Sexual Harrassment at work - LONG

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. You could ask HR to give a mandatory EEOC compliance training refresher to all employees.

2. You should have informed this employee before she told you, that you would be obligated to report it.

3. Let the employee know you will be reporting it to HR yourself, and invite her to attend the HR meeting with you. Let her report it to HR herself.

4. Ask HR what their official policy is in regard to you obligated to either report the harassment, or keep the employee's confidence.

Thanks PP these are good ideas and basically cover what has happened since I first posted.

I will be in this other office next month so I was advised to have a casual chat with the other female employees on my team. Just something general to remind them where they can get help with issues.
An HR colleague of mine is also going to this office next month and he said he would do some sort of refresher for the entire office (it is a very large office)

I did let her know that if I am obligated to (oddly the obligation is still under discussion even with HR and the ombuds), I will report. and even if I am not obligated I will likely report it anyway. I am waiting for my meeting with ethics today to receive more advice as suggested by the ombuds.

Thanks for all the comments/advice PPs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This could also be a case of someone else in the office witnessing the harassment and reporting "favoritism." It could appear that the employee was okay with the harassment, since she doesn't officially report to the man, and she did volunteerily add him to her What's APP. How many younger women want the attention of the older men in the office, to get a promotion or better job opportunity? Maybe she is sneaky and is playing you both for a fool.

Do you think these young women in Washington, D.C. are really so young and naive? Puhleeese!

My HR colleagues did ask me if this was a possibility. I really don't think so. She'd have to be a very good actress. There are much higher people on the food chain than this guy. It would be a poor choice if this was all an act.

I do believe her but I understand why my colleagues in HR had to ask and why this PP maybe suspicious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Employment lawyer here.

You have an affirmative obligation to act on this information regardless of what the victim says or does on her own behalf. Now that your company management has this information, your company must take steps to ensure that there is an investigation of the alleged harasser's conduct and possible victimization of any and all other victims. You must tell this person in no uncertain terms that his conduct is unacceptable and it must stop. You must discipline him appropriately.

You must act on the information you possess. Your company's liability begins NOW.

+1. You must act. If this results in repurcussions for her career, too bad for her and your company sucks, but you need to be wearing your company hat and quick. In my company, you'd be dismissed before the harasser would.

If it's the policy then I could maybe see OP being dismissed along with the harasser but before? Really?

OP's dithering about what to do puts her company at more risk of liability than the harasser's behavior.

OP here. Thanks. I would not say I was dithering. I was hoping to hear from DCUM but I was also making calls on this end as well.
As noted I made an appointment our ombudsman the same day, unfortunately we were told they would not see us until 5/4. Yesterday I met with a colleague in HR who was able to get us an appointment that afternoon.

I will report it to the office of ethics today but I may not be required to share the names. I wanted to share the names upfront but was told to listen to what the ethics office has to say before I mention names.
Also they tell me that if the woman chooses not to participate it will likely not result in an investigation.

As mentioned this is not an American company so our policies are different than what you would find in many American companies.

Are you located in the US? You are subject to US law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Employment lawyer here.

You have an affirmative obligation to act on this information regardless of what the victim says or does on her own behalf. Now that your company management has this information, your company must take steps to ensure that there is an investigation of the alleged harasser's conduct and possible victimization of any and all other victims. You must tell this person in no uncertain terms that his conduct is unacceptable and it must stop. You must discipline him appropriately.

You must act on the information you possess. Your company's liability begins NOW.

+1. You must act. If this results in repurcussions for her career, too bad for her and your company sucks, but you need to be wearing your company hat and quick. In my company, you'd be dismissed before the harasser would.

If it's the policy then I could maybe see OP being dismissed along with the harasser but before? Really?

OP's dithering about what to do puts her company at more risk of liability than the harasser's behavior.

OP here. Thanks. I would not say I was dithering. I was hoping to hear from DCUM but I was also making calls on this end as well.
As noted I made an appointment our ombudsman the same day, unfortunately we were told they would not see us until 5/4. Yesterday I met with a colleague in HR who was able to get us an appointment that afternoon.

I will report it to the office of ethics today but I may not be required to share the names. I wanted to share the names upfront but was told to listen to what the ethics office has to say before I mention names.
Also they tell me that if the woman chooses not to participate it will likely not result in an investigation.

As mentioned this is not an American company so our policies are different than what you would find in many American companies.

Are you located in the US? You are subject to US law.

We are not under the jurisdiction of US courts but that doesn't mean it does not need to be reported. I have officially done so w/o names today, and the woman will meet with them and share the names tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Employment lawyer here.

You have an affirmative obligation to act on this information regardless of what the victim says or does on her own behalf. Now that your company management has this information, your company must take steps to ensure that there is an investigation of the alleged harasser's conduct and possible victimization of any and all other victims. You must tell this person in no uncertain terms that his conduct is unacceptable and it must stop. You must discipline him appropriately.

You must act on the information you possess. Your company's liability begins NOW.

+1. You must act. If this results in repurcussions for her career, too bad for her and your company sucks, but you need to be wearing your company hat and quick. In my company, you'd be dismissed before the harasser would.

If it's the policy then I could maybe see OP being dismissed along with the harasser but before? Really?

OP's dithering about what to do puts her company at more risk of liability than the harasser's behavior.

What are you-an embassy? A foreign company here in the US is subject to US law and US courts.

OP here. Thanks. I would not say I was dithering. I was hoping to hear from DCUM but I was also making calls on this end as well.
As noted I made an appointment our ombudsman the same day, unfortunately we were told they would not see us until 5/4. Yesterday I met with a colleague in HR who was able to get us an appointment that afternoon.

I will report it to the office of ethics today but I may not be required to share the names. I wanted to share the names upfront but was told to listen to what the ethics office has to say before I mention names.
Also they tell me that if the woman chooses not to participate it will likely not result in an investigation.

As mentioned this is not an American company so our policies are different than what you would find in many American companies.

Are you located in the US? You are subject to US law.

We are not under the jurisdiction of US courts but that doesn't mean it does not need to be reported. I have officially done so w/o names today, and the woman will meet with them and share the names tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Something similar happened to one of my DH's employees and the victim pleaded with him not to tell HR, but he had to. She was really upset with him. However, she got over it, when the guy started social media stalking her and sending her emails under a fake email address. The abuser eventually was let go and stopped contacting my DH's employee but things got real nasty with him fast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Employment lawyer here.

You have an affirmative obligation to act on this information regardless of what the victim says or does on her own behalf. Now that your company management has this information, your company must take steps to ensure that there is an investigation of the alleged harasser's conduct and possible victimization of any and all other victims. You must tell this person in no uncertain terms that his conduct is unacceptable and it must stop. You must discipline him appropriately.

You must act on the information you possess. Your company's liability begins NOW.

+1. You must act. If this results in repurcussions for her career, too bad for her and your company sucks, but you need to be wearing your company hat and quick. In my company, you'd be dismissed before the harasser would.

If it's the policy then I could maybe see OP being dismissed along with the harasser but before? Really?

OP's dithering about what to do puts her company at more risk of liability than the harasser's behavior.

OP here. Thanks. I would not say I was dithering. I was hoping to hear from DCUM but I was also making calls on this end as well.
As noted I made an appointment our ombudsman the same day, unfortunately we were told they would not see us until 5/4. Yesterday I met with a colleague in HR who was able to get us an appointment that afternoon.

I will report it to the office of ethics today but I may not be required to share the names. I wanted to share the names upfront but was told to listen to what the ethics office has to say before I mention names.
Also they tell me that if the woman chooses not to participate it will likely not result in an investigation.

As mentioned this is not an American company so our policies are different than what you would find in many American companies.

Are you located in the US? You are subject to US law.

We are not under the jurisdiction of US courts but that doesn't mean it does not need to be reported. I have officially done so w/o names today, and the woman will meet with them and share the names tomorrow.

You have a US office but you are not under the jurisdiction of the US courts? OP, I would check and doublecheck that. It makes no sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Employment lawyer here.

You have an affirmative obligation to act on this information regardless of what the victim says or does on her own behalf. Now that your company management has this information, your company must take steps to ensure that there is an investigation of the alleged harasser's conduct and possible victimization of any and all other victims. You must tell this person in no uncertain terms that his conduct is unacceptable and it must stop. You must discipline him appropriately.

You must act on the information you possess. Your company's liability begins NOW.

+1. You must act. If this results in repurcussions for her career, too bad for her and your company sucks, but you need to be wearing your company hat and quick. In my company, you'd be dismissed before the harasser would.

If it's the policy then I could maybe see OP being dismissed along with the harasser but before? Really?

OP's dithering about what to do puts her company at more risk of liability than the harasser's behavior.

OP here. Thanks. I would not say I was dithering. I was hoping to hear from DCUM but I was also making calls on this end as well.
As noted I made an appointment our ombudsman the same day, unfortunately we were told they would not see us until 5/4. Yesterday I met with a colleague in HR who was able to get us an appointment that afternoon.

I will report it to the office of ethics today but I may not be required to share the names. I wanted to share the names upfront but was told to listen to what the ethics office has to say before I mention names.
Also they tell me that if the woman chooses not to participate it will likely not result in an investigation.

As mentioned this is not an American company so our policies are different than what you would find in many American companies.

Are you located in the US? You are subject to US law.

We are not under the jurisdiction of US courts but that doesn't mean it does not need to be reported. I have officially done so w/o names today, and the woman will meet with them and share the names tomorrow.

You have a US office but you are not under the jurisdiction of the US courts? OP, I would check and doublecheck that. It makes no sense to me.

It sounds like the World Bank, IMF, or an Embassay.

[Anonymous]

You have a US office but you are not under the jurisdiction of the US courts? OP, I would check and doublecheck that. It makes no sense to me.

It sounds like the World Bank, IMF, or an Embassay.


But OP uses the word "company" repeatedly in her posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


You have a US office but you are not under the jurisdiction of the US courts? OP, I would check and doublecheck that. It makes no sense to me.

It sounds like the World Bank, IMF, or an Embassay.


But OP uses the word "company" repeatedly in her posts.

Could be an easier way to refer to her organization, could be she's changing facts to prevent anyone from id'ing her, etc.

[Anonymous]

World bank and IMF have been sued before for this kind of stuff. And if this is an embassy, if this ended in an actual assault (which seems possible) that would appear to be a political liability.

This guy sounds like a classic serial harasser. Report him by name - it is the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's no good feedback/advice. Exposing harassment always causes problems for the victim. If she doesn't want to go to HR, and it seems she doesn't, then there isn't much you can do. It's almost always easier to just find a new job than battle a harasser on their own turf.

Which is how these guys get away with it year after year...Want to know why women make less than men?Situations like this — where the woman gives up what might be a very good job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no good feedback/advice. Exposing harassment always causes problems for the victim. If she doesn't want to go to HR, and it seems she doesn't, then there isn't much you can do. It's almost always easier to just find a new job than battle a harasser on their own turf.

Which is how these guys get away with it year after year...Want to know why women make less than men?Situations like this — where the woman gives up what might be a very good job.

Why did you revive a three year old post?

[Anonymous]

If I was your company’s lawyer I would be enraged that you did not report this up the chain.