This statute proscribes a range of actions which constitute Sexual Harassment, encompassing:. The statute confers upon the employer the following duties: a to ensure a workplace devoid of sexual harassment, b to apprise employees of the prohibition of sexual harassment, and c to effectively address instances of harassment. In pursuance of these responsibilities, the statute mandates employers to undertake the following actions:. An employer who fulfils all the stipulated legal obligations is absolved of legal liability for the occurrence of a sexual harassment perpetrated by an employee.
This approach is designed to motivate employers to promptly address complaints of sexual harassment, thus potentially protecting them from legal repercussions. Employers must clearly demonstrate that they have taken all requisite measures to prevent sexual harassment within the workplace.
Non-compliance with the aforementioned requirements exposes employers to potential civil lawsuits brought by aggrieved employees, in addition to the risk of fines and criminal charges brought by labour law enforcement agencies. The actions and investigations carried out by the designated supervisor are subject to meticulous scrutiny by the courts. Inadequate handling of investigations of sexual harassment may expose the employer to litigation and legal proceedings and allegations of violating the law and promoting such inappropriate conduct of sexual harassment.
The handling of investigations into sexual harassment claims by the supervisor must be undertaken with sensitivity, efficiency, and due respect for the dignity and privacy of all parties involved. Comprehensive documentation, including investigation protocols and witness testimonies must be generated by the supervisor.
Should supporting or refuting evidence be available, such as recordings, messages, security camera footage, or employee statements, swift collection and preservation are imperative to avert evidence loss. In certain instances, entrusting the investigation to an external expert, such as a former judge, may be advisable to ensure impartiality. Given that sexual harassment claims may prompt police investigations as criminal proceedings, and owing to the sensitive nature of such cases, the labour court will scrutinise investigations and evidence, demanding irrefutable proof prior to adjudicating claims of sexual harassment.
