SexualHarassment, Assault Response, and Prevention
Sexualharassment is any form of discrimination that leads to violation ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Such Title applies to anemployer with more than 20 employees, including the national andlocal governments. Title VII is also applied to the federalgovernment, to employment agencies, and to the labor organizations.
SexualHarassment, Assault Response, and Prevention
Mostpeople think that sexual harassment involves the sexual activitiesbetween the people either of the same sex or different. Little dothey know that even unwelcoming sexual advances, people requestingfor sexual favors, and other physical or verbal done in a sexualnature enmasselead to sexual harassment. Such conduct can affect a person’semployment, irrationally interferes with the performance of a person,or creates a hostile, intimidating, and offensive environment atwork. With a little contradiction of the term “sexual harassment,”people think that it involves sexual actions perhaps between peopleof different sex. In sexual harassment, the harasser, as well as thevictim, can be a man or a woman. The victim should not necessarily beof the opposite sex. This essay focuses the steps followed whenhandling the sexual harassment case, the agencies that the sexuallyharassed people should run to and why they should run to such agencyor program (Simon,2006).
PFCNolan did not want to engage in sexual activities with SPC Andrewseven if she liked him. Although SPC Andrews wanted to have sex withher due to his several attempts to touch her genital but PFC Nolandeclined, it can be considered a sexual harassment case since therewas no any agreement between both parties. It is unequivocal thatAndrews did not force Nolan to go back to the barrack rooms, but thatdid not mean that she wanted to have sex with him. Moreover, Andrewsgoes ahead to intoxicate Nolan with liquor so that she can be looseenough to stop declining Andrew’s plea. However, because the victimis not sure whether she had sex with the harasser or not, it can be acritical case since Andrew also does not clearly divulge the story tothe leader. Because of this, there are some steps that a leader issupposed to take, when reported such a case, to find the truth-valuesof the claims from both sides (Khan,& Friedrich Ebert Foundation, 2004).
Theleader should not jump into an irrational conclusion of reporting thecase to the Sexual Harassment, Assault, Response, and Prevention(SHARP) consultant. Instead, the leader should face PFCNolan immediately and ask her what exactly happened during thatnight. Now that the leader has some facts about PFC Nolan’s case,he or she can go to SHARP and solicit for the guidelines of handlingsuch case without divulging the PFC Nolan’s situation to the SHARPrepresentative. After understanding what to do, the leader should goback to PFC Nolan and ask her what she wants to do with thesituation. Due to that, the leader should make sure that he or shehas briefed both parties, PFC Nolan and SPC Andrews several times. IfSPC Andrews is unable to give more information about what happened,then the leader should realize that he wants to say no. The leadershould advise PFC Nolan that if she has any doubt of what SPC Andrewdid to her or she understands that such a thing was against her will,then she should file an informal complaint. The leader should alsodoubt that when SPC Andrews saw that PFC Nolan was unstable, hethought that she would not be able to object sex. Perhaps, such athing led to the sexual harassment (Kitzinge& Thomas, 2007).
Theoutcome of this case may lead to SPC Andrew being taken to UniformCode Military Justice (UCMJ) and probably court-martialed. SPCAndrew’s job will come to an end and will look for any other job ifhe could because he thought that it was not a bad idea of escortingPFC Nolan to her room and in the end demand more than what sheanticipate. Another outcome is that PFC Nolan should be removed fromthe current battalion as SPC Andrew faces UCMJ. Such a step isrational because PFC Nolan would not work effectively in the presenceof her perpetrator. By taking PFC Nolan from the initial unit wouldnot only separate her from her perpetrator, but also from those whofeel that SPC Andrew was innocent. In both cases, someone has to beheld responsible for what took place because such behavior is againstthe Army Values (AV).
Theleader should handle this case in a similar way if the victim and theharasser were of the same sex because sexual harassment has the samemagnitude regardless of the gender. If such a situation turns out tobe a rumor, the leader should involve another person to scrutinizethe situation to formulate evidence that is beyond the reasonabledoubt. The AR 600-20 (Army Command Policy) prescribes the duties andpolicies of command, which include the military discipline and theArmy Sexual Victim Program, such as SHC. The leader should collectthe facts about the harassment case and forward it to the Commanderin written form (ArmyRegulation 600-20, 2016)
Sexualharassment has been experienced on many occasions in the contemporaryworld. It involves the violation of violation of Title VII of theCivil Rights Act of 1964. Sexual harassment is prevalent at workduring the recruitment exercise where the employees request for asexual favor. Sexual harassment can also involve people from the samegender. When a leader is been reported the sexual harassment case, heor she should guide the victims through the organizational policiesregarding such harassment. The same thing should be done when thesituation involves people from the same gender.
Khan,N., & Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Harare. (2004).Sexualharassment [sic] at the workplace: Report.Harare, Zimbabwe?: Training Institution.
Kitzinger,C., & Thomas, A. M. (2007). Sexualharassment: Contemporary feminist perspectives.Buckingham [u.a.: Open University Press.
ArmyRegulation 600-20, Army Command Policy, Chapter 8, Sexual AssaultPrevention and
ResponseProgram retrieved on April 2016 from