Is This Sexual Harassment ?

[hatelilpeepees]

Found this in a google search, similar, but not the same ...........

http://www.icemiller.com/enewsletter/InformedEmployerBriefing/PornSexualDiscriminationinWorkPlace.htm

[mobey]

They got terminated as it was a pattern of use.

That is the key to firing employees.

You have to show a pattern OR as I said above, set a clear "standard" or policy such as *Viewing porn in a public forum such as an ambulance or station shall be considered sexual harrassement of ones co-workers and the offender shall be dismissed*

The employer dictates what constitutes sexual harrassment in the workplace. Yes... there are federal laws that protect people in extreme cases (ass slapping), but an employer can place more stringent boundries if they choose too.

In Canada that is how you avoid wrongful dismissal hearings.

[hatelilpeepees]

Talked with a corporate HR relative of mine who kind of backed-up what Herbie and Pmdcmike said. She states that she would have terminated also, reason being is that there is "tangible proof" that something happened. In her company's opinion (non EMS)it is safer to gamble with a wrongful termination suit than it is to do "too little" when the complainant has "proof". If it is he said/she said with no witnesses or proof then they tend to do a counseling that ends in the language of any further similar occurences will result in immediate termination. But if there is proof, you are gone, and it is the same rule for racial, age, religous discrimination and/or violence in the workplace.

Anyone have a different view ? Guess I have been around fire stations too long to see the harassment.

[Vorenus]

On another note:

There is an ad at the sidebar of the City that shows asian girls in obvious poses (though clothed) - would it be dangerous to visit the City as well?

I know it`s a bit provocative, but I just wanna point out, that I think, some of the cases that are construed to be/considered sexual harassment are a bit overstretched, don`t you think?

On a more serious note:

I just want to clarify that I don`t make any fun of these ads. I thinks it`s a shame how those girls are exploited and in what way there`s an advantage taken of their often poor background.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Vorenus

[hatelilpeepees]

I agree with you, as we all know people who walk around looking for reasons to be "offended" every day. I think lumping in everything that is offensive as "Harassment" is a bit of a stretch, especially on a first offense. If that is the case, I have already been harassed twice today and it is barely past lunch time.

[Just Plain Ruff]

Anyone can claim sexual harassment, anyone can claim racism, anyone can claim hostile work environment as those are three of the most feared claims a HR or administrative management person can hear.

It's sometimes easier to fire the person involved than to really do the due diligence in finding out what really went on. I call it the knee jerk reaction that these types of claims or lawsuits have made our companies rely on.

[paramedicmike]

The key to this case, though, is opening up the computer and finding porn up on the screen. That negates the she said-he said argument. The legally mandated investigation that would follow this provider filing her complaint would be pretty quick as the evidence is right there. It's really hard to argue against that.

Otherwise, AK has a valid point. When there is a lack of direct evidence it falls back to a pattern of behaviour that needs to be established.

At every place I've ever worked, both EMS and non-EMS, the procedure has been the same:

If a complaint is filed an investigation *must* take place. This is mandated by law.

Lacking any direct evidence the complainant must have at least taken steps on his/her own to stop the offending behaviour (e.g. telling the offending person to knock it off). The behaviour must have persisted despite direct interpersonal efforts to stop it.

If the investigation reveals enough evidence (eyewitnesses etc...) then the disciplinary process begins. Every place I've worked for has said that discipline includes anything up to termination. In practice the offending person was fired. There was no practical alternative.

I agree that many people just need to grow some thicker skin. At the same time, many people just need to stop being such bumbling morons. (Porn? At work? On the company owned computer and network? Seriously?) And as HLP noted I think you'll be hard pressed to find any HR professional argue in this case that the guys in question shouldn't have been fired.

[DwayneEMTP]

Yeah, I'm with those that are saying no harassment.

The one caveat that I do see is that if she would normally follow him at work, and she was known to be prudish, and he had reason to believe that she would use the computer next, and particularly if he's known to be a pig, it would be really hard to defend against, "I think he did it on purpose."

Having said that, I've broken the rules many times by coming to the City after hitting the OK button on the "You know that this computer is for work only, right?" message, or whatever it says. I'm sure that some of those times I looked in the humor forum, and it would be conceivable that I might forget and leave it open. Should the next chick that comes along find offensive material, should I then be fired for that? Nah, I don't think so.

Probably I should be fired for not following the policies regarding company computer use, but some people need to sack up a bit. As long as we keep screaming 'rape' every time someone is forced to survive a minimal moment of uncomfortableness the problem is just going to keep getting worse.

Assuming it was legal porn I would probably have handled this the same way I would any other bonehead move. "Hey, hotshot. You left your ugly shit on my computer. No blood, no foul this time, but you know the rules. Next time I'm gonna burn you down, ok? Just so you know."

At which time he would run to HR, claim that I called him names and threatened to set him on fire, causing the company to give him a medal and I would get fired...just sayin'...welcome to my politically incorrect life... :-)

Someone doesn't have to be damaged each time that someone else is offended. That's all I'm sayin'...well, that and I don't think it's harassment.

Dwayne

[Just Plain Ruff]

Since when did we go from solving arguments on the playground with a hefty strike to the jaw and go to "I'm telling on you and taking your ass to court for making me uncomfortable"

We have to stop taking ourselves so serious and note that not all "offenses" require court intervention or one of the persons being fired.

Just go outside the building, down the alley and commence to beating the hell out of each other and then get up and shake hands and get back to work.

If more people solved their problems man to man or woman to woman, life would be a better place and one less filled with "you hurt my feelings so I'm gonna sue you and get you fired"

[mobey]

Since when did we go from solving arguments on the playground with a hefty strike to the jaw and go to "I'm telling on you and taking your ass to court for making me uncomfortable"

We have to stop taking ourselves so serious and note that not all "offenses" require court intervention or one of the persons being fired.

Just go outside the building, down the alley and commence to beating the hell out of each other and then get up and shake hands and get back to work.

If more people solved their problems man to man or woman to woman, life would be a better place and one less filled with "you hurt my feelings so I'm gonna sue you and get you fired"

I believe it is called culture and civilization.

As a 140lb man.... I prefer it this way!

The theory I support though... Not every little matter has to go to court. Although I suspect that is more the "American way" than a global issue. But physical altercations to prove a point or settle a difference is caveman culture.