RIGHTS OF MEN AGAINST SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT WORKPLACE IN INDIA: A CALL FOR GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS BY - AMIT D NAMDER
RIGHTS
OF MEN AGAINST SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT WORKPLACE IN INDIA: A CALL FOR
GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS
AUTHORED BY - AMIT D NAMDER
LLM, School of Law,
Christ (Deemed to be) University,
Bangalore, India
ABSTRACT
Workplace sexual harassment laws in
India primarily focus on protecting women, as reflected in the Sexual
Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act,
2013 (POSH Act). However, the absence of gender-neutral provisions raises
concerns regarding the rights of men who may face harassment at the workplace.
This research paper critically examines the legal gap in addressing male
victims of workplace sexual harassment in India. It explores judicial
interpretations, case studies, and international best practices to highlight
the need for inclusive legislation. Additionally, the study discusses the
sociocultural barriers that discourage men from reporting harassment, including
stigma and fear of ridicule. By analyzing global legal frameworks and proposing
policy reforms, this paper advocates for gender-neutral workplace harassment
laws to ensure equal protection for all employees, irrespective of gender.
Keywords – POSH Act, Men’s Rights, Gender Equality, Gender
Neutral, Sexual Harassment, workplace.
INTRODUCTION
Sexual harassment in the workplace is
a serious problem that affects people of both genders and is a problem that has
to be addressed. On the other hand, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace
(Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) in India is a
prime example of how the legislative measures that address harassment in the
workplace primarily concentrate on safeguarding women. However, this
legislation does not provide equivalent rights to males, leaving them
vulnerable and without appropriate redressal methods. While this legislation
has been crucial in protecting women, it does not offer similar protections to
men. This study paper takes a critical look at the legal gap that exists with
regard to male victims of workplace harassment, as well as the cultural stigmas
that are connected with reporting such cases, court interpretations, and
worldwide best practices. Over the course of its findings, the research finally
recommends for a legislative framework that is gender-neutral and guarantees
equal protection for all employees, regardless of their gender.
Legal Gap
in the POSH Act, 2013
The POSH Act 2013 was enacted to
prevent and redress sexual harassment against women at the workplace. The Act
defines sexual harassment and mandates the establishment of Internal Complaints
Committees (ICCs) within organizations to address complaints. However, its
gender-specific language excludes men and individuals of other gender
identities from its protection. Consequently, male victims must seek recourse
under other laws, which may not be tailored to address workplace harassment
effectively.
Alternative
Legal Recourse for Men
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),
2023, which replaces the Indian Penal Code (IPC), introduces new provisions
that male victims of workplace sexual harassment can utilize. Section 69 (formerly IPC Section 354A)
criminalizes unsolicited sexual approaches, demands for sexual favors, and
sexually tinged remarks; its phrasing remains female-centric, thereby creating
uncertainty on its applicability to male victims. Relevant in circumstances when a male
employee suffers physical sexual assault at work, Section 75—previously IPC
Section 377—protects males as well as others against non-consensual sexual
actions. Previously IPC Section 509,
Section 82 addresses words, gestures, or acts meant to offend modesty, which
might be taken to encompass male victims of verbal and nonverbal harassment. Section 105 also covers criminal
intimidation, insult, and annoyance, hence relevant in situations of
psychological harassment at the job.
Beyond the BNS, 2023 the Indian
Constitution offers basic liberties that male victims of workplace harassment
could exercise. Article 14 (Right to
Equality) guarantees legal challengeability of any discriminating treatment or
neglect to shield male employees from harassment. Should company regulations exclude males from
sexual harassment protections, Article 15 (Prohibition of Discrimination) can
be used. Moreover, Article 21 (Right to
Life and Dignity) preserves a person's right to mental health and dignity.
Hence, workplace harassment violates the constitution.
Some IPC clauses still find reference
in incidents of workplace harassment even after the switch to the BNS in 2023. Section 503 guards against criminal
intimidation, therefore shielding male workers from compulsion in the
workplace. Section 506 guarantees
judicial action for harassment-induced fear or anxiety by punishing threats
compromising an individual's safety and dignity. Furthermore, sections 499 and 500 on slander
give men a defense against unfounded charges meant to tarnish their
professional standing. Although these
clauses provide some legal remedies, India still lacks a specific
gender-neutral workplace harassment law, which calls for legal changes to give
equal protection to all employees—regardless of gender.
Judicial
Interpretations and Case Studies
While judicial precedents concerning
male victims of workplace sexual harassment are scarce in India, some cases
have highlighted the urgent need for legal reform.
Vijay Nair
Case 2017
Former Only Much Louder (OML)
entertainment and event management firm CEO Vijay Nair was accused of sexual
assault in 2017. These claims surfaced
during the larger #MeToo movement in India, which revealed workplace harassment
in many other fields, including the entertainment business. Nair co-founded OML, which grew well-known
for planning big events such as the NH7 Weekender music festival. Under his direction, OML was instrumental in
forming India's independent comedy and music sectors. He resigned as CEO in 2017, though, and more
claims of sexual misbehaviour against him and other top OML executives surfaced
the next year.
The charges directed against Nair
included instances of improper behaviour and power abuse. Several former staff members and acquaintances
reported a workplace where such behaviour was unnoticed or not given enough
attention. The claims belonged to a
bigger exposé stressing the frequency of sexual harassment in the workplace,
especially in the entertainment business.
OML confirmed prior events but underlined that Nair had already departed
the business six months before the exposé was released. The business also said that throughout his
term as CEO, no official accusations were levelled against him. Notwithstanding this, the disclosures
resulted in notable criticism; some musicians withdrew from OML-sponsored gigs,
including the NH7 Weekender, in protest.
The case clarifies numerous important
problems. First of all, it draws
attention to the possible abuse of authority in powerful companies, therefore
allowing misbehaviour to go unpacked.
Second, it emphasizes the need for organizational responsibility and
businesses to have strong systems to handle harassment accusations to guarantee
a safe and open workplace. Finally, it
shows the effect of public movements such as #MeToo, which elevated victim
voices and exposed institutional problems.
All things considered, the accusations against
Vijay Nair signalled a sea change in the Indian entertainment business and
spurred more general conversations on employee welfare, corporate ethics, and
the need for clear, legally enforced rules against harassment. The lawsuit was a wake-up call, pushing
businesses to create a more inclusive and safer workplace early.
Workplace
Complaints
While some organizations have
attempted to handle such complaints internally, the absence of a statutory
framework leaves men vulnerable to workplace bias and dismissal of their
grievances.
India Inc. is gradually recognizing
that women are not the only victims of workplace harassment. While legal
provisions in India currently do not mandate recourse for male victims, some
progressive companies have taken the initiative to adopt gender-neutral
policies. For instance, Wipro Technologies has implemented a gender-neutral
Prevention of Sexual Harassment Committee (PSHC), which ensures that all
complaints, regardless of the complainant’s gender, are investigated fairly and
without bias. Similarly, Infosys in Bangalore has established a gender-neutral
Internal Complaints Committee, reinforcing the idea that workplace harassment
policies should extend beyond just female employees.
While these measures mark a step in
the right direction, they remain limited to select organizations, leaving
countless male employees across various industries without formal protection.
Addressing workplace harassment effectively requires a more inclusive legal
framework that recognizes and safeguards all individuals, irrespective of
gender. A crucial step toward this goal is the enactment of a legislation that
makes workplace sexual harassment laws truly gender-neutral. Until such reforms
are introduced, more companies must acknowledge the pressing need to create an
environment where men can also report harassment without fear of stigma, dismissal,
or bias. Only by fostering a more inclusive and legally supportive structure
can workplaces ensure safety and dignity for all employees.
The lack of reported cases does not
indicate the absence of harassment but rather reflects societal stigma and lack
of legal support, discouraging male victims from coming forward.
Sociocultural
Barriers and Stigma
The fact that males who are subjected
to sexual harassment frequently face major social hurdles and stigma makes it
difficult for them to report their experiences during sexual harassment. Due to
the fact that many men are concerned about being ridiculed or disregarded when
they come out, one of the most significant challenges is the fear of mockery.
Additionally, males are discouraged from speaking up because of strongly
entrenched notions of masculinity, which portray men as being dominating and
unaffected by harassment. There is a
general lack of reporting since many people are uninformed of their legal
rights or the available channels for action, which further exacerbates the
problem. This lack of understanding leads to widespread underreporting. The existence of these obstacles brought to
light the urgent requirement for gender-neutral awareness campaigns and legal
reforms in order to establish an atmosphere that is more welcoming and
supportive of all individuals who have been harassed.
Global Best
Practices: Lessons for India
Several countries have adopted
gender-neutral laws to protect all employees from workplace sexual harassment.
UK
The United Kingdom has made
significant strides in ensuring workplace protections against harassment for
individuals of all genders through the Equality Act 2010. Explicitly forbade harassment based on sex,
gender, sexual orientation, and other protected traits, this all-encompassing
legislation aggregates and enhances anti-discrimination regulations. The Equality Act 2010 guarantees that men,
women, and non-binary people have equal rights and protections in the
workplace, therefore unlike some nations where legislative measures mostly
concentrate on shielding women from workplace harassment. Harassment under this
legislation is defined as unwelcome behavior connected to a relevant protected
attribute that compromises someone's dignity or generates an intimidating,
hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. This wide definition guarantees that every
kind of improper verbal, physical, and nonverbal behavior is included. Legal action may follow from employers' legal
need to behave reasonably to stop harassment in the workplace.
The Equality Act 2010 also gives
workers the right to object and pursue legal action should they be
harassed. The Employment Tribunal system
of the United Kingdom offers a disciplined approach for managing such situations,
supporting business responsibility. The
Equality Act 2010 guarantees that all people, regardless of gender, are
shielded from harassment by assuming a gender-neutral position, establishing a
progressive benchmark for occupational safety and equality.
USA
In the United States, Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 serves as the cornerstone of workplace protections
against sexual harassment, ensuring that both men and women are covered under
its provisions. Clearly extending its
rights to all employees, regardless of gender, this federal legislation forbids
employment discrimination based on sex, color, national origin, religion, and
gender. U.S. courts and the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have strengthened throughout time that
sexual harassment is a type of sex-based discrimination, therefore illegal in
the workplace.
Under Title VII, sexual harassment is
mostly classified as hostile work environment harassment—where unwelcome
behavior creates an intimidating, offensive, or abusive workplace—or quid pro
quo harassment, whereby job benefits or employment conditions are contingent on
submitting to sexual advances. The
legislation recognizes that anyone—regardless of gender—can be a victim or
offender of harassment hence it affects men and women. Employers are legally
obliged to adopt preventative actions like anti-harassment rules, frequent
training, and guarantee of a strong grievance handling mechanism. Should an employee report sexual harassment,
they can do so with the EEOC, which looks at allegations and might act about
enforcement if needed. Victims may
launch lawsuits to hold companies responsible if legal remedies are sought.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 creates a robust legal framework that
protects occupational safety and equality by offering gender-neutral
protection, therefore guaranteeing that every employee—regardless of gender—has
the right to work in an atmosphere free from harassment and discrimination.
CANADA
The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA)
is a basic legislative framework in Canada that guarantees protections for
people of both sexes and helps to prevent workers from workplace
harassment. Approved in 1977, the CHRA
covers government buildings, banking, telecommunications, and transportation
industries—all federally controlled businesses.
Reiterating a gender-neutral approach to workplace safety, it forbids
discrimination and harassment depending on protected traits like sex, gender
identity, sexual orientation, race, and handicap.
Under the CHRA, businesses are
legally required to keep a harassment-free workplace and workplace harassment
is seen as a kind of discrimination.
This covers proactive steps such developing explicit anti-harassment
rules, running frequent training courses, and offering means of confidential
reporting. Harassment victims can report
their incidents to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), which looks
into claims and could forward matters to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for
determination. Besides the CHRA, provincial and territorial legislation,
including Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and British
Columbia's Human Rights Code, enhance the defences against workplace harassment
all over Canada. These rules guarantee
that, regardless of gender, staff members can pursue action against inappropriate
behavior, promoting a more inclusive and fairer workplace.
Recommendations
for Policy Reform
Several important legislative changes
need be carried out to provide equal employment protection for every gender.
1) The Prevention of Sexual Harassment
(POSH) Act has to be gender-neutral changed.
Though a revamped framework should acknowledge that males and non-binary
people can also face workplace harassment, the legislation now mostly addresses
safeguarding of women. This amendment
would let every employee—of any gender—file grievances and pursue legal action.
2) Awareness efforts aiming at teaching
companies and staff about male workplace harassment should be started. Many males seldom disclose harassment because
of stigma, ignorance, or fear of humiliation.
Nationwide awareness campaigns can assist in removing these obstacles
and promote honest conversations about occupational safety for every person.
3) Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) must be
strengthened to address issues raised by all sexes fairly. Organizations must teach ICC members to
handle situations without favoritism and have a safe reporting system for every
staff member.
4) Furthermore, policy advocacy and case
law should support court acceptance of men's experienced workplace sexual
harassment. Legal agencies and courts
should accept and record instances of male harassment, therefore establishing
precedents supporting the necessity of legislative changes.
5) Establishing a National Helpline specifically
for male victims of workplace harassment would ultimately offer much-needed
legal aid, support, and direction. Men
would be able to report events and seek expert guidance using this hotline as a
private forum, guaranteeing they get the assistance they want free from the worry
of rejection.
These steps will help workplace
harassment rules develop into a really inclusive framework that safeguards
every employee and promotes a safer and fairer workplace.
Conclusion
The laws in India that pertain to
harassment in the workplace do not have any gender-neutral protections, which
leaves men exposed and without the ability to seek appropriate legal
remedies. When it comes to addressing
the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace that males confront, this
research underlines the vital need for legal reforms, judicial recognition, and
social awareness. India can establish a
more secure and equitable working environment for all its employees by gaining
knowledge from international legal frameworks and implementing inclusive
policies.
When it comes to recognizing the rights
of males against sexual harassment in the workplace and ensuring that justice
is available to all individuals, regardless of gender, this research serves as
a call to action for lawmakers, policymakers, and society as a whole.