment scenarios.
Constitutional Provisions
Article 14: Ensures equality before the law and prohibits discrimination, guaranteeing women equal treatment at the workplace.
Article 15: Clause (1) bars discrimination based on race, religion, caste, sex, or birthplace. Clause (3) allows positive measures for women and children, forming the basis for pro-women policies like the 2013 Act.
Article 19(1)(g): Grants the right to practice any profession or occupation. Workplace harassment infringes on this right by creating fear and psychological distress.
Article 21: Recognized by courts to include the right to a dignified life. In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court ruled that workplace harassment violates Articles 14, 15, and 21.
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013
This Act was established to protect women and ensure proper complaint resolution in the workplace. It applies to all workplaces—public and private, formal and informal.
Employers with 10+ employees must form Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs), headed by a woman and including an external expert.
Firms must ensure a safe environment, conduct awareness training, and publicly display legal information on harassment.
The Act defines sexual harassment broadly, covering physical, verbal, and non-verbal conduct, including unwanted advances and sexual remarks.
Non-compliance may result in penalties, including fines and imprisonment.
Vishaka Guidelines (1997)
Issued by the Supreme Court in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, these guidelines filled the legal void before the 2013 Act. They outlined procedures for handling sexual harassment, including:
Defining sexual harassment clearly.
Recommending the formation of complaints committees.
Emphasizing the employer’s duty to prevent and resolve harassment.
Though not legally binding, these guidelines laid the foundation for later laws and raised awareness nationwide.
Steps to Prevent Sexual Harassment at Work
All employers—public or private—must actively work to prevent harassment by:
Clearly communicating and publishing anti-harassment policies.
Integrating these rules into codes of conduct and disciplinary systems with defined consequences.
Including them in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.
Providing safe, clean, and equitable working conditions to eliminate legitimate causes of complaint.
Maintaining awareness and training—such as enrolling in relevant courses at the National University of Juridical Sciences.
Cases Pertaining to Sexual Harassment in Order to Have a More Comprehensive Understanding of the Subject
Sexual Harassment at the Job: TVF’s Case Study
The Indian Constitution provides all people equal status and opportunity, emphasizing gender equality as an essential human right in all domains. Sexual harassment violates a woman’s basic right to equality, protected by Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. Sexual harassment at the workplace creates a hostile and insecure atmosphere for women, discouraging them and impeding their social and economic growth.
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (“Prevention of Workplace Sexual Harassment Act”), enacted on December 9, 2013 by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, is India’s first dedicated legislation addressing the subject. The statute intends to prevent and protect women from sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as to effectively resolve sexual harassment complaints.
The government has also issued guidelines under the legislation called The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) guidelines, 2013 (“Prevention of Workplace Sexual Harassment Rules”).
TVF’s Case
In an anonymous blog post earlier this month, Arunabh Kumar, CEO of The Viral Fever (TVF), was accused of sexual harassment by a female employee who worked at TVF from 2014 to 2016. This was followed by a number of similar sexual harassment complaints against Kumar made anonymously by other women, which went viral on social media.
On March 29th, a 27-year-old writer-director filed the first FIR with the MIDC police station, claiming that Kumar made improper gestures and even groped her while filming a web series in 2016. Then, on March 30, 2016, another victim came forward to file a sexual harassment charge against Kumar at the Versova police station.
Arun Chavan, Assistant Commissioner of Police (DN Nagar division), verified to TOI the FIR filed by a lady who previously worked for the TVF CEO. Chavan went on to say, “The victim worked with Kumar in 2014, and she alleges he misbehaved with her at that time. A case against Kumar has been registered with the Versova police under IPC Section 354 (A).”
In her blog, the victim describes the abuse and harassment she received, claiming that Kumar asked her if she was interested in role play, a quickie, or a “commercial” transaction on several occasions. When she mentioned notifying the police about such words and actions, he said that the cops are “in his pocket.”
Adding to the blog, she described the comments she received when she discussed it with her colleagues TVF employees. Naveen Kasturia, an actor who has been in multiple TVF videos, revealed that she is still receiving breach of contract warnings from the organization despite the fact that she resigned when she couldn’t take it anymore. The complainant blogger also expressed a desire to kill herself.
Meanwhile, nine more women, including actor-director Reema Sengupta, made similar charges in a Facebook post supporting the anonymous blog, claiming Kumar made overtures when she was filming a web series for TVF last year.
Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa and Others
In “Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa and Others,” the Supreme Court of India examined the case of Aureliano Fernandes, who appealed against the termination of his services by Goa University due to allegations of sexual harassment.
The Court found procedural lapses in the inquiry conducted by the university’s complaints committee, particularly regarding the haste in conducting hearings and inadequate consideration of the appellant’s health issues. The judgment underscored the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice, especially in sensitive cases like sexual harassment allegations.
In 2009, nine complainants accused the appellant, Aureliano Fernandes, of physically harassing them after he was hired at Goa University in 1996. Fernandes asserted conspiracy against him during the investigation and asked for prejudiced committee members to be removed. A number of health-related requests for adjournments were denied, but the committee continued with hearings and ultimately recommended his dismissal.
After conducting a rigorous analysis of the procedures, the Supreme Court discovered several violations from the established rules, most notably the rushed character of the hearings and the committee’s inadequate consideration of Fernandes’ health concerns.
The Court found that, “to the extent practicable,” the procedures had breached natural justice standards. It overturned the decision to terminate and gave instructions for a fair investigation procedure to be completed within a certain amount of time.
The Court’s judgment highlights the significance of procedural fairness in disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing the need for thorough and impartial investigations, particularly in cases involving serious allegations like sexual harassment. The decision underscores the importance of upholding individuals’ rights and ensuring that they are afforded due process, even in challenging circumstances.
Challenges in Enforcement and Prosecution
Workplace harassment is frequently underreported for a variety of reasons, including fear of reprisal, stigma, and a lack of trust in the justice system. Victims may be hesitant to file complaints, particularly if they believe their accusations will not be taken seriously or if they fear severe consequences for their professions or personal life.
Proving charges of workplace harassment can be difficult, especially when the harassment is subtle, psychological, or nonverbal. Investigations need extensive documentation, witness testimony, and supporting evidence, which may not always be readily available, posing challenges in enforcement and prosecution.
Perpetrators of workplace harassment may have influence or power inside the business, making it difficult for victims to seek redress through internal or judicial means. Fear of revenge, retaliation, or harm to professional ties may dissuade victims from filing complaints, hindering enforcement operations.
Solutions to Meet the Issues and Constraints of Workplace Harassment
Create private and easily accessible reporting methods for victims of workplace harassment, such as anonymous hotlines, online reporting platforms, and designated HR representatives. Provide explicit information on the reporting procedure, as well as whistleblower protection against retribution.
Provide comprehensive training programs for employees, employers, and law enforcement agencies on how to recognize, report, and resolve workplace harassment. Include training on investigative procedures, evidence collecting, and victim support services to help with enforcement and prosecution efforts.
Provide victims of workplace harassment with access to legal help, counselling, and advocacy assistance. Collaborate with legal aid groups, bar associations, and pro bono attorneys to give free or low-cost legal assistance to victims seeking justice.
The Provisions Of Other Countries To Steer India
United States
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin, is the main legislation in the United States that addresses workplace harassment. Title VII is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which also looks into harassment accusations.
What constitutes harassment? In the United States, there are many different types of workplace harassment, including harassment based on race, sexual orientation, and other protected characteristics. It includes any unwanted behaviour that makes the workplace unpleasant or uncomfortable.
Anti-harassment rules and procedures must be implemented by employers. Workers may register complaints with state or federal agencies, such as the EEOC, and employers are required to look into concerns promptly and thoroughly.
Employers are urged to put preventive measures in place, such as reporting procedures, explicit rules, and anti-harassment training. To increase knowledge and foster a respectful working culture, training is frequently required for managers and employees alike.
United Kingdom
The Equality Act 2010, which forbids discrimination based on protected characteristics like age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnerships, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation, is the main legislation in the UK that addresses workplace harassment.
Unwanted behaviour pertaining to a protected trait that injures a person’s dignity or puts them in a hostile, demeaning, humiliating, or insulting situation is considered harassment in the UK. It is mandatory for employers to establish protocols for managing grievances related to harassment.
Workers have the right to file complaints with an employment tribunal, which has the authority to grant compensation and offer advice on how to stop harassment in the future. Employers are urged to take preventive action to stop harassment, which may involve offering training to employees and managers, promoting a culture of respect and dignity, and taking swift action to address any incidents of harassment that occur.
Germany
The General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz – AGG), which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, handicap, or religion or belief, addresses workplace harassment in Germany.
In Germany, harassment in the workplace refers to any form of discriminatory behaviour or conduct that injures a person’s dignity or fosters an atmosphere that is frightening, hostile, demeaning, humiliating, or insulting.
Workers may register complaints of harassment at work with the appropriate labour court or seek guidance and support from the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency (Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes). Policies and procedures for stopping and dealing with workplace harassment must be in place at employers. They are urged to teach management and staff on inclusiveness, diversity, and non-discrimination.
Australia
Legal Framework: The Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 and other state-based anti-discrimination statutes are among the federal and state/territorial laws that handle workplace harassment in Australia. Furthermore, under the Fair Work Act of 2009, the Fair Work Commission is responsible for hearing complaints pertaining to harassment at work.
Meaning of Harassment in the Workplace: In Australia, harassment in the workplace refers to any unwanted sexual conduct as well as insulting, demeaning, or intimidating behaviour based on protected characteristics including sex, race, age, disability, or sexual orientation.
Mechanisms for Filing Complaints: Workers may report instances of harassment at work to the Australian Human Rights Commission, as well as state or territory anti-discrimination or equal opportunity offices. Workplace harassment accusations are also handled by the Fair Work Commission.
Employers must take reasonable precautions to prevent workplace harassment, including implementing policies and procedures, providing training to employees and managers, and fostering a culture of respect and inclusion.
Conclusion
Although the sexual harassment law is a much-needed step toward providing women with a safe workplace, some see it as a hastily implemented firefighting tool that is unclear, rife with loopholes, and vulnerable to misuse. If they are the target of sexual harassment, male employees have legal recourse to seek protection or remedies.
The act makes no mention of protection from victimization and retribution, which is a fairly typical outcome for those who report sexual harassment. The law also requires the employer to respond to complaints against sexual harassment in the workplace within a certain amount of time.
However, in many situations, this may not be realistically practicable since the witnesses or workers involved may not be able to readily or willingly cooperate.
Another interesting inclusion in the statute is the ability of the employer to punish the complainant in case of a false or malicious complaint. This provision, although meant to protect the employer’s interests, is likely to deter victims from reporting such incidents and filing complaints, which may defeat the purpose for which the law has been enacted.
Whether this law is successful in protecting women employees and reducing instances of sexual harassment at the workplace is yet to be tested.
Madhuripu Raj, Comparative Study Of Sexual Harassment With Major Countries Of The World: A Protective Approach, Volume II Issue VI ISSN: 2583-0538, Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, 2, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/COMPARATIVE-STUDY-OF-SEXUAL-HARASSMENT-WITH-MAJOR-COUNTRIES-OF-THE-WORLD-A-PROTECTIVE-APPROACH.pdf
Damini Singh Chauhan, Sexual Harassment At Workplace Is An Affront to Women’s Fundamental Rights: SC [Online], https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal//article-1858-sexual-harassment-at-workplace-is-an-affront-to-women-s-fundamental-rights-sc.html
BNS. S74. 2023
BNS. S75. 2023
BNS. S76. 2023
CONST. ART 14
CONST. ART 15
CONST. ART 19(1)(g)
CONST. ART 21
Dr. Kaneez Fatima, Dr. Inderjeet Kaur, Workplace Sexual Harassment: Constitutional Infringements and Legal Safeguards in India, RES MILITARIS Social Science Journal, 3, https://resmilitaris.net/uploads/paper/246556e5a1b55eafbd7e589b49902f55.pdf
Madhuripu Raj, Comparative Study Of Sexual Harassment With Major Countries Of The World: A Protective Approach, Volume II Issue VI ISSN: 2583-0538, Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, 2, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/COMPARATIVE-STUDY-OF-SEXUAL-HARASSMENT-WITH-MAJOR-COUNTRIES-OF-THE-WORLD-A-PROTECTIVE-APPROACH.pdf
Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa and Others, Civil Appeal No. 2482 of 2014
Dr. Kaneez Fatima, Dr. Inderjeet Kaur, Workplace Sexual Harassment: Constitutional Infringements and Legal Safeguards in India, RES MILITARIS Social Science Journal, 3, https://resmilitaris.net/uploads/paper/246556e5a1b55eafbd7e589b49902f55.pdf
Madhuripu Raj, Comparative Study Of Sexual Harassment With Major Countries Of The World: A Protective Approach, Volume II Issue VI ISSN: 2583-0538, Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, 2, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/COMPARATIVE-STUDY-OF-SEXUAL-HARASSMENT-WITH-MAJOR-COUNTRIES-OF-THE-WORLD-A-PROTECTIVE-APPROACH.pdf
Madhuripu Raj, Comparative Study Of Sexual Harassment With Major Countries Of The World: A Protective Approach, Volume II Issue VI ISSN: 2583-0538, Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, 2, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/COMPARATIVE-STUDY-OF-SEXUAL-HARASSMENT-WITH-MAJOR-COUNTRIES-OF-THE-WORLD-A-PROTECTIVE-APPROACH.pdf
