Effects of Sexual Harassment

last updated 9 May 2007

As the Commission of the European Union states, "sexual harassment pollutes the working environment and can
have a devastating effect upon the health, confidence, morale and performance of those affected by it. The
anxiety and stress produced by sexual harassment commonly leads to those subjected to it taking time off work
due to sickness, being less efficient at work, or leaving their job to seek work elsewhere. Employees often suffer
the adverse consequences of the harassment itself and short- and long-term damage to their employment
prospects if they are forced to change jobs. Sexual harassment may also have a damaging impact on employees
not themselves the object of unwanted behaviour but who are witness to it or have a knowledge of the unwanted
behavior."
"There are also adverse consequences arising from sexual harassment for employers. It has a direct impact on
the profitability of the enterprise where staff take sick leave or resign their posts because of sexual harassment,
and on the economic efficiency of the enterprise where employees' productivity is reduced by having to work in a
climate in which individuals' integrity is not respected."
"In general terms, sexual harassment is an obstacle to the proper integration of women into the labour market."
From European Union Commission Recommendation of 27 November 1991 on the protection of the dignity of
women and men at work, 1992 O.J. (L49) 1.
Health Effects
In a summary of two studies of sexual harassment completed in 1998 covering 16 European countries, the EU
Commission reported that almost all people suffering sexual harassment reported negative consequences both in
their private lives and relating to their job. As regards the former, psychosomatic symptoms, loss of self-esteem,
and interference with private life are the most commonly reported consequences. As regards the latter, it appears
that harassed employees experience a negative impact on their career more often than the harassers. Adapted
from Sexual harassment in the workplace in the European Union, European Commission, Directorate-General for
Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs (1998) (PDF, 243 pages).
American scholars have come to similar conclusions. They maintain that "[s]exual harassment often has a serious
and negative impact on women's physical and emotional health, and the more severe the harassment, the more
severe the reaction. The reactions frequently reported by women include anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance,
weight loss or gain, loss of appetite, and headaches. Researchers have also found that there is a link between
sexual harassment and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder." From National Women's Law Center (citing Barbara A.
Gutek and Mary P. Koss, Changed Women and Changed Organizations: Consequences of and Coping with
Sexual Harassment, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 42, 28, 33 (1993); Louise F. Fitzgerald, Sexual
Harassment: Violence Against Women in the Workplace, American Psychologist, Vol. 48, 1070, 1072 (1993)). For
more information on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder see Health Consequences of Sexual Assault.
Prominent U.S. psychologist Louise Fitzgerald, PhD, has studied sexual harassment extensively in private U.S.
companies using the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) she developed. The SEQ "measures harassment
in what Fitzgerald has defined as the behavioral categories of gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention and
sexual coercion" expressed through "crude words, acts and gestures conveying hostile, misogynist attitudes."
Unwanted sexual attention is analogous to the legal concept of "hostile work environment harassment" and sexual
coercion is analogous to the legal concept of "quid pro quo sexual harassment". "The SEQ gauges the
psychological anguish harassment victims experience, whether, for example, the harassment made them feel
incompetent. It also measures outcomes such as anxiety, depression, job satisfaction and work withdrawal."
Using the SEQ, Fitzgerald has demonstrated that sexual harassment leads to depression, anxiety and stressrelated physical problems, especially when the harassment is severe and frequent. No job benefit need be lost
for harassment to have a psychological effect on its target. From Bridget Murray, Psychology's voice in sexual
harassment law, American Psychological Association (August 1998)(referencing Fitzgerald, L.F., Drasgow, F.,
Hulin, C.L., Gelfand, M.J. & Magley, V.J., Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations:
A test of an integrated model, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, 578-589 (1997); Fitzgerald, L.F., Swann, S.
& Magley, V.J., But Was It Really Harassment? Legal, Behavioral and Psychological Definitions of the Workplace
Victimization of Women, in W. O'Donohue (Ed.), Sexual Harassment: Theory, Research and Treatment (1997);
and Schneider, K.T., Swann, S. & Fitzgerald, L.F., Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in
the workplace: empirical evidence from two organizations, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, 401-415
(1997)).
See also Chelsea R. Willness, et al., Journal of Personnel Psychology, A Meta-Analysis of The Antecedents and
Consequences of Workplace Sexual Harassment (2007) ([Sexual Harassment] experiences are associated with
negative outcomes such as decreased job satisfaction, lower organizational commitment, withdrawing from work,
ill physical and mental health, and even symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder . . . . Sexual harassment (SH)
has been identified as one of the most damaging barriers to career success and satisfaction for women.)
The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions has noted that: Those affected
by violence or harassment in the workplace tend to report higher levels of work-related ill-health. European
Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Fourth European Working Conditions Survey
(2007). For example, the Foundation discovered that the proportion of workers reporting symptoms such as
sleeping problems, anxiety and irritability is nearly four times greater among those who have experienced
workplace harassment than among those who have not. Fourth European Working Conditions Survey at 40.

Financial Effects
The financial effects of sexual harassment are potentially severe, especially when the employer does not have
adequate policies and complaint procedures in place. Financial harms to victims of sexual harassment include
loss of wages because of taking sick leave or leave without pay from work or as a result of the termination or
transfer of employment. For example, the U.S. Government estimated that federal employees lost $4.4 million in
wages from 1992-1994 because of sexual harassment. From U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, Sexual
Harassment in the Federal Workforce: Trends, Progress and Continuing Challenges, 13 (1995). Victims may face
more intangible financial or career losses such as a loss of job references or recommendations, or being
ostracized from professional or academic circles. From Sexual Harassment Support, Effects of Sexual
Harassment (2006).
According to the National Council for Research on Women, women in the United States are 9 times more likely
than men to quit their jobs, 5 times more likely to transfer, and 3 times more likely to lose jobs because of
harassment. From 911 for Women, What to Do if You or Someone You Know is Sexually Harassed, Feminist
Majority Foundation (citing The Webb Report (June 1994)).
Violence, including instances of sexual harassment, also "affects third parties, with witnesses and observers
frequently leaving the organization in response to their experiences." From European Foundation for the
Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Preventing Violence and Harassment in the Workplace (2003)
(PDF, 109 pages).
Global Costs of Sexual Harassment
The costs of sexual harassment suffered by employers and consequently the global economy are high. These
costs result from absenteeism, reduced job satisfaction and productivity, premature ill health and retirement,
higher rates of staff turnover and insurance costs, legal defense and liability for sexual harassment claims. From
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Preventing Violence and
Harassment in the Workplace (2003) (PDF, 109 pages). It is generally believed that formal sexual harassment
policies against sexual harassment in the workplace is one way to prevent lawsuits and drops in productivity and
efficiency. See the Employer Responsibilities Section for more information about such policies.
In Europe, it has been noted that workers who are exposed to psychosocial risks like sexual harassment are
significantly more likely to report they have been absent from work due to work-related ill health. European
Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Fourth European Working Conditions Survey
(2007). These workers also tend to have longer durations of work absence and are over-represented in that
category of workers who took 60 days off in the previous 12 months due to work-related ill health. Fourth
European Working Conditions Survey at 40.
In the United States, it is estimated that "[i]gnoring problems of sexual harassment can cost the average company
up to $6.7 million a year in low productivity, low morale, and employee turnover and absenteeism, not including
litigation or other legal costs." From 911 for Women, What to Do if You or Someone You Know is Sexually
Harassed, Feminist Majority Foundation (citing "Sexual Harassment in the Fortune 500," Working Woman, Dec.
19, 1988). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) indicates that $48.8 million in monetary
benefits were provided to filers of sexual harassment claims in 2006; this amount does not include monetary
benefits obtained through litigation. From Sexual Harassment Charges EEOC & FEPAs Combined: FY 1997-FY
2006. In addition, the federal government reported a loss of $327 million from 1992-1994 due to sexual
harassment. From U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workforce: Trends,
Progress and Continuing Challenges, 13 (1995).
The Effects of Sexual Harassment on the Victim
The effects of sexual harassment vary from person to person, and are contingent on the severity, and duration, of
the harassment. However, sexual harassment is a type of sexual assault, and victims of severe or chronic sexual
harassment can suffer the same psychological effects as rape victims. Aggravating factors can exist, such as
their becoming the target of retaliation, backlash, or victim blaming after their complaining, or filing a formal
grievance. Moreover, people who have experienced sexual harassment occupy a place in our society that is
similar to where rape victims were placed in the past, and they can be abused further by the system that is
supposed to help and protect them. Indeed, the treatment of the complainant during an investigation or litigation
can be brutal, and add further damage to their life, health, and psyche. Depending on the situation, a sexual
harassment victim can experience anything from mild annoyance to extreme psychological damage, while the
impact on a victim's career and life may be minimal, or leave them in ruins.
Some of the effects a sexual harassment victim can experience:
Decreased work or school performance as the victim must focus on dealing with the harassment and the
surrounding dynamics and/or effects; psychological effects of harassment can also decrease work and school
performance;
Increased absenteeism to avoid harassment, or because of illness from the stress;
Having to drop courses, or change academic plans; academic transcripts may be weakened because of
decreased school performance;
Retaliation from the harasser, or colleagues/friends of the harasser, should the victim complain or file a grievance
(retaliation can involve revenge along with more sexual harassment, and often involves stalking the complainant);

Having one's personal life offered up for public scrutiny --the victim becomes the "accused," and their dress,
lifestyle, and private life will often come under attack. (Note: this rarely occurs for the perpetrator.);
Being objectified and humiliated by scrutiny and gossip;
Becoming publicly sexualized;
Defamation of character and reputation;
Loss of trust in environments similar to where the harassment occurred;
Loss of trust in the types of people that occupy similar positions as the harasser or their colleagues;
Extreme stress upon relationships with significant others, sometimes resulting in divorce; extreme stress on peer
relationships, or relationships with colleagues;
Being ostracized from professional or academic circles;
Having to relocate to another city, another job, or another school;
Loss of job and income; loss of tuition because of having to leave school;
Loss of references/recommendations;
Loss of career;
Weakening of support network: colleagues, friends, and even family may distance themselves from the victim or
abandon them altogether.
Some of the health effects, psychological and physiological, that can occur in someone who has been sexually
harassed:
Depression
Anxiety and/or panic attacks
Traumatic stress; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
Sleeplessness and/or nightmares
Shame and guilt; self-blame
Difficulty concentrating
Headaches
Fatigue or loss of motivation
Difficulties with time (forgetting appointments, trouble gaging time)
Stomach problems; gastrointestinal disorders
Eating disorders (weight loss or gain)
Feeling betrayed and/or violated
Feeling angry or violent towards the perpetrator
Feeling powerless, helpless, or out of control
Increased blood pressure
Loss of confidence and self esteem
Overall loss of trust in people; problems with intimacy
Problems with sex (sexual dysfunction)
Withdrawal and isolation
Suicidal thoughts or attempts; suicide
Please note, the above symptoms may not be generated only from the harassment, but can be the cumulative
result of the harassment, retaliation, backlash, and/or blaming a sexual harassment victim may endure.
Environmental changes: The Womens' Crisis Support and Shelter of Santa Cruz has created a list of the changes
that might occur in a sexual harassment victim's environment after they have complained of the behavior, or
other's have found out about it. While written for the workplace, you can generalize many of these patterns to
sexual harassment in an educational setting. (Note: this was written for female victims, but a male victim may
experience similar pressures; however, because of the "double-standard" in our society regarding sex and gender,
a male will most likely have different concerns, and struggle with different emotions.)
Her social environment may be entirely transformed. If only some people know, she may constantly wonder who
knows and what they are thinking. She may overhear conversations of her superiors about her case. She may
become the subject of juicy gossip and wild misinformation and speculation. The harasser may be conducting
their own campaign of misinformation. She will be judged by all who know about it, whether positively or
negatively. This is a huge burden to carry through your work or school environment.
Her support network may be torn. The environment in which it happened may be a big part of her life and her
social sphere as well. It can be turned upside down in the wake of a complaint. If she does not have a strong
network of friends outside of that sphere, she can become highly isolated. Those who she would ordinarily rely on
for support may have mixed loyalties or may turn against her altogether. They also may not be free to support her
for their own political reasons. If the proceedings are confidential, she can be isolated from potential supporters
because she can't bring it up.
Because it's a subject which has meaning for a lot of people, even those who are not connected to the particular
job or school may have mixed reactions to her dilemma. One advantage could be that she will find out who her
real friends at work or school are. However, she may lose some friends whom she would still rather have kept.
Also, she is more in need of friends now than usual.
There may be a series of intrigues which continually intrude upon her ability to do her work as usual. She is now
no longer an ordinary student or employee, she is part of a major underground drama. She may be called away
for meetings with people high up, she may get urgent confidential letters and phone calls.
Fellow women coworkers may be her best friends or worst enemies. They have the potential to be sources of
support and validation. If they went through it too, they could become allies in the process. However, fellow

women may also be the least sympathetic. This could be due to internalized sexism, or they may even feel
threatened by her, either because she had the guts to speak up for herself, or because they are jealous for her
sexual attention.
She becomes publicly sexualized, a walking icon of misplaced amorous attentions. Is she attractive enough to get
in trouble over?
Additional effects in the aftermath of speaking up:
Suppressed anger: she is cast as the aggressor; she may feel she must come across as non threatening and as
non angry as possible. She is pressured to show caring for the accused, and compassion for his plight. However,
through her various struggles, she will become stronger and will know herself better. Opportunities to really take a
stand on what one believes in are rare, and even if undesirable, they can have positive effects as well. She is on
the front line of a battle for women's rights. Another significant effect can arise from the outcome. In many cases,
she may have paid a tremendous price for nothing.
The Effects of Sexual Harassment on The Workplace or School Environment
The impact on the workplace: Sexual harassment has been linked to decreased job satisfaction, and can lead to a
loss of staff and expertise because of resignations to avoid harassment, or because of resignations or firings of
alleged harassers. Every year, hundreds of millions of dollars are lost in productivity because of effects such as
employee absenteeism to avoid harassment, and increased team conflict in environments where harassment is
occurring. The increased team conflict also leads to problems with team cohesion and less success in meeting
financial goals. The knowledge that harassment is permitted can undermine ethical standards, and discipline in
the organization. Prekel writes, staff lose respect for, and trust in, their seniors who indulge in, or turn a blind
eye to, sexual harassment. If the problem is ignored, a companys image can suffer amongst clients, employees,
potential customers, and the general public. Health care costs can increase because of the health consequences
of harassment, not to mention the legal costs if a victim files a lawsuit after complaints are ignored or mishandled.
The impact in school: In educational environments where sexual harassment is occurring, the impact can be
similar to that of the workplace: increased absenteeism by students to avoid harassment, increased student
turnover as students leave to escape harassment; conflict amongst students when harassment is present;
decreased productivity and performance, and/or decreased participation in school activities, as students must
focus on, and strategize about, ways to deal with the harassment, or because of the psychological effects of
harassment. The same loss of trust in the ethical standards of a company can also occur at school, leading
students, staff, parents, and the general public can lose respect for, and trust in, the institution if nothing is done to
improve the situation.
Psychological Factors in Sexual Harassment
Assessment of Emotional Factors in Sexual Harassment - In personal injury cases, there is usually physical
trauma, in addition to emotional trauma, but in sexual harassment cases, the most significant harm to the
individual is psychological. There are other damages, such as loss of job or promotional opportunities, loss of pay
for days not worked, and damage to reputation, but the psychological impact of sexual harassment can be very
severe and sometimes permanent.
While psychologists may offer an opinion regarding the connection between a traumatic event and emotional
injury in an accident, that is less clear in sexual harassment. The emotional trauma experienced by the victim of
sexual harassment is based on perceptions about the behavior of others by the victim. Psychologists are not
qualified to determine if sexual harassment took place, because that is a legal question, not a psychological one.
However, psychologists can offer an opinion regarding whether a particular action by one individual can
reasonably lead to emotional distress in another individual. Most of the time, psychologists are asked to evaluate
victims of sexual harassment to assess whether they are exhibiting any psychological distress, and whether that
distress appears to be related to specific events on the part of another person. The court must then decide
whether those actions were appropriate or legal.
Are we splitting hairs? Some individuals misinterpret harmless, reasonable behavior as malicious and specifically
directed at themselves. Diagnostically this is called ideas of reference. This would suggest an individual with
some type of psychological problem who overreacts to reasonable behavior because of their own perception of
the world and the other person. This often occurs in individuals with personality disorders, paranoid disorders, or
other psychological problems that might involve delusions or extreme exaggerations of negative events in their
lives. Therefore, psychological evaluations in sexual harassment cases also focus on the expectations of the
victim, and whether the victim presents with psychological symptoms which result in exaggerated negative
conclusions about others.
For example, a person's boss is of a different sex than the person. The worker believes that the boss is sexist and
discriminates against the worker's sex. The worker requests to work on a specific project, but is not chosen. The
worker assumes the choice was based on sexist behavior, rather than merit or chance. The worker experiences a
number of events like this over time, and feels harassed because of it, resulting in depression. Is this sexual
harassment? The answer depends on many factors, such as alternative reasons for not selecting the worker,
whether the worker was selected positively on other occasions, whether other individuals had credentials which
led to choosing them instead, and whether other individuals of the same sex as the worker experienced similar
problems and perceptions.

Psychologists are experts in human behavior. In addition to evaluating the presence or absence of psychological
disorders, psychologists may also offer opinions regarding whether a person's expectations are reasonable,
based on the circumstances. Many psychological problems result when we expect people to treat us in an
unrealistically positive way. These cases are not clear cut, because they are not based solely on the identification
of a psychological problem. Ultimately, the court will decide whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that
sexual harassment took place.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE: A PRIMER 1
by
BARRY S. ROBERTS 2
RICHARD A. MANN3
Despite widespread publicity about the perils of sexual harassment,4 surveys demonstrate that many businesses
operating in the United States have yet to address the problem.5 Moreover, recent news reports indicate that
sexual harassment has reached the highest levels of management.6 Although businesses know it exists, they
appear unsure of what to do about it. As a result, the specter of employer liability for sexual harassment continues
to loom over the workplace.7
Failure to adopt a pro-active and aggressive stance on this issue, how ever, can result not only in costly lawsuits,
but also in a loss of employee morale, decline in productivity, and an erosion of a company's public image.8 That
businesses are still taking chances may reflect a failure to adequately consider the risks.
This may prove costly because these risks have substantially increased in recent years. In 1991, Congress
amended Title VII to permit victims of sexual harassment to recover damages (including punitive damages) under
federal law.9 Moreover, in 1993 the U.S. Supreme Court broadened the reach of this law by making it easier to
prove injury.10 As a result, sexual harassment in the workplace presents a clear and present danger to
businesses. They must now act or face increasing risk of liability.
To act wisely, companies need to understand the whole issue of sexual harassment. They need to consider the
disturbing statistics behind an often hidden problem, the legal grounds available to victims, the current trends in
the law, and the ways that companies can protect themselves.
This Article is a primer for attorneys to use when advising their clients on how to address sexual harassment in
the workplace. We will begin by describing the scope and severity of the sexual harassment problem. Then we
will examine the recently strengthened federal law governing sexual harass ment in the workplace. Finally, we will
suggest policies and procedures for establishing and implementing a sexual harassment policy.
DISTURBING STATISTICS
On-the-job sexual harassment is not a recent problem, although legal liability for it is.11 The American court
system did not decide the first sexual harassment case under Title VII until 1976.12 Moreover, the wider public
appears not to have fully appreciated the problem's scope until 1991, when the Senate Judiciary Committee held
hearings on Anita Hill's charges against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.
In 1976, the same year that the District Court of the District of Columbia resolved the first Title VII sexual
harassment case, a Redbook magazine poll found that nine out of ten women said they had been subjected to
unwanted sexual advances at work.13 In 1980, the federal government surveyed its own employees and found
that forty-two percent of women stated they had experienced some form of work-related sexual harassment.14 (In
addition, fifteen percent of men reported such harassment.)15 When the federal government looked at the same
issue seven years later, the numbers had not changed.16 Surveys done in the private sector revealed similar
results.17 These statistics notwithstanding, most cases of sexual harassment still go unreported: as many as
ninety-five percent of all such incidents may not be brought to light.18
While the cost to victims is high, the cost to American business cannot be over-estimated. In the federal
government's first sexual harassment survey, it discovered that the government itself had lost $189 million
between 1978 and 1980 from the effects of sexual harassment.19 In its next survey, the federal government saw
its losses jump to $267 million for the years 1985 to 1987, even though the rate of sexual harassment had not
changed.20
According to Working Woman Magazine, a typical Fortune 500 corporation can expect to lose $6.7 million, in
1988 dollars, annually.21 Losses can result from absenteeism, lower productivity, increased health-care costs,
poor morale, and employee turnover.22 These losses do not include litigation costs or court-awarded damages.23
Also not included is damage to a company's image. Bad press, which often accompanies such cases, can cost a
business not only its reputation but also its customers and revenues.
In recent years, the number of sexual harassment cases filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC), as well as in federal and state courts, has climbed dramatically.24 In 1992, for example, a
year after the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings on Capitol Hill, the number of sexual harassment cases filed
with EEOC offices across the country jumped fifty percent over the previous year.25 Complaints about sexual
harassment have ranged from fostering of a hostile work environment to demands for prostitution.

Although men face harassment, women are the most likely victims. Harm caused by sexual harassment is often
extreme, including humiliation, loss of dignity, psychological (and sometimes physical) injury, and damage to
professional reputation and career.26 Inevitably, the victims face a choice between their work and their selfesteem. Sometimes, they face a choice between their jobs and their own safety.
STRONGER FEDERAL LAW
For years, sexual harassment victims who sought relief found them selves in a legal quandary. Federal legislation
was on the books to protect employees from on-the-job discrimination, including sexual harassment, but the
benefits of pursuing such a case were few.27 Often, victims who spoke out jeopardized their jobs, their careers,
and their reputation, with little reward.
Until 1991, Title VII entitled sexual harassment victims to collect only back pay, lost wages and, if they had been
forced to leave, to be reinstated in their jobs.28 Nothing was provided for pain and suffering. Often, women who
did file EEOC complaints continued to be harassed at work, or felt compelled to quit. If they won, all they got were
a few dollars and an intolerable job back.29 However, these cases were very difficult to win.30 Alternatively, the
victims would file tort actions for assault, battery, false imprisonment, and /or intentional infliction of mental
distress in state court.31 As a result, sexual harassment victims found little recourse in the legal system for their
harms.
Recognizing the need to strengthen the remedies for sexual harassment under Title VII, Congress amended the
Civil Rights Act in 1991.32 Now, sexual harassment victims can recover compensatory damages beyond back
pay,33 and may do so in a jury trial.34 Moreover, these damages can encompass "future pecuniary losses,
emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary
losses."35 Plaintiffs can also collect punitive damages, if they can demonstrate that an employer acted with
malice or with reckless or callous indifference.36
The legislation, however, limits the sum of compensatory and punitive damages according to the number of
employees.37 (See Table I.) Nevertheless, sexual harassment victims can bring a claim under federal law and
collect substantial amounts for harm done. Thus, for companies operating in the United States, the stakes have
increased dramatically.
TABLE 1: LIMITS ON DAMAGESNumber of Employees
in Company
Maximum Sum of Compensatory
and Punitive Damages
15-100 $ 50,000
101-200
$ 100,000
201-500
$ 200,000
501 or more
$ 300,000
Quid Pro Quo
Federal law recognizes two different sets of legal grounds for claiming sexual harassment under Title VII.38 The
first is quid pro quo.39 Under the quid pro quo form of harassment, a person in authority, usually a supervisor,
demands sexual favors of a subordinate as a condition of getting or keeping a job benefit.40 The second, which
we will discuss below, is a hostile work environment harassment.
EEOC guidelines define sexual harassment generally as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors,
and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.41 In quid pro quo cases, the offense is directly linked to
an individual's terms of employment or forms the basis for employment decisions affecting the individual. Usually,
such cases are easy to recognize the first sexual harassment lawsuit under Title VII was decided on quid pro quo
grounds.42
When such harassment occurs, the subordinate has the legal right to take the employer to court.43 Because
courts follow the doctrine of respondent superior, the company is held strictly liable even if it had no knowledge of
the conduct.44 In 1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit set forth the rationale for a company's
strict liability in Henson v. City of Dundee.45 The court reasoned:
In that case, the supervisor uses the means furnished to him by the employer to accomplish the prohibited
purpose. He acts within the scope of his actual or apparent authority to "hire, fire, discipline or promote." . . . .
Because the supervisor is acting within at least the apparent scope of his authority entrusted to him by the
employer when he makes employment decisions, his conduct can fairly be imputed to the source of his
authority.46
This makes a company responsible for a supervisory employee's action if that employee wields authority
delegated by the corporation.47 Moreover, the perpetrator does not even have to be an employee, but only an
agent for the company.48
Hostile Work Environment
Frequently, a quid pro quo situation does not exist. Many sexual harassment victims are never threatened with
termination or lack of advancement. Rather, they suffer repeated abuse by a hostile work environment, which is
an alternative ground for bringing a Title VII sexual harassment action.49 A hostile work environment arises when
a co-worker or supervisor, engaging in unwelcome 50 and inappropriate sexually based behavior, renders the
workplace atmosphere intimidating, hostile, or offensive.51

In one early case, Bundy v. Jackson,52 the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals characterized hostile
environment cases as presenting a "cruel trilemma."53 In Bundy the victim had three options: (1) to endure the
harassment, (2) to attempt to oppose it and likely make the situation worse, or (3) to leave the place of
employment.54 A hostile work environment, the court held, represented discrimination under Title VII and
constituted grounds for legal action.55 Over the next few years other courts followed this holding.56
In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson,57 endorsed the notion of a hostile work
environment.58 Placing strong emphasis on EEOC guidelines, the Court held such sexual misconduct constitutes
prohibited sexual harassment, even if it is not linked directly to the grant or denial of an economic quid pro quo,
where "such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance
or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment."59
This decision set the stage for a broader definition of sexual harassment. It also gave rise to a debate over two
related issues: What degree of abuse is needed to constitute hostility that interferes unreasonably with a victim's
work performance, and what is the nature and extent of an employer's liability for a hostile work environment.
What Is a Hostile Work Environment?
As part of its decision in Meritor, the Supreme Court stated that a hostile work environment constitutes grounds for
an action only when the conduct is unwelcome, based on sex, and severe or pervasive enough "to alter the
conditions of [the victim's] employment and create an abusive working environment."60 This standard raises
numerous questions. What is unwelcome? When is conduct based on sex? Are employees allowed to flirt on the
job anymore? Can they tell off-color jokes? What happens when someone gets offended? Who decides what is
appropriate, and what is not? Should employees be required to tolerate some minimal level of offensive sexual
behavior within the workplace?
The EEOC itself has stated, "Title VII does not proscribe all conduct of a sexual nature in the workplace."61 The
line is drawn between acceptable sexual conduct and sexual harassment where the conduct becomes
unwelcome.62 However, as the courts continue to grapple with the definition of unwelcome sexual conduct, their
decisions have not followed a predictable pattern.63
Nonetheless, the courts now grant relief for sexual harassment far more often than they did initially. Today, courts
will more likely find an illegal hostile environment present when the workplace includes sexual propositions,
pornography, extremely vulgar language, sexual touching, degrading comments, or embarrassing questions or
jokes.64 The following cases illustrate conduct that creates a hostile work environment.
(1) In Hall v. Gus Construction Co., a construction company hired three women to work as "flag persons" or traffic
controllers at road construction sites.65 Male co-workers immediately and continually subjected the women to
outrageous verbal sexual abuse. One of the three women developed a skin reaction to the sun and the men
nicknamed her "Herpes."66 When the women returned to their car after work one day, they found obscenities
written in the dust on their car.67 Male co-workers continuously asked the woman if they wanted to engage in
sexual intercourse or oral sex.68 In addition to the verbal abuse, the women were constantly subjected to
offensive and unwelcome physical contact. On one occasion, the men held up one of the female employees so
that the driver of a truck could touch her.69 The men subjected all three woman to other types of abuse, including
"mooning" them, showing them pornographic pictures, and urinating in their water bottles and automobile gas
tanks.70 The company's supervisor was well aware of all of these activities.71 The court found this conduct
violated Title VII because it was unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, even though it did not contain "explicit
sexual overtones."72
(2) In Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., a shipyard company employed a female welder who was
continually subjected to nude and partially nude pictures posted by her male co-workers.73 The men posted these
pictures not only in common areas, but also in places where the victim would have to encounter them, including
her tool box.74 The men referred to the victim as "baby," "sugar," "momma," and "dear."75 In addition, the men
wrote obscene graffiti directed at the victim all over the plant.76 The men also made numerous suggestive and
offensive remarks to the victim concerning her body and the pictures posted on the walls.77 The victim
complained about this atmosphere of harassment on a number of occasions, but the company's supervisory
personnel provided little or no assistance.78 The court found this conduct violated Title VII because the plaintiff
belonged to a protected category, was subject to unwelcome sexual harassment, the harassment was based on
sex, it affected a term or condition of her employment, and the employer knew or should have known about the
harassment and failed to take remedial action.79
(3) In Waltman v. International Paper Co., the harassment began when a co-worker broadcast over the company's
public address system obscenities about the female victim, who then received over thirty pornographic notes in
her locker.80 The men covered the walls of the facility and the elevator with pornographic pictures and crude
remarks concerning the victim.81 In addition, one of the victim's supervisors told her that she should have sex
with a certain co-worker; he also physically accosted her.82 Another employee told the victim that "he would cut
off her left breast and shove it down her throat."83 On another occasion, this same employee held the victim "over
a stairwell, more than thirty feet from the floor."84 Other male employees also physically grabbed and pinched the
victim. The court found this conduct stated a claim of hostile environment discrimination under Title VII, because
employees touched her in a sexual manner, directed sexual comments toward her, and continued to write sexual
graffiti hroughout the workplace.85
Even though these examples involved blue collar workers, the problem of sexual harassment permeates all
businesses and reaches upper management.86 No company or supervisor can prudently ignore the problem.

Another issue concerning hostile environment cases is whether a victim may only recover for sexual harassment
aimed at the victim, or whether she may cite examples of sex-based conduct directed at other employees to
establish her prima facie case. A number of courts have held that incidents involving employees other than the
victim are relevant in establishing a generally hostile work environment.87
In the last few years, new rulings have introduced another element into the fray. In 1991, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that sexual harassment should be examined from the perspective of what a
"reasonable woman," not a "reasonable person," would find offensive.88 This holding has raised additional
questions: Whose perspective should prevail? What is meant by a "reasonable woman?" By a "reasonable man?"
By a "reasonable person?" If a reasonable woman standard is utilized can a male ever be confident of his
conduct?
Although the courts are toiling over the details of hostile environment cases, the Supreme Court remains steadfast
in its view that federal law prohibits that type of sexual discrimination. In the 1993 case of Harris v. Forklift
Systems, Inc.,89 the Supreme Court extended its ruling in Meritor to include conduct that does not actually cause
psychological injury.90 In this case, the Court reaffirmed its holding that Title VII is violated when a workplace is
permeated with unwelcome discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult, that is sufficiently severe or pervasive
to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment.91 The Court added
that "Title VII comes into play before the harassing conduct leads to a nervous breakdown. . . . Certainly Title VII
bars conduct that would seriously affect a reasonable person's psychological well-being, but the statute is not
limited to such conduct. So long as the environment would reasonably be perceived, and is perceived, as hostile
or abusive, there is no need for it to be psychologically injurious."92 Thus, the Court apparently employed a
reasonable person standard.93 Acknowledging that this test is not and cannot be mathematically precise, the
Court emphasized that whether a work environment is hostile or abusive can be determined only by looking at all
the circumstances.94 The Court provided some guidance by noting some factors that could be part of the
"circumstances" of the case:
frequency of the discriminatory conduct;
severity of that conduct;
whether it is physically threatening or humiliating or a mere offensive utterance;
whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance.95
The Court additionally stated that although psychological harm is relevant to determining whether a victim found
the work environment abusive, it -- like any other relevant factor -- is not required.96
This decision makes it easier for sexual harassment victims to win law suits using a hostile work environment as
grounds for the action.97 Consequently, attorneys should advise their clients to take stringent steps to limit their
legal liability. Above all, they should explain that companies should make certain their employees understand that
all sexual matters belong outside the workplace.
When Is the Employer Liable?
In Meritor the Supreme Court sidestepped the issue of employer liability for a hostile work environment. It deferred
instead to Congress, which it said wanted the courts to look to common-law principles of agency law for guidance
in this area.98 The Court, however, announced some general parameters. In sexual harassment cases based on
a hostile work environment, employers are not always automatically liable for their supervisors' conduct.99 On the
other hand, absence of notice regarding the supervisors' conduct does not necessarily insulate employers from
liability.100
Since Meritor, the lower courts have not reached entirely uniform results in applying agency law principles to
hostile environment cases.101 Employers, therefore, are well advised to observe the EEOC's guidelines on this
issue.102 Under these guidelines, employers are liable when either their supervisors or agents create a hostile
environment, or if the employer knew or should have known of the sexual harassment and failed to take
immediate and appropriate corrective action.103 According to the EEOC, employers are usually deemed to know
of sexual harassment if it is: (1) openly practiced in the workplace; (2) well-known among employees; or (3)
brought to the employer's notice by a victim's filing a charge.104
Employers may protect themselves from liability by taking immediate and appropriate corrective action. To do so,
companies need to institute comprehensive, detailed, and responsible sexual harassment policies. Moreover, the
courts have advised employers to look carefully at their current grievance procedures. In Meritor, the Supreme
Court cautioned:
[Employer's] general nondiscrimination policy did not address sexual harassment in particular, and thus did not
alert employees to their employer's interest in correcting that form of discrimination. Moreover, the [employer's]
grievance procedure apparently required an employee to complain first to her supervisor, in this case Taylor.
Since Taylor was the alleged perpetrator, it is not altogether surprising that the [employee] failed to invoke the
procedure and report her grievance to him.105
The EEOC has concisely explained the principle when it stated that it will generally find an employer liable for
hostile environment sexual harassment by a supervisor when the employer failed to establish an explicit policy

against sexual harassment, and did not have a reasonably available avenue by which victims of sexual
harassment could complain to someone with authority to investigate and remedy the problem.106
Figure I summarizes the elements of sexual harassment under Title VII.
FIGURE 1: SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Sexual Misconduct
Unwelcone sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature
plus
Submission to such conduct
(1) is made a term or condition of employment or
(2) forms a basis for employment decisions affecting that individual or Hostile Environment
Employer always liable
Conduct has purpose or effect of (1) unreasonably interfering with work performance or (2) creating an
intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment
Employer liable if knew or should have known and failed to take appropriate corrective action

ADDRESSING SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Given the high stakes involved in sexual harassment, many employers are woefully unprepared to protect their
own interests, and those of their employees. Despite widespread recognition of sexual harassment, businesses
are still exhibiting a surprisingly cavalier attitude about the problem. When Inc. magazine surveyed business
managers in 1992, for example, it found that thirty-four percent of companies said they had not even thought
about formulating a written sexual harassment policy.107 Moreover, fewer than a quarter said they would promptly
investigate a complaint.108
In stark contrast, the courts and the EEOC have repeatedly indicated that companies must take affirmative and
effective steps both to prevent sexual harassment and, when it occurs, to intervene quickly.109 At the same time,
employers should ensure that male supervisors do not overreact by avoiding all unnecessary contact with females
to minimize the risk of engaging in sexual harassment. Such an approach discriminates unfairly against female
employees, and disregards the Supreme Court rulings in Meritor and Harris: "Conduct that is not severe or
pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive environment an environment that a reasonable
person would find hostile or abusive is beyond Title VII's purview."110
Company Policy
Companies that want to manage their risk prudently must act before a problem occurs. The EEOC encourages
employers to "take all steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment from occurring, such as affirmatively raising
the subject, expressing strong disapproval, developing appropriate sanctions, informing employees of their right to
raise, and how to raise, the issue of harassment under Title VII, and developing methods to sensitize all
concerned."111
First, companies need a comprehensive, detailed written policy on sexual harassment. The CEO should issue the
policy and make it a high priority of the company. Second, they need to distribute this policy to all workers,
supervisors, and even some non-employees. A basic policy should set forth the following:
an express commitment to eradicate and prevent sexual harassment;
a definition of sexual harassment including both quid pro quo and hostile work environment;
an explanation of penalties (including termination) the employer will impose for substantiated sexual harassment
conduct;
a detailed outline of the grievance procedure employees should use;
additional resource or contact persons available for consultation;
an express commitment to keep all sexual harassment complaints and personnel actions confidential.112
To help employees grasp the nature of sexual harassment, companies may want to provide their workers with
examples of behavior that they consider inappropriate. Professor Catherine MacKinnon advises companies to
warn employees against posting suggestive photographs, telling sexual jokes or making innuendoes, or
romancing subordinates.113 She also suggests that workers be advised against referring to female employees as
"girls," assigning work according to an individual's gender, or promoting employees based on gender.114 In
addition, Professor MacKinnon says workers should be told to refrain from requesting sexual favors, from
touching or flirting with unwilling or even willing subordinates, and from making similar unwelcome sexual

advances to co-workers.115 Finally, she says that the company should prohibit everyone in the company from
retaliating against a worker who files a sexual harassment complaint.116
Once a company develops a sexual harassment policy, it should circulate it widely. Companies should provide
copies not only to newly hired employees, but also to current ones. In addition, companies should post copies
throughout office and break areas, issue periodic memos about the policy, and hold informal and formal
departmental meetings to discuss the topic. In particular, companies need to train their supervisors to deal with
sexual harassment. Even small businesses will find it useful to educate their workers through videos and
seminars. Companies may also wish to seek help from an outside consultant.
Procedure
Despite prudent measures, companies will always face the possibility, if not the probability, that sexual
harassment will occur. However, as the Supreme Court indicated in Meritor, an employer greatly improves its
position by having grievance procedures that encourage employees to come forward with sexual harassment
complaints.117 Lower courts have supported this view even more strongly.118 With any grievance procedure, one
element is paramount: A sexual harassment victim must not be required to address complaints to a supervisor
who is involved in, condones, or ignores the harassment.119
Consequently, an effective grievance procedure should provide the complainant with alternative routes for
reporting harassment. In setting up grievance procedures, a company may want to consider that women lodge the
vast majority of sexual harassment complaints, and that the courts have found differences of perception to exist
between men and women. As a result, an employer is better protected if a female employee is involved in
assessing sexual harassment complaints. That way, female victims may be more willing to come forward, thus
enhancing an employer's ability to take prompt and effective remedial action. As with any grievance procedure, of
course, a company must maintain confidentiality, both for the sake of the victim and the accused.
Enforcement
Even the most comprehensive sexual harassment policies and procedures are bound to fail if a company does
not enforce them quickly, consistently, and aggressively.120 To be effective, companies must take sexual
harassment seriously. They need to make certain that personnel responsible for enforcement conduct prompt,
thorough, and documented investigations of all complaints, even those that appear trivial.121
Employers should also keep tabs on their supervisors. This can be accomplished by means of monthly meetings
with higher management, unscheduled spot checks, or periodic sexual harassment training sessions. Depending
on management style, some businesses may find it useful to survey subordinates about sexual harassment
issues, as a way to gauge supervisors attitudes about the problem.122 Finally, companies may want to screen
annual data on hiring, firing, promotions, and compensation packages for any pattern of overt gender
discrimination that may also be occurring.
Once a company has received notice of sexual harassment, its liability may be reduced or eliminated depending
on how promptly and effectively it responds. Prompt means precisely that: under no circumstance should a
company delay an investigation of sexual harassment more than a few days. Notably egregious sexual
misconduct should be handled immediately. Whatever the situation, a company should take action that is
reasonably calculated to end the harassment.123 Such action must be directed toward the harasser, and may
include verbal warnings, written warnings, job transfers, suspension of employment, and, if necessary,
termination.124
In dealing with problems, companies must avoid any measures that penalize the individual who has lodged a
sexual harassment complaint. This can occur, for example, when a company transfers the complainant to a less
desirable position as a way to avoid interaction between the victim and the accused. As the Seventh Circuit Court
of Appeals has warned, "A remedial measure that makes the victim of sexual harassment worse off is ineffective
per se."125
A company should also be careful not to allow too much time to elapse before achieving a satisfactory resolution
of the harassment. Once matters have been brought under control, a company should continue to monitor the
situation to ensure compliance. Toward this end, follow-up interviews with all parties and witnesses are highly
recommended. When claims of sexual harassment cannot be substantiated, an employer should still take the
opportunity to reemphasize to employees that sexual harassment will not be tolerated.
Exhibit 1 summarizes our suggestions for addressing sexual harassment and provides guidelines that all
companies should consider in establishing and implementing their sexual harassment policy.
CONCLUSION
Sexual harassment in the workplace presents an ongoing and growing risk to businesses operating in the United
States. Today, the time is right for businesses to begin to manage their risk in this area more wisely. Preventing
sexual harassment in the workplace requires a considerable investment of time and personnel. In the end,
however, these costs will be offset by significant savings in legal fees and health-care costs. Companies will also
benefit from increased worker productivity. From a purely business perspective, a company only stands to gain if it
takes a no-nonsense, hard-line position on sexual harassment. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is the smart
thing to do.

GUIDELINES FOR A SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY

UNDERSTAND SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Appreciate that you and your company can be held liable if your employees engage in sexual harassment. Know
that any unwelcome sexual activity tied to employment decisions or benefits is sexual harassment. Recognize that
sexual harassment may include jokes, vulgar language, sexual innuendoes, pornographic pictures, sexual
gestures, physical grabbing or pinching, and other unwelcome or offensive physical touching or contact
Remember that every sexual harassment charge is extremely serious. Comprehend that employees who comply
with unwelcome sexual advances can still be victims of sexual harassment. Realize that men as well as woman
may be sexually harassed Understand that employees may wait a while before lodging sexual harassment
charges
COMMUNICATE POLICY
Issue a strong policy from the CEO against sexual harassment
Provide a clear definition of sexual harassment using examples of inappropriate behavior
Review the policy with your employees on a regular basis
Discuss the policy with all new employees
Ensure that third-party suppliers and customers are aware of your sexual harassment policy
ESTABLISH PROCEDURES
Appoint a senior corporate official to oversee the implementation of the policy
Train your supervisors and managers to recognize and prevent sexual harassment
Outline procedures to use in reporting sexual harassment
Designate a personnel officer or other appropriate manager, rather than a direct supervisor, to receive sexual
harassment complaints
Provide alternative routes for filing complaints
Keep all sexual harassment charges confidential
ENFORCE POLICY
Make sure employees who bring charges do not face retaliation
Safeguard the rights of the accused
Investigate all sexual harassment charges quickly and thoroughly
Maintain accurate records of the investigation and the findings
Take immediate action when sexual harassment is discovered or suspected
Discipline appropriately any employee found to have engaged in sexual harassment
Safeguard your employees from third-party work-related sexual harassment
Sexual Harassment Investigation
First and foremost, all complaints need to be taken seriously and put into writing to prevent future litigation. Sexual
harassment policies should include instructions on complaint procedures. This should include ways to circumvent
the supervisor, in case the supervisor is the one accused of sexual harassment. A prompt investigation should be
affirmed in the policy. The alleged victims will feel more comfortable coming forward if the investigation will be
made with confidentiality, dignity and respect.
Recommended Questions To Ask When Investigating Sexual Harassment Complaints
Who harassed you? (The more senior the person, the greater the chance the firm may get sued.)
What did he/she do? (Get the specifics; generalities are not sufficient.)
When did he/she do it? (Find out if there have been repeated offenses.)
Where did it happen? (On or off company property is a key fact.)
Were there any witnesses? (Try to corroborate the employees story; be careful not to lead witnesses.)
Who else did you tell? (The EEOC will ask who else knew about the alleged harassment.)
Who else has been harassed? (Find out if the employee knows of anyone else who has suffered similar
harassment.)
What did you do and say in response? (Again be specific; generalities are not sufficient.)
What do you want done? (Document the answer in the event the victim later claims that he or she requested a
different action.)
Would you like to see a counselor? (Specifically recommend that the employee see the health insurance
covered counselor or a service of the Employee Assistance Program. If the employee refuses, document the
refusal in writing.)
What to do next?
Review evidence.
Interview witnesses.

 Interview co-workers in the department to assess overall work environment.

Interview alleged harasser.
Determine the validity of the alleged harassment.
If found valid, follow the appropriate disciplinary action or sanctions.
Document all information.
Category:Legal Considerations
Psychological trauma is a type of damage to the psyche that occurs as a result of a traumatic event. When that
trauma leads to posttraumatic stress disorder, damage may involve physical changes inside the brain and to brain
chemistry, which damage the person's ability to adequately cope with stress.
A traumatic event involves a single experience, or an enduring or repeating event or events, that completely
overwhelm the individual's ability to cope or integrate the ideas and emotions involved with that experience. The
sense of being overwhelmed can be delayed by weeks, years, even decades, as the person struggles to cope
with the immediate circumstances.
Trauma can be caused by a wide variety of events, but there are a few common aspects. There is frequently a
violation of the person's familiar ideas about the world and of their human rights, putting the person in a state of
extreme confusion and insecurity. This is also seen when people or institutions depended on for survival violate or
betray or disillusion the person in some unforeseen way.[1]
Psychological trauma may accompany physical trauma or exist independently of it. Typical causes of
psychological trauma are sexual abuse, violence, the threat of either, or the witnessing of either, particularly in
childhood. Catastrophic events such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, war or other mass violence can also
cause psychological trauma. Long-term exposure to situations such as extreme poverty or milder forms of abuse,
such as verbal abuse, can be traumatic (though verbal abuse can also potentially be traumatic as a single event).
However, different people will react differently to similar events. One person may experience an event as
traumatic while another person would not suffer trauma as a result of the same event. In other words, not all
people who experience a potentially traumatic event will actually become psychologically traumatized [2]
People who go through these types of extremely traumatic experiences often have certain symptoms and
problems afterward. How severe these symptoms are depends on the person, the type of trauma involved, and
the emotional support they receive from others. Reactions to and symptoms of trauma can be wide and varied,
and differ in severity from person to person. A traumatized individual may experience one or several of them.[3]
After a traumatic experience, a person may re-experience the trauma mentally and physically, hence avoiding
trauma reminders, also called triggers, as this can be uncomfortable and even painful. They may turn to
psychoactive substances including alcohol to try to escape the feelings. Re-experiencing symptoms are a sign
that the body and mind are actively struggling to cope with the traumatic experience.[3]
Triggers and cues act as reminders of the trauma, and can cause anxiety and other associated emotions. Often
the person can be completely unaware of what these triggers are. In many cases this may lead a person suffering
from traumatic disorders to engage in disruptive or self-destructive coping mechanisms, often without being fully
aware of the nature or causes of their own actions. Panic attacks are an example of a psychosomatic response to
such emotional triggers.
Consequently, intense feelings of anger may surface frequently, sometimes in very inappropriate or unexpected
situations, as danger may always seem to be present. Upsetting memories such as images, thoughts, or
flashbacks may haunt the person, and nightmares may be frequent.[4] Insomnia may occur as lurking fears and
insecurity keep the person vigilant and on the lookout for danger, both day and night.
The person may not remember what actually happened while emotions experienced during the trauma may be
reexperienced without the person understanding why, see Repressed memory. This can lead to the traumatic
events being constantly experienced as if they were happening in the present, preventing the subject from gaining
perspective on the experience. This can produce a pattern of prolonged periods of acute arousal punctuated by
periods of physical and mental exhaustion.[5]
In time, emotional exhaustion may set in, leading to distraction, and clear thinking may be difficult or impossible.
Emotional detachment, as well as dissociation or "numbing out", can frequently occur. Dissociating from the
painful emotion includes numbing all emotion, and the person may seem emotionally flat, preoccupied, distant, or
cold. The person can become confused in ordinary situations and have memory problems.
Some traumatized people may feel permanently damaged when trauma symptoms don't go away and they don't
believe their situation will improve. This can lead to feelings of despair, loss of self-esteem, and frequently
depression. If important aspects of the person's self and world understanding have been violated, the person may
call their own identity into question.[3] Often despite their best efforts, traumatized parents may have difficulty
assisting their child with emotion regulation, attribution of meaning, and containment of post-traumatic fear in the
wake of the child's traumatization, leading to adverse consequences for the child.[6][7] In such instances, it is in

the interest of the parent(s) and child for the parent(s) to seek consultation as well as to have their child receive
appropriate mental health services.
[edit]
Situational trauma
Trauma can be caused by man-made and natural disasters, including war, abuse, violence, earthquakes,
mechanized accidents (car, train, or plane crashes, etc.) or medical emergencies.
[edit]
Responses to psychological trauma
There are several behavioral responses common towards stressors including the proactive, reactive, and passive
responses. Proactive responses include attempts to address and correct a stressor before it has a noticeable
effect on lifestyle. Reactive responses occur after the stress and possible trauma has occurred, and are aimed
more at correcting or minimizing the damage of a stressful event. A passive response is often characterized by an
emotional numbness or ignorance of a stressor.
Those who are able to be proactive can often overcome stressors and are more likely to be able to cope well with
unexpected situations. On the other hand, those who are more reactive will often experience more noticeable
effects from an unexpected stressor. In the case of those who are passive, victims of a stressful event are more
likely to suffer from long term traumatic effects and often enact no intentional coping actions. These observations
may suggest that the level of trauma associated with a victim is related to such independent coping abilities.
"Betrayal trauma theory suggests that psychogenic amnesia is an adaptive response to childhood abuse. When a
parent or other powerful figure violates a fundamental ethic of human relationships, victims may need to remain
unaware of the trauma not to reduce suffering but rather to promote survival. Amnesia enables the child to
maintain an attachment with a figure vital to survival, development, and thriving. Analysis of evolutionary
pressures, mental modules, social cognitions, and developmental needs suggests that the degree to which the
most fundamental human ethics are violated can influence the nature, form, and processes of trauma and
responses to trauma."
Jennifer Freyd[8]
There is also a distinction between trauma induced by recent situations and long-term trauma which may have
been buried in the unconscious from past situations such as childhood abuse. Trauma is often overcome through
healing; in some cases this can be achieved by recreating or revisiting the origin of the trauma under more
psychologically safe circumstances, such as with a therapist.
[edit]
Trauma in psychoanalysis
Main article: Psychoanalysis
French neurologist Jean-Martin Charcot argued[when?] that psychological trauma was the origin of all instances
of the mental illness known as hysteria. Charcot's "traumatic hysteria" often manifested as a paralysis that
followed a physical trauma, typically years later after what Charcot described as a period of "incubation".[9]
Sigmund Freud, Charcot's student and the father of psychoanalysis, examined the concept of psychological
trauma throughout his career. Jean Laplanche has given a general description of Freud's understanding of
trauma, which varied significantly over the course of Freud's career: "An event in the subject's life, defined by its
intensity, by the subject's incapacity to respond adequately to it and by the upheaval and long-lasting effects that it
brings about in the psychical organization".[citation needed]
[edit]
Trauma and stress disorders
Main articles: Post-traumatic stress disorder and Complex post-traumatic stress disorder
In times of war, psychological trauma has been known as shell shock or combat stress reaction. Psychological
trauma may cause an acute stress reaction which may lead on to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD
emerged as the label for this condition after the Vietnam War in which many veterans returned to their respective
countries demoralized, and sometimes, addicted to drugs. Psychological trauma is treated with therapy and, if
indicated, psychotropic medications.
Following traumatic events, persons involved are often asked to talk about the events soon after, sometimes even
immediately after the event occurred in order to start a healing process. This practice may not garner the positive
results needed to recover psychologically from a traumatic event.
Victims of traumatic occurrences who were debriefed immediately after the event in general do far better than
others who received therapy at a later time, though there is also evidence to suggest forcing immediate debriefing
may distort the natural psychological healing process.[10]
Cases on Sexual Harassment:
Defense that complaint was merely a product of conspiracy: The Commission ruled that filing charges for sexual
harassment does not affect only the accused but also the complainants themselves, since by filing a complaint
they are exposed to public mockery. (Grave Misconduct: Resma, Paulino CSC Res. 950968, 17 Feb 1995)

Filipina of decent repute doctrine. as a rule, no Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she had been
criminally abused and ravished unless that is true. It is her natural instinct to protect her honor (People v. Ramil,
G.R. 52230, 15 December 1986) cited in Alegre, Armando CSC Res. No. 953599, 15 June 1995)
Work ethic of a managerial employee: A managerial employee is bound by a more exacting work ethic (Delfin G.
Villamor v. NLRC, G.R. no. 10634, September 2, 1994)
Defense that it was a Joke: A touch on the person coupled with an attempt to kiss, even if jokingly made, if
unwelcome, is intimidating , or causes discomfort or humiliation constitutes sexual harassment. (Pambid,
Eduardo CSC Res. No. 963366 8 May 1996)
Motive of complainant to bring respondent to justice: It is well-settled rule in this jurisdiction that in case of rape,
a woman would not go through the expense, trouble, shame and inconvenience of public trial, not to mention the
scandal, embarrassment and humiliation such action inevitably invites, as well as allow an examination of her
private parts if her motive is not to bring to justice the person who abused her (People v. Calixtro, G.R. No.
92355, 24 January 1999) cited in Boneo, Eladio CSC Res. 965558, 27 August 1996)
Defense of Denial: Denials if uncorroborated by clear and convincing evidence, are negative and self-serving
which deserve no weight in law and cannot be given evidentiary weight over the testimony of credible witnesses
who testify on the affirmative matters. As between the positive declaration of the prosecution witness and
negative statements of the accused, the latter is not worth an iota of consideration. (People v. Sencil, et al. G.R.
105959-60, 12 October 1993) cited in Boneo, Eladio CSC Res. 965558, 27 August 1996)
legal implication of absence of hematoma or contusion: The Supreme Court had ruled in various decisions that
the absence of hematoma or contusion is not evidence that the sexual molestation never occurred, and that the
force employed need not be so great that it could not be resisted. It is enough that the force employed be
sufficient to consummate the act. (Boneo, Eladio CSC Res. 965558, 27 August 1996)
Uncorroborated testimony: While we have frequently held that the uncorroborated testimony of the offended
partymay be sufficient under certain circumstances to warrant conviction, yet from the very nature of the charge
and the ease with which it may be made and the difficulty which surrounds the accused in disproving itit is
imperative that such testimony should be scrutinized with the greatest caution. (People v. Villapana, 161 SCRA
72 (1988) cited in Belaga Allyson CSC Res. No. 966213, 23 September 1996)
Res judicata, as a ground for dismissing a complaint, necessitates a previous final judgment in another case
between the same parties involving the same subject matter and cause of action. The decision of DECS
Secretary Gloria dismissing the case on the merits has already become final, hence, it should not be disturbed.
Since the DECS had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties involved, its decision on the matter is
valid. (Erguiza, Gerardo S. Sr. CSC Res. 973161 , 27 June 1997)
Inaccurate affidavit: The most honest witnesses may make mistakes sometimes, but such innocent lapses do
not necessarily impair their credibility. The Court further held that a testimony given on the witness stand is
given more weight than an affidavit taken ex parte because the latter is almost always incomplete and often
inaccurate, sometimes due to partial suggestions and inquiries meant to help the witness recall circumstances
related to the subject.
Absence of witnesses. The Commission found the complainants testimony to be natural, straightforward,
spontaneous and convincing, and with details consistent with human nature and the ordinary course of things.
The sequence of events, narrated by the complainant and her witnesses, disclosed the complainants
contemporaneous and subsequent conduct in response to respondents offensive act and is credible. The
absence of an eyewitness to the actual commission of the acts was of no moment because Grave Misconduct
through Sexual harassment is normally committed in the absence of witnesses. (People v. Dabon (216 SCRA
656) cited in Mollaneda, Arnold P. CSC Res. No. 973277 7 July 1997)
Effect of desistance or withdrawal of the complaint. The Commission held that Section 6, Rule XIV of the
Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292) states that
the desistance or withdrawal of the complaint does not bar the Civil Service Commission from proceeding with the
case. Where there is obvious truth or merit to the charges or complaint, the same should be given due course...
However, the Commission recognized that for the present action to continue, other sources of evidence were
needed to sustain the charge. In the instant case, the prosecutions only evidence was the testimony of the
complainant. Since the complainants testimony was no longer available, the Commission had no choice but to
dismiss the complaint. (Agustin, Jose M. CSC Res. No. 973936, 18 September 1997)
The Civil Service Commission held that complainants in cases of misconduct, malfeasance or misfeasance
against a public officer or employee are witnesses and, therefore, regardless of their motions to dismiss or
withdraw the complaints, the proceedings thereon may continue (citing Sy. V. Academia, 198 SCRA 705)
Complaint filed by the disciplining authority need not be under oath: Section 46 of Book V of the Administrative
Code of 1987 provides that a complaint under oath is not necessary when the disciplining authority initiated the
administrative proceedings. Besides, the Supreme Court held that strict observance of technical rules of
procedure is not required in administrative cases as long as the elements of fairness are not ignored (Dadubo v.

Civil Service Commission, 223 CRA 747) cited in Bobadilla, Marcelo M. CSC Res. No. 973890 18 September
1997
Who may interpose an appeal? It is a well settled rule in administrative proceedings that only the party adversely
affected by the decision may interpose an appeal. Section 49, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 provides
that appeals, where allowable, shall be made by the party adversely affected by the decision within 15 days from
receipt thereof. The Supreme Court has interpreted the term party adversely affected as referring to the person
or the respondent employee against whom the administrative disciplinary case was filed. (CSC Res. No. 953698,
20 June 1995) cited in Cruel, Leonides B, CSC Res. No. 973952, 2 October 1997)
More weight is given to the reaction of the victim: The Commission held that:
1.
In sexual harassment cases, more weight is given to the reaction of the victim than to the intent of the
harasser.
2.
The defense raised that one of the complainants was prompted by ill-motives because she was admonished
for being late for work is weak and shallow reason to drive her to tell lies involving the college president
considering that doing so would make her vulnerable to public ridicule.
3.
The alleged loose morals of one of the complainants is not material to the case. What is necessary in a
sexual harassment case is the unwelcome sexual advances or other verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature
had been committed against the complainant. The good reputation of the victim is neither a qualification for nor a
prerequisite tot eh filing of a sexual harassment case.
4.
The argument that the third complainant should not be believed because she neither screamed nor
struggled against the assault must fail. A young woman in the threshold of womanhood, faced with the same
situation, can have varying reactions. Some may fight, others can be petrified and paralyzed with shock and
fear, considering that the attack came from an unexpected source. In the instant case, the person who harassed
the complainants was someone they respected and trusted, the president of the University. (Baking, Rodolfo CSC
Res. No. 980399 26 February 1998)
Effect of negative testimony of a witness for the defense: The negative testimony of a witness for the defense
does not deserve weight and credence against the positive testimonies of the victim and her witness who testified
in detail and in a straightforward manner. The Supreme Court held: In the first place, the testimony of appellant
consisted merely of denials without any other evidence to sustain his claim and defense. We have consistently
ruled that denials if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence are negative, self-serving evidence which
deserve no weight over the testimony of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters. As between the
positive declarations of the prosecution witness and the negative statements of an accused, the former deserve
more credence. (Bacsin, Dioscor F. CSC Res. No. 980521 11 March 1998)
Different reactions: The workings of the human mind when placed under emotional stress are unpredictable and
cause different reactions; that a rape victims actions are oftentimes ruled by fear rather than reason (People vs.
Ariel, 261 SCRA 339 (1996); People vs. Layagum, 262 SCRA 207 (1996); People vs. Galas, 262 SCRA 381)
1996)
Defense of denials: Denials, if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, are negative, self-serving
evidence and cannot prevail over the clear, categorical and positive statements of the complainant (People v.
Regallario, 220 SCRA 368). On the other hand, in order for an alibi to be given full faith and credit, it must be
clearly established and must not leave any room for doubt as to its plausibility and verity; otherwise, it cannot
prevail over the positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses who have no motive to testify falsely against the
accused. (People v. Fernandez, 206 SCAR 414). Respondent did not present evidence to show why
complainant and her witnesses would testify falsely against him. In the absence of such evidence, the logical
conclusion is that no improper motive existed (People v. Rendoque, 205 SCRA 783)
No struggle: That the girls did not shout, scream or effectively struggle against the assault or immediately tell
their parents did not diminish their credibility. The incidents happened where they were isolated or alone. Since
they are children, they were easily cowed and intimidated, and were naturally shy and embarrassed about matters
of sexuality. .. Being the District Supervisor, was someone they respected and trusted. The fact that he is a
public educator aggravates his actuations in violating minors over whom he has moral ascendancy and surrogate
parental authority. (Lazona, Efren A. CSC Res. No. 990835 16 April 1999; CSC Res. No. 992206 24 September
24, 1999)
Effect of withdrawal of complaint: Thus, a complaint for misconduct, malfeasance or misfeasance against a public
officer or employee cannot just be withdrawn at anytime by the complainant simply because he has lost interest in
the prosecution of the case. Where, as in the instant case, the charges are very serious and are supported by
sufficient evidence attached to the sworn complaint itself, and the complainant vigorously reiterates such charges
in his reply to the answer of the respondent, any withdrawal or dismissal thereof upon motion of complainant
would not only be suspect but would be inimical to public interest. If the charges are in fact true, the grant of a
motion to dismiss by complainant would hide the evil deed committed with the disciplinary authority being used
therefor. (Veniegas, romeo CSC Res. No 991134; 31 may 1999)

Complainants: in real sense, the complainants in such cases are just witnesses. (Sy v. Academia, 198 SCRA
705)
Motive to bring to justice the respondent: It was also emphasized that in crimes against chastity, it is hard to
believe that a young would publicly disclose that she had been raped or sexually abused, and hence undergo the
expense, trouble and inconvenience of a public investigation or trial, not to mention the scandal, embarrassment
and humiliation such action inevitably invites, as well as allow an examination of her private parts, if her motive
were not to bring to justice the person who had sexually abused her (People v. Robles , G.R. 53569, 2/25/89)
The testimony of the victim was given full faith and credence. According to the Commission, it would be highly
improbable for a girl of her age (in this case, 11 years old) to fabricate a charge so humiliating to herself and her
family had she not been truly subjected to the pain and harrowing experience of sexual abuse. (Perez, Luis CSC
Res. No. 991377 citing People v. Cabilan, 267 SCRA 259)
Alibi: The defense of alibi to be credible, he must not only prove his presence at another place at the time of the
commission of the offense, but he must also demonstrate that it would be physically impossible for him to be at
the scene of the offense at that particular time (People v. Alcantara, 254 SRA 384).
Investigation Committee: The Investigation Committee findings were only recommendatory and not binding. Its
function is expressly confined to the investigation of the case and the submission of its report and
recommendation. Under Section 4 (b) of Republic Act no. 7877, the Committee has no authority to dismiss a
case filed before it. (Bauyot, Marleonie CSC Res. No 992262 30 September 1999)
Respondent teacher: His act of embracing and kissing the complainant is clearly unbecoming of a public school
teacher because his position requires him not only to conduct himself properly but also to maintain a high degree
of moral uprightness in relation to his duty of molding the character of his students. Thus, any improper conduct
will seriously impair his moral ascendancy over his students. This cannot be treated lightly as this constitutes a
grave offense deserving the severest administrative penalty. (Nana, Luis Bernardo CSC Res. O 00-2481 October
27, 2000)
Separation from service: The Supreme Court ruled that sexual harassment is a valid cause for separation from
service, and that it is reprehensible enough but more so when inflicted by those with moral ascendancy over their
victims. (Delfin G. Villarama vs. National Labor Relations, commission and Golden donuts, Inc; G.R. no. 106341
2 September 1994)
Superior officer: The actuations of respondent were aggravated by the fact that the complainant was his
subordinate over whom he exercised control and supervision as executive judge. Instead of acting in loco
parentis over his subordinates, the respondent preyed on them, taking advantage of his position and power in
order to carry out his lustful and lascivious desires. . ( Jocelyn Talens-Dabon vs. Judge hermin E. Arceo A.M.
RTJ-961336 25 July 1996)
Constitutional provision on women: No less than the Constitution itself has expressly recognized the invaluable
contribution of women to national development, thus, the need to provide women with a working environment
conducive to productivity and befitting their dignity. The people have spoken, through Congress, to deem conduct
constituting sexual harassment as criminal. Thus, the Supreme Court, in disciplining erring judges and court
personnel, can do no less. (Sarah B. Vedana vs. Judge Eudario B. Valencia Adm. Mat No. RTJ-96-1351.
September 3, 1998.)
Due process: On the question of due process, the Court found that the requirements thereof were sufficiently
complied with. Due process as a constitutional precept does not always and in all situations require a trial type
proceeding. Due process is satisfied when a person is notified of the charge against him and given an opportunity
to explain or defend himself. The essence of due process is simply to be heard, or as applied to administrative
proceedings, an opportunity to explain ones side, or an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or
ruling complained of. (Carlos G. Libres vs. Naitonal Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 123737. May 28,
1999)
SH in the workplace: Sexual harassment in the workplace is not about a man taking advantage of a woman by
reason of sexual desire; it is about power being exercised by a superior officer over his woman subordinates. The
power emanates from the fact that the superior can remove the subordinate from his workplace if the latter would
refuse his amorous advances. (Yolanda Floralde, Nida Velasco and Normelita Alambra vs. CA, CSC and Paulino
Resma. G.r. No 123048, 8 august 2000)
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
GUIDELINES FOR INVESTIGATING SEXUAL HARASSMENT COMPLAINTS
I. Introduction
There are no uniform rules for investigating alleged sexual harassment. A complaint may be resolved informally
after speaking with the complaining party and the alleged harasser. It may be necessary to interview others and/or
to review documentary material. In all cases, sexual harassment complaints must be addressed. Upon receiving a
complaint of sexual harassment, the responsible administrator should confer with the Office of the General

Counsel and academic or human resources administrators. Where a matter entails alleged ongoing ill treatment,
the need for prompt action is indicated. In such an instance, the administrator should immediately contact the
Office of the General Counsel. In all cases, respect for the affected individuals' privacy and reputational interests
calls for discretion.
These investigation guidelines are intended as helpful suggestions.* Complaints of sexual harassment need not
be processed according to these guidelines, but the responsible administrator under the University's Policy on
Sexual Harassment must process every sexual harassment complaint that he or she receives. The Office of the
General Counsel welcomes any questions an administrator has regarding these guidelines or any complaint of
sexual harassment that the administrator receives.
* These guidelines are not intended to be used where a student is the alleged harasser, as proceedings under
those complaints are conducted under the document called Academic Freedom for Students at Michigan State
University.
II. Informal Resolution
Individuals who make complaints of sexual harassment sometimes request that the complaint be resolved
informally. It may be appropriate for the responsible administrator to honor this request, especially if the
administrator determines that the complaint involves unprofessional or other objectionable behavior, but not
sexual harassment. Administrators should be cautious about attempting to resolve complaints informally if the
complainant has not asked for such a resolution; the suggestion of an informal resolution may be perceived by the
complainant as pressure to drop or not pursue a sexual harassment complaint. There should be a brief record
(e.g., a memo to file) of an informal resolution of a complaint.
III. Investigations
A.) Investigative Overview
1.) Under the University's Policy on Sexual Harassment, the unit administrator of the alleged harasser (or, if the
alleged harasser is the unit administrator, the unit administrator's superior) has responsibility for processing
complaints of sexual harassment. This individual will generally conduct the investigation of the sexual harassment
complaint.
If you, as unit administrator, have any doubts about your ability to conduct an impartial investigation of a sexual
harassment complaint, please contact the Office of the General Counsel and personnel administrators in Human
Resources or the Office of the Provost, as appropriate, about having another person act in your stead.
2.) Administrative actions should be undertaken deliberately, but promptly.
a.) Review applicable University policies and procedures, especially the Policy on Sexual Harassment, and create
a confidential investigation file.
b.) Note, preliminarily, the apparent significant factual issues; prepare a list of likely witnesses and sources of
pertinent information, e.g., a list of records or documents that may shed light on the underlying situation.
c.) Confer with an Office of the General Counsel attorney, and with personnel administrators from Human
Resources or the Office of the Provost. The Women's Resource Center provides counseling services to victims
and professional expertise to administrators.
d.) Interview the parties and witnesses, and examine documentary evidence.
e.) Analyze all information and prepare a report that summarizes the evidence, states your factual findings and the
rationale for your findings, and states any proposed disciplinary or other personnel action to be taken.
B.) Anonymous or Third Party Complaints
If you receive an anonymous complaint, encourage the complainant to give his/her name. If you receive a
complaint from a person who is not the alleged victim of the alleged harassment, encourage the complainant to
get the alleged victim to come forward. It is difficult to investigate a complaint, draw conclusions about it, or
otherwise be helpful if you do not know who the complainant is or if the alleged victim will not confirm the charge.
Depending on the evidence provided and the severity of the alleged harassment, however, you may have to
investigate an anonymous or third party complaint. In that event, contact the Office of the General Counsel and
personnel administrators in Human Resources or the Office of the Provost, as appropriate, for assistance.
C.) Fact Gathering
1.) Interview the complainant. Determine whether the complainant is comfortable communicating with you. If
necessary, have a person who is of the same gender as the complainant either handle the interview or join you for
the discussion. Listen attentively. Encourage the complainant to say just what happened, then ask questions to
clarify or elicit additional information. Be supportive, but do not make judgmental statements. '
- Ask what happened. Due to feelings of embarrassment or shame, a complainant may be reticent or imprecise in
expression. You should seek specific information; use who, what, where, when, and how type questions.

- Ask how the victim was affected by what happened and what redress s/he wants. If the alleged harassment is
severe, such may indicate the need for immediate action.
- Ask for the names of persons with knowledge of matters related to the complaint, and of persons with whom
complainant has spoken about the matter.
- Ask for copies of any documents which may pertain to the reported event(s).
- Tell the complainant that you will investigate the matter. Explain other avenues, such as the ADJB procedure,
that may be available, and explain to the complainant that you will respect his/her privacy. Do not promise
absolute confidentiality. (You may be legally required to disclose information which the complainant would prefer
that you not disclose.)
- Take notes. Promptly prepare a memo summarizing the interview and have the complainant verify its accuracy. If
the complainant gives you a written statement, your interview notes will supplement the statement. Ask that the
complainant review your notes and specify, in writing, needed corrections as well as any omitted information.
-Be careful about what you write down, especially your personal observations. Your notes and memos could be
subpoenaed in a related legal proceeding.
2.) Identify the actual issues and prepare an investigative plan.
- Determine the identity of other witnesses and the order in which you propose to interview them.
- Determine what documents., if any, should be obtained.
- Notify the appropriate administrative superior of the matter, as appropriate.
- Set a schedule that provides for a prompt, but thorough, investigation.
3.) Interview the alleged harasser.
- Advise that an allegation of sexual harassment has come to your attention.
- Tell the alleged harasser that you are responsible for investigating the matter.
- State the allegations without making judgmental comments.
- It will almost always be necessary to identify the complainant to the alleged harasser at this time. If the
complainant has requested confidentiality and you believe that you can honor that request and still conduct a fair
and thorough investigation, contact the Office of the General Counsel before interviewing the alleged harasser.
- Ask the alleged harasser for his/her views regarding the complaint. Ask who, what, where, and how questions to
elicit specific details relevant to the events alleged by the complainant. (Let the alleged harasser tell the facts in
his or her own words.)
- Obtain names of witnesses and specification of documents that the alleged harasser thinks may be helpful to
your understanding.
- Advise the alleged harasser that the University prohibits retaliation of any kind. Tell the respondent to avoid
contact with the complainant, and that in all events he or she may not communicate with the complainant about
the subject of the complaint while the matter is under review.
- Take notes. Promptly prepare a memo summarizing the interview. Have the alleged harasser verify its accuracy,
in the same manner as with the complainant.
4.) Interview other witnesses.
- Advise the witness that you are conducting a confidential investigation into an allegation of sexual harassment
and that you understand that he or she may have some information. (If the witness can identify the complaining
party and alleged harasser, you will be able to avoid having to identify the parties.)
- Find out what the witness knows. Elicit details and seek relevant documents.
- Take notes. Promptly prepare a memo summarizing the interview and have the witness verify its accuracy.
Distinguish between what the person knows as a matter of firsthand knowledge and what he or she understands
from other sources.
5.) Review employee or student records.
- Has the complainant made similar complaints before? Have similar complaints been made against the alleged
harasser by anyone else?
6.) Maintain the confidentiality of the investigation.

- Do not discuss the complaint or the investigation with anyone who does not need to know about it for you to
carry out the investigation. Advise the complainant, the alleged harasser and the witnesses that keeping the
matter confidential will minimize the possibility of legal problems.
- If the investigation lasts longer than you have told the complainant and alleged harasser to expect, periodically
advise them of its status and when you expect it to be finished. Do not tell them what the investigation is revealing
or your thoughts about it, however. Remind them of the importance of confidentiality.
D.) Evaluating the Situation
1.) Review and analyze the evidence.
- Consider the existence or lack of corroborating evidence, as well as any other indicators that may be persuasive
to you in determining the factual truth. In situations involving alleged improper behavior in personal interactions it
commonly occurs that there are no disinterested witnesses. In such a case, consider whether the complainant told
anyone else of the harassment and/or whether anyone observed a change in behavior of either or both of the
parties. Sometimes there is a written record, such as a diary or correspondence.
- Assessing the credibility of the parties and witnesses calls for observing attitudes and behavior. A person's
emotional affect can be telling. The timing of the complaint in relation to the occurrence of the behavior may allow
for an inference about truthfulness. The reports of other persons in the work unit about the complainant's and the
alleged harasser's behavior may be highly informative.
2.) Determine whether sexual harassment has occurred
- Was the subject conduct sexual in nature? Was it unwanted or unwelcome? Was it offensive from the
perspective of a reasonable person? (A complainant need not expressly reject an advance in order for the
advance to be regarded as unwelcome.)
- Decide whether it is more likely than not that sexual harassment occurred or that it is not possible to decide the
matter. The latter conclusion is appropriate when the evidence that sexual harassment occurred and did not occur
is of equal weight and credibility.
3.) Determine what action should be taken to resolve the complaint and ensure that any harassment will end and
not reoccur. Both remedial action and disciplinary action may be necessary. Decisions regarding discipline should
be made in consultation with Human Resources or Academic Human Resources, and the Office of the General
Counsel, as appropriate.
- Depending upon the nature and seriousness of the allegations, and the results of the investigation, consider
written reprimands, required counseling, demotion to the non-supervisory duties, reassignment, suspension,
discharge, or other options.
- Transfers to other positions may be considered. Whether the complainant or harasser is to be transferred
requires close attention. Transferring the complainant may be construed as unlawful retaliation. Take into
consideration the complainant's desires.
E.) Preparation of a Report Disposing of Factual Issues and Stating Personnel Actions
- Prepare a written report, including a chronological rendition of the factual findings, the action to be taken, and
the rationale for any actions or proposed actions. The report should contain the following elements:
- a description of the complaint and the circumstances of your learning about it, to include when you first learned
of it;
- a summary of the interviews of all parties and witnesses and any documents reviewed;
- a conclusion as to whether sexual harassment occurred and a statement of the supporting rationale; and, a
statement of corrective actions or proposed actions to be taken, including disciplinary action.
- The Office of the General Counsel should review the report before you finalize it.
F.) Meet Separately with the Complainant and Alleged Harasser to Discuss the Report, and Provide a Copy of it to
the Appropriate Human Resources Office
1.) Notifying the complainant. The complainant should be told of the investigative findings, whether the allegations
have been substantiated, what action, if any, is being taken, and, if apropos, that the complainant should promptly
report any further incidents of harassment or possible retaliation.
2.) Notifying the alleged harasser. The alleged harasser should be advised as to the investigative results.
- Where the investigation reveals no harassment, such should be directly stated. Where it is determined that
sexual harassment did occur, the harasser should be provided a copy of the report and an opportunity to ask any
questions that he or she may have. Where the allegations are serious, but it is impossible to determine whether
sexual harassment occurred, the alleged harasser should be sent a memo stating that the evidence is

inconclusive, but that serious allegations have been made. The memo should iterate the substance of University
policy on sexual harassment and advise that such conduct is not tolerated by the University.
G.) Records
1.) Confidentiality of administrative file. The administrator's investigative papers should be kept in a confidential,
locked file, not in the affected employee's personnel file.
2.) Disciplinary records. Papers related to disciplinary actions should be placed in the affected employee's
personnel file in the same manner as any other disciplinary documents.
H.) Special Situations
Immediately contact the Office of the General Counsel and/or personnel administrators from Human Resources or
the Office of the Provost, as appropriate, for assistance if:
1.) you believe the complainant has knowingly filed a false complaint or that the complainant, the alleged
harasser, or a witness has knowingly misled you, provided false information or otherwise impeded your
investigation;
2.) the alleged harasser attempts to retaliate against the complainant or any witness;
3.) the confidentiality of the investigation is breached;
4.) the complainant says that she or he only wants to let you know about the harassment, but does not want you
to do anything about it (a request that you will probably not be able to honor);
5.) there is a proposed change during the investigation in the terms and conditions of the complainant's or alleged
harasser's employment or status in a course, program, or activity, including any temporary change;
6.) the complainant or the alleged harasser wants another person, especially a lawyer, present at your interview;
or
7.) there have been other sexual harassment complaints against the alleged harasser.