Does (or should) a private company’s “sexual harassment” division have jurisdiction in cases that arise outside the workplace, in this case in an establishment where people consume alcohol?
Unless the harassment happens within the confines of the office or a company sponsored event, there was no sexual harassment. The company cannot be held responsible for person's actions outside of the workplace (outside of BFOQ's, such as drug use or convictions), nor can it police relationships outside of the office.Aevans176
Frankly, the sexual harassment cannot apply to external work relationships, as dating in the workplace, etc could cause sincere ramifications. What if Girl X dates Guy Y, and the relationship goes south. Then Guy Y calls Girl X numerous times after work hours and discusses sexually related issues? She could tell him that she doesn't want him calling, but the company could not legally get involved unless it interferes with their productivity/performance.
Even as this incident shows poor judgement and bad taste, the company could be in sincere financial trouble if it intervenes.
The only times that the company could intervene is if :
1. The man said "if you tell me your bra size, I'll give you Friday off" (quid pro quo)
2. The offense happened at a work related event or either person were on company time.
3. The conversation proceeded to be carried out within the confines of the workplace.
I'm sorry suit happy/politically correct Americans, but there would never be a labor lawyer that would touch this with a ten-foot pole. Being a member of a management team for an international company, I might venture to mention it to the gentleman and ask that nothing of this nature happen on company time... but what's next??? We cannot police after 5:00pm....
thanks for your well thought out opinion. When I was teaching school I always hated any attempt of school administrators to interfere with the private lives of teachers. The first school district I worked in wanted employees to live in the district. When I balked at this, an assistant superintendent told me I should “shop and attend church"
in the community where I worked. There was always the implied idea that teachers were to be held to a higher standard than others. So, while the question here is specific to sexual harassment, the ramifications go beyond to the general question of businesses policing off-duty behavior of employees. You answered quite well.
QUOTE(lordhelmet @ Jun 13 2005, 01:31 PM)
Well, that depends. Lordhelmet
What counts for sexual harassment these days depends on who is involved in the alleged offense.
If it's a straight man being rude to a woman, it's almost always sexual harassment. If the man happens to be a republican, then this is a felony on top of improper behavior.
If it's a woman being rude to a man, the man just can't handle a "strong woman".
If it's a gay man being rude to a straight man, then the hetero man is a "homophobe".
And if it's a president having sex on the job with an unpaid intern and rewarding her with 6 figure government job offers, and therefore creating a "hostile work environment" for the other female interns who don't put out..... it's a private matter, a vast right wing conspiracy, and certainly not a matter to justify any sexual harassment charges.
I appreciate your participation, but I intentionally drew up this question to address the specific matter of whether businesses have jurisdiction in cases of off-duty employee behavior. Aevans176
gave a thoughtful answer, but you went into a diatribe that can only be driven by what I describe as “pity the poor white angry male syndrome” without really addressing the question.