Ignore Sexual Harassment? I Adamantly Disagree
May 17th, 2007 | Posted by in Business Ethics | Corporate Governance | Corporate Social ResponsibilityWow! It appears that several decades of progress in workplace atmosphere, sexual harassment policies and general decency just disappeared. Check out the following snippet from an interview Guy Kawasaki conducted with Penolope Trunk [clarification mine]:
“Question [Kawasaki]: Should I sue a boss who is sexually harassing me?
“Answer [Trunk]: In most cases, you will destroy your career if you report sexual harassment. So unless you are in physical danger, you should not report harassment. The laws governing sexual harassment don’t protect women who report. The law protects companies from being sued by the women who report. Human resource professionals are trained to protect the company, not the woman who reports.
“When you report harassment it is usually the case that you lose your job through retaliation. Retaliation is illegal but nearly impossible to prove in court. And, even if you could prove it in court, you would go through emotional hell, with no salary, and high-profile drama that makes you unable to get another job. All this for a settlement that will almost certainly not enable you to retire.
“This is simply how the legal system works. I am not saying this is okay. But I’m saying that if you care about your career, you’ll do everything possible to not report. Most women are not in the position to sacrifice their career—and their earning power—in the name of trying to bring down one harasser. The legal system needs to step in and take care of this.”
Let’s see here… No, no, no and NO! The above is absolutely terrible advice. If you are sexually harassed, report it — end of story.
I could pontificate for pages on why this is such bad advice and so completely off base, but I guess I feel as if the reasons are self-evident. Quite frankly, I find it baffling that the above mentality even exists today, let alone is verbalized. I think the only statement above that has value is the closing one — indeed, the “legal system [does need] to take care of this.”
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 Both comments and pings are currently closed.







