Introduction
Noting the lack of scientific surveys on the nature and magnitude of sexual harassment in the workplace, the Congressional subcommittee investigating sexual harassment requested Ruth Prokop of the Merit System Protection Board to conduct a comprehensive survey of federal employees to determine the extent of sexual harassment in the federal workplace. The Board surveyed a random sample of 23,000 female and male federal employees, 85 percent of whom responded. Several feminists, including Freada Klein, served as consultants on this survey. In September 1980, the Merit Systems Protection Board reported the results of the survey. Forty-two percent of the females and 15 percent of the males responding said they had been sexually harassed in the two years before the survey. This survey was repeated in 1987 and 1995 with similar results.67
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE FEDERAL WORKPLACE IS IT A PROBLEM?
MARCH 1981
A REPORT OF THE U.S. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD OFFICE OF MERIT SYSTEMS REVIEW AND STUDIES
p. iii
THE CHAIRWOMAN OF THE MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD
Washington, D.C. 20419
March 1981
THE PRESIDENT
THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESDear Sirs:
The Merit Systems Protection Board presents this report pursuant to a request by the Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, United States House of Representatives.
This report conveys the findings of a survey of the extent of sexual harassment in the Federal workplace conducted by the Board's Office of Merit Systems Review and Studies.
We urge your consideration of the facts presented here and the use of your good offices to ensure that the Federal personnel system is free from prohibited practices and honors merit principles.
Respectfully,
FOR THE BOARDRuth T. Prokop
Chairwoman
p. vii
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 19 Review of Relevant Case Law 20 Survey of the Literature 21 Major Views of Sexual Harassment 21 Study Design 22 Disclaimers and Cautions in Interpreting the Data 23 Presentation of the Report 23 2. VIEW OF FEDERAL WORKERS TOWARD SEXUAL HARASSMENT 25 Federal Workers' Definition of Sexual Harassment 26 Motives and Sensitivity to Sexual Overtures 28 Different Behavior Is Expected of Supervisors 30 Federal Workers' Attitudes Toward Sexuality in the Workplace 30 Conclusion 32 3. EXTENT OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE FEDERAL WORKPLACE 33 Sexual Harassment Is Widespread 34 Women Are Sexually Harassed More than Men 36 Most Forms Of Harassment Are Common 36 Sexual Harassment Occurs Repeatedly 38 Incidents May Last Several Weeks or More 38 Sexual Harassment Is No Worse in Federal Workplace 39 Conclusion 40 4. VICTIMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 41 Several Personal Characteristics Are Related to Sexual Harassment 43 Several Organizational Characteristics Are Related to Sexual Harassment 46 Other Organizational Characteristics Showed Little Relationship with Sexual Harassment 52 Victims See Their Work Environments Differently Than Nonvictims 54 Conclusion 54 5. PERPETRATORS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 57 Harassers of Women Are Strikingly Similar 58 Harassers of Men Also Are Similar 60 Experiences of Men and Women Differ 61 Some Harassers Reported on Themselves 61 Conclusion 62 6. INCIDENTS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 63 Fear of Penalties and Expectation of Rewards 64 Assertive Responses Are the Most Effective 67 Talking with Others 69 Few File Formal Complaints 71 Response of Management 71 Conclusion 74
p. viii
7. IMPACT AND COST OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 75 Sexual Harassment Is Costly to the Federal Government 76 Work Situation of Most Victims Did Not Change 79 Well-Being and Morale of Many Victims Suffered 79 Victims Judged Their Own Work Performance and Productivity to Be Unaffected 82 Victims Also Judged Their Workgrops to Be Unaffected 84 Conclusion 84 8. AWARENESS OF REMEDIES AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS 85 Awareness of Formal Remedies Is Not Great 88 Formal Remedies Are Not Seen as Effective 88 Assertive Informal Remedies Are See as Most Effective 93 Management Can Help 94 Conclusion 95 9. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 97 Summary of Findings 97 Conclusions 99 What Is the Nature of Sexual Harassment? 101 Implications 102 Recommendations 102 APPENDICES A. Methodology A-1 B. Definitions of Terms B-1 C. Survey Questionnaire and Cover Letters C-1 D. Additional Statistical Analyses D-1 E. Official Policy Documents E-1 1. Memoranda of Understanding E-2 2. Office of Personnel Management Policy Statement and Definition of Sexual Harassment E-7 3. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex E-9 4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Instructions for Prevention of Sexual Harassment in the Workforce Plans E-11 F. Agency Actions Regarding Sexual Harassment F-1 G. Survey of the Literature G-1 H. Annotated Bibliography H-1 TABLES 2.1 Sexual Attitudes 29 4.1 Characteristics of Federal Workers Most Likely To Be Sexually Harassed On the Job 42 4.2 Incidence Rate of Sexual Harassment In Each Agency 47 4.3 Perceptions of Work Environment 55 7.1 Costs of Sexual Harassment 77 F.1 Summary of Agency Actions Regarding Sexual Harassment as of September 1980 F-3 F.2 Summary of Actions Regarding Sexual Harassment Taken by 17 Agencies Named in Survey Questionnaire as of September 1980 F-4
p. ix
FIGURES 2.1 Definition of Sexual Harassment 27 3.1 Overall Incidence Rate of Sexual Harassment 34 3.2 Incidence Rate of Sexual Harassment Among Women and Men 35 3.3 Incidence Rate Among Various Forms of Sexual Harassment 37 3.4 Frequency of Sexual Harassment Incidents 39 4.1 Age of Victims 43 4.2 Marital Status of Victims 44 4.3 Education Level of Victims 45 4.4 Racial and Ethnic Background of Victims 45 4.5 Geographic Location of Victims 48 4.6 Annual Salary of Victims 49 4.7 Job Classification of Victims 50 4.8 Traditionality of Jobs of Victims 51 4.9 Sex of Supervisor(s) of Victims 51 4.10 Sexual Composition of Victims' Work Groups 52 5.1 Sex of Harasser 58 5.2 Age of Harasser 58 5.3 Marital Status of Harasser 59 5.4 Ethnic Status of Harasser 59 5.5 Organizational Level of Harasser 60 5.6 Has the Harasser Bothered Others at Work? 60 6.1 Perceived Penalties for Not Going Along 65 6.2 Perceived Benefits for Going Along 66 6.3 Narrators' Informal Responses to Sexual Harassment 68 6.4 Parties Contacted by Narrators 70 6.5 Narrators' Formal Responses to Sexual Harassment 72 6.6 Organizations' Responses to Formal Actions Taken by Narrators 73 7.1 Changes in Narrators' Work Situations as a Result of Sexual Harassment 80 7.2 Impact of Sexual Harassment on Narrators 81 7.3 Impact of Sexual Harassment on the Morale and Productivity of Narrators' Immediate Work Groups 83 8.1 Awareness of Formal Remedies 87 8.2 Reasons For Not Taking Formal Action 89 8.3 Perceived Effectiveness of Formal Remedies 90 8.4 Perceived Effectiveness of Individual Actions 92 8.5 Perceived Effectiveness of Management Actions 95
p. 1
Executive Summary
This Executive Summary provides in condensed form a summary of major recommendations and a review of the major findings on the views of Federal employees about sexual harassment, the extent of sexual harassment in the Federal workplace, a description of characteristics of victims and perpetrators of sexual harassment, a discussion of the perceptions and responses of victims to their incidents of sexual harassment, the impact of the behavior on the victims and the estimated dollar cost of sexual harassment to the Federal Government, and views of Federal employees about potential remedies and their effectiveness.
The full Final Report represents the culmination of approximately one year of original research and evaluation of the nature and extent of sexual harassment in the Federal Government. This study is the first scientifically controlled survey of this depth and breadth ever to be conducted on the subject of sexual harassment. To our knowledge it is also the first of its kind to be conducted with the full cooperation of the employer--in this case the Federal Government.
The full report contains many recommendations that can be implemented by agency heads quickly and at relatively minimum cost. Copies of this study should be made available to all agency personnel offices, training officers, Equal Employment Opportunity officers and Federal Women's Program managers, to aid implementation of the recommendations.
Background
"Managers should be put on notice that a ‘boys will be boys’ atmosphere will not be condoned in any Federal agency." James M. Hanley, former Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, U.S. House of Representatives.
In recent years there has been growing discussion about the existence of sexual harassment at the workplace. Some maintain that it is an age-old problem, while others feel that it is a relatively new phenomenon that has emerged as more women enter the working world. There has been controversy about what constitutes sexual harassment, how widespread harassment is, and how serious its consequences are for employee well-being and productivity.
Against this background, Chairman James M. Hanley and the Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service of the United States House of Representatives conducted a preliminary investigation on sexual harassment in October and November of 1979. Although the investigation was limited to an examination of 100 complaints, the findings were serious enough to prompt the Subcommittee to ask the Merit Systems Protection Board to conduct a thorough and scientific survey of sexual harassment in the Federal workplace. The Subcommittee wanted to find out if the results of their limited investigation would be borne out by a more extensive study.
p. 2
The preliminary results of the MSPB study were presented at follow-up hearings held by the House Subcommittee on September 25, 1980. The preliminary briefing focused on the series of questions mandated by the Subcommittee to be addressed in the survey. These were:
What kinds of behavior constitute sexual harassment? Do the attitudes of men and women differ in this regard?
To what degree does sexual harassment occur within the Federal workplace? What is the frequency? What are the manifestations?
Are victims or perpetrators of sexual harassment found in disproportionate numbers within certain agencies, job classifications, geographic locations, racial categories, age brackets, educational levels, grade levels, etc.?
What forms of express or implied leverage have been used by harassers to reward or punish their victims?
What has been the impact of sexual harassment on its victims in terms of job turnover, work performance, physical and emotional condition, financial and career well-being?
What effect has sexual harassment had on the morale or productivity of the immediate work group?
Are victims of sexual harassment aware of available remedies? Do they have confidence in those remedies?
Research Methodology
To develop the study, the MSPB's Office of Merit Systems Review and Studies:
surveyed the current literature on the subject of sexual harassment.
consulted with a group of community workers, academic researchers, Federal officials, and a union representative on the content of the study.
reviewed applicable case law and Government regulations and related policy directives, plans, and training programs, and
reviewed various case testimonies, Congressional testimony, and previous research studies that had addressed the subject of sexual harassment.
After extensive field testing on over 300 Federal employees and after making numerous revisions, the research team constructed a questionnaire designed to elicit answers to questions in the Congressional mandate. As directed by the House Subcommittee, the research team prepared the questionnaire on the basis of the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) definition of sexual harassment, i.e., deliberate or repeated unsolicited verbal comments, gestures or physical contact of a sexual nature that is considered to be unwelcome by the recipient.
With the assistance of OPM, a disproportionately stratified random sample1 was drawn from OPM's Central Personnel Data File (CPDF) consisting of civilian employees in the Executive Branch. Four variables were selected to stratify the population. These were: sex, minority status, salary, and organization. Over 23,000 men and women were surveyed in May 1980. Questionnaires were sent to respondents' homes to preserve their confidentiality and anonymity. The members of the sample were asked to base most of their answers on their work experience during the 24-month period from May 1978 to May 1980. A reminder post card was sent one week later and a follow-up questionnaire was sent to nonrespondents three weeks after that. The rate of return of 85%-- was considerably higher than usually expected on mail surveys.2
1 A "disproportionately stratified" sample is one in which certain categories of participants are selected to be in the sample in greater numbers than they occur in the general population. These categories of participants are intentionally oversampled to ensure adequate numbers for statistical analysis within each category. The sample is "random" in that, within a given category (or stratum), each member has an equal chance of being selected. A random sample enables the researcher to make predictions about the whole population based upon the sample. All final results in this final report are expressed in "weighted" terms, which means that all numbers and percentages are adjusted to reflect each category's actual size in the Federal population.
2 See Babbie, Earl R. Survey Research Methods, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. Belmont, California, 1973, p. 165.
p. 3
Explanations of Frequently Used Terms
Victims. In this executive summary, victims of sexual harassment are defined as those respondents who indicated (in either Survey Question 17 or Question 20) that they had experienced one or more forms of sexual harassment on the job during the preceding 24 months. All data is computed on the basis of Question 17 except for those parts of the Questionnaire where respondents were asked to provide detailed data on one critical sexual harassment incident. For questions involving this critical incident, the data on victims was computed on the basis of Survey Question 20. In the final report, the victims who chose to describe their critical incident are referred to as "narrator-victims."
Level of severity of sexual harassment. On the basis of preliminary analysis, sexual harassment experiences (identified by respondents to Survey Question 17 or Question Survey 20) were classified as "most severe," "severe," or "less severe." Those considered "most severe"-- were actual or attempted rape or assault; "severe"--included letters, phone calls or materials of a sexual nature; pressure for sexual favors; and deliberate touching, leaning over, cornering or pinching; and "less severe" included pressure for dates; sexually suggestive looks or gestures; and sexual teasing, jokes, remarks or questions.
Findings
Summary
The following major findings emerged from the study:
Both men and women Federal workers generally agree that uninvited behaviors of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment.
The incidence rate of sexual harassment in the Federal workforce is widespread-- 42% of all female employees and 15% of all male employees reported being sexually harassed.
Many sexual harassment incidents occur repeatedly and are of relatively long duration.
The majority of Federal employees who had worked elsewhere feel sexual harassment is no worse in the Federal workplace than in state and local governments or in the private sector.
Sexual harassment is widely distributed among women and men of various backgrounds, positions and locations; however individuals with certain personal and organizational characteristics are more likely to be sexually harassed than others.
The characteristics of harassers differ for women and men victims--for example, women report almost always being harassed by a man, whereas men report usually being harassed by a woman.
Many harassers are reported to have bothered more than one victim at work.
Few employees report having been accused of sexually harassing others.
Those who are sexually harassed by supervisors and those who experience the more severe forms of sexual harassment are more likely than other victims to foresee penalties or possible benefits from the sexual harassment.
Most victims neither anticipated nor receive adverse consequences as a result of their sexual harassment, although a sizeable minority did, particularly women.
A number of informal actions were found by victims to be effective in stopping sexual harassment, particularly the most direct and assertive responses.
Few victims pursue formal remedies, but many who do find them helpful.
The impact and cost of sexual harassment in dollars to the Federal Government is sizeable--an estimated minimum of $189 million over the 2-year period covered by the study.
p. 4
Although their experiences do not change the careers and work situations of most victims, a sizeable number of women and men do leave their jobs or suffer adverse consequences.
Victims are more likely to think the sexual harassment negatively affected their personal well-being or morale than their work performance or that of their immediate work group.
Victims and supervisors are generally unaware of available formal remedies and are skeptical about their effectiveness.
Assertive informal actions are thought to be the most effective way employees can make others stop bothering them sexually.
Most victims and supervisors think there is much management can do to reduce sexual harassment.
In conclusion, the data show that sexual harassment is widespread, is costly, deeply felt by many of the victims, and that the 1979 Congressional investigation was indicative of a significant problem; however, the data also indicated that there is much that can be done to reduce that problem.
View of Federal Workers Toward Sexual Harassment
To determine whether men and women defined sexual harassment differently, they were asked whether they considered uninvited sexually-oriented behaviors to be sexual harassment. These behaviors, ranked in order of agreement were:
Severe
Letters, phone calls or materials of a sexual nature
Pressure for sexual favors
Touching, leaning over, cornering or pinching
Less Severe
Pressure for dates
Sexually suggestive looks or gestures
Sexual teasing, jokes, remarks or questions
From the responses, we found that most men and women agreed that behaviors 1-4 constituted sexual harassment. However, men were less likely to think that "sexual looks" and "sexual comments," the more ambiguous and prevalent forms of sexual behavior on the job, were sexual harassment, particularly when perpetrated by a coworker. Respondents were not asked whether they thought that actual or attempted rape or assault was sexual harassment. Since this behavior is potentially criminal, we assumed that it is the most severe form of sexual harassment.
Generally, men and women were more likely to think that a behavior was sexual harassment if the perpetrator was a supervisor rather than a coworker. Thus, it would appear that a higher standard of conduct exists for supervisors to exhibit proper behavior in the office, arguably because of their official authority and responsibilities.
Although in the abstract men and women were likely to agree that uninvited sexual behavior at work is sexual harassment, responses may indicate that sexual harassment is some times situational. For most workers, including those who identified themselves as victims, the perceived motive or demeanor of the initiator made a difference as to whether the behavior was viewed as sexual harassment.
A number of questions were asked to find how respondents viewed sexual behavior at work. We found that both men and women believed that sexual activity, whether voluntary or otherwise, should not occur between people who work together, although women were less likely to approve of sexual affairs among coworkers than were men. We found that men, including supervisors, showed a greater tendency than women to think that victims are somewhat responsible for bringing sexual harassment on themselves and are inclined to believe that sexual harassment has been exaggerated. However, men and women agreed that sexual harassment is behavior that people should not have to tolerate.
Extent of Sexual Harassment
To determine how widespread sexual harassment is in the Federal workplace, respondents were asked whether they had experienced any of the seven listed behaviors within the finite time frame of the previous 24 months (May 1978 to May 1980), and how often the experience occurred.
From this we found that one in four Federal employees reported receiving uninvited and
p. 5
Definition of Sexual Harassment
Percentage of Male and Female Federal Employees Who Agreed that Each of Six Forms of Unwanted, Uninvited Sexual Attention Constitutes Sexual Harassment (Questions 2-7, b & d)
NOTE: Percentages are based on "Probably Yes" and "Definitely Yes" responses to questions.
unwanted sexual attention, and that women, as expected, were much more likely to be victims than were men. Almost half--(42%) of all female Federal employees and only 15% of all male employees reported being sexually harassed. Although the percentage for men is lower in comparison to women, it nevertheless is much higher than previously expected.
Whether both men and women define the unwanted behavior that they received in the same way is debatable. Other studies have shown that men and women view their sex roles very differently and use language in different ways to describe sexual behavior. Again, it should be pointed out that the sexual harassment as reported here is based upon data provided by the victims themselves. If sexual attention was neither unwanted (nor uninvited) by the recipient, it presumably was not reported.
The sexual harassment as reported by the victims took many forms. Every form except actual or attempted rape or sexual assault was experienced by a sizeable percentage of both men and women. The more ambiguous forms of sexual harassment--"sexual comments" and "suggestive looks"--were reported most often. These forms were more likely to be repeated.
However, with the exception of actual or attempted rape or assault, most of the victims reported experiencing all forms of sexual harassment repeatedly. In addition, many reported experiencing more than one form of sexual harassment. We also found that the incidents of sexual harassment were not just passing events-- most lasted more than a week, and many lasted longer than 6 months. Thus, not only did the sexual harassment occur repeatedly, it was of relatively long duration as well.
p. 6
Incidence Rate Among Various Forms of Sexual Harassment
Percentage of Female and Male Federal Employees Who Experienced Each Form of Sexual Harassment Between May 1978 and May 1980 (Question 17)
NOTE: Many respondents indicated that they experience more than one form of sexual harassment.
To view the incidence rate of sexual harassment in context, we asked respondents who had worked outside the Federal Government to compare the Federal Government with other workplaces. The majority of respondents stated that they felt sexual harassment was no worse in the Federal workplace than in state and local government or in the private sector.
Victims of Sexual Harassment
To determine who is sexually harassed and whether certain personal and organizational factors contributed to the likelihood of harassment, we looked at a number of demographic variables. Demographic characteristics of victims that seem to have a strong bearing on whether or not an individual is harassed are: age, marital status, and sexual (male-female) composition of the workgroup. Those factors that seem to have a somewhat weaker bearing are education level, race, ethnic background, job classification, non-traditional nature of job, and sex of immediate supervisor. Based on these factors, we found that the typical men and women who are likely to be harassed are:
young,
not married,
higher educated,
members of a minority, racial or ethnic group (if male)
hold trainee positions (or office/clerical positions, if male),
hold non-traditional positions, for their sex, (e.g., female law enforcement officers, male secretaries)
have an immediate supervisor of the opposite sex,
have an immediate work group composed predominately of the opposite sex.
We also found that certain agencies have a greater incidence rate than do others. Women in the Departments of Labor, Transportation, Justice, certain Defense Department agencies3 (other than the Air Force, Army, Navy and Marine Corps), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Air Force, Navy/Marine Corps, Veterans Administration and other smaller agencies4 had a higher rate of sexual harassment than those in other agencies. Men (as well as women) in the Departments of Justice and HUD and the Veterans Administration, and men in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and the General Services Administration also reported rates higher than the Federal-wide average.
3 Such as the Defense Mapping Agency and Office of the Secretary of Defense.
4 Such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Office of Personnel Management.
p. 7
Age of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees of Different Ages Who Experienced Sexual Harassment (Question 61)
Marital Status of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees Who Experienced
Sexual Harassment, by Marital Status (Question 62)Education Level of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees of Different Education Levels Who Experienced Sexual Harassment
(Question 60)
p. 8
Racial and Ethnic Background of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees of Different Racial and Ethnic Backgrounds
Who Experienced Sexual Harassment (Question 59)Job Classification of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees of Different Job Classifications
Who Experienced Sexual Harassment (Question 57)Traditionality of Jobs of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees in Traditional and
Nontraditional Jobs For Their Sex Who Experienced
Sexual Harassment (Question 52)Sex of Supervisor(s) of Victims
Percentage of Federal Employees Who Experienced
Sexual Harassment, by Sex of Immediate
Supervisor(s) (Question 50)
p. 9
Sexual Composition of Victims' Work Groups
Percentage of Federal Employees in Different Kinds of Work Groups Who Experienced Sexual Harassment
(Question 51)Sex of Harasser
Percentage of Narrator Victims Who Indicated the Sex of the Person(s)
Who Bothered Them Sexually (Question 32a)In addition, we found that certain work environments were more conducive to sexual harassment than were others.
Victims were more likely to report being in work environments where employees did not perceive open communications or a good relationship with their supervisors, felt pressure to engage in sexual activity such as flirting or making comments about the opposite sex, and observed others using sex for professional advancement.
In addition, victims were much more likely than supervisors to perceive that sexual harassment is a problem in their offices and to think that management is not making every effort to stop sexual harassment.
Perpetrators of Sexual Harassment
We found that most women reported that their harassers were male and that most men indicated that their harassers were female. However, men were far more likely than women to report being harassed by someone of their same sex.
Most harassers of women and men reportedly acted alone rather than in concert with another person. However, most women identified their harasser as being older than they, whereas men usually indicated that their harasser was usually younger than they. Although both women and men reported that their harasser was usually married, men were more likely to indicate that their harasser was divorced or single. Most victims in general reported being harassed by someone of their same race or ethnic background, although
p. 10
Age of Harasser
Percentage of Narrator Victims Who Indicated the Age of the Person(s) Who Bothered Them Sexually
(Question 32b)Marital Status of Harasser
Percentage of Narrator Victims Who Indicated the Marital Status of the Person(s) Who Bothered Them Sexually
(Question 32d)minority women were more likely to report that their harasser was of a different race or ethnicity.
One surprising finding was that women and men reported being harassed by fellow employees more often than by supervisors. This finding was surprising in that, before the study, most sexual harassment was thought to be perpetrated by the more powerful supervisors against their more vulnerable employees. However, a sizeable number of women also reported being harassed by supervisors. Thus, supervisors were found to be personally responsible for a number of sexual harassment incidents, although not the principal cause of the problem. However, supervisors as part of their duties have a responsibility to assure that their subordinates work in an environment free from sexual harassment in keeping with Federal policy prohibiting sexual harassment in the Federal workplace.
Another major finding was that many women and men reported that their harasser had also bothered others at work. This somewhat negates the view that sexual harassment is principally a matter of isolated instances of personal sexual attraction. Thus it appears that some individuals are more likely to harass than others and that sexual harassment is not necessarily normal interaction among men and women on the job, or that all men and women engage in it as has been intimated by some.
Only a handful of respondents indicated that they had been accused of sexually bothering someone else at work, and most thought that the charge was unfair. This could indicate that few victims confront their harassers or that many accused harassers are unwilling to identify themselves even in the privacy of an anonymous questionnaire.
p. 11
Ethnic Status of Harasser
Percentage of Narrator Victims Who Indicated the
Ethnic Status of the Person(s) Who Bothered Them
Sexually (Question 32c)TOTAL VICTIMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Organizational Level of Harasser
Percentage of Narrator Victims Who Identified the
Organizational Level of the Person(s) Who Bothered
Them Sexually (Question 33)TOTAL VICTIMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
NOTE: Some respondents Indicated that more than one party bothered them.
Incidents of Sexual Harassment
We found that although most victims did not foresee consequences for resisting or complying with the sexual harassment, both the organizational level of the harasser in relation to the victim and the severity of the sexual harassment made a major difference in the victims' perceptions of the use of leverage.
Victims who were harassed by immediate or higher level supervisors were more likely to foresee negative consequences for refusing to comply and incentives for complying with the sexual harassment than those who were harassed by coworkers or other employees. Like wise, those who were victims of "most severe" and "severe" sexual harassment were much more likely than those who were victims of "less severe" harassment to perceive that carrots and sticks were being used against them to comply with the behavior.
We also looked at how victims responded to their sexual harassment. Most victims stated that they responded to the sexual harassment by passively ignoring it. However, the most effective actions for most victims to take were found to be the most assertive actions--" asking or telling the person to stop" or "reporting the behavior to the supervisor or other officials." The least effective actions were found to be the most passive--"going along with the behavior" or "ignoring it." The effectiveness level for various actions differed somewhat with the sex of the victim and severity of the sexual harassment.
However, it should be pointed out that although reporting the behavior to a supervisor or other officials was found to produce better results compared with other informal actions, around half of the women and only one-third of the men who tried this found that it made no difference or made things worse. This indicates that much still needs to be done to make supervisors and other officials accountable for resolving these problems informally.
Another indication of the need to make supervisors and other officials more responsive to the problem of sexual harassment is the finding that talking with these officials did not help the situation in the majority of cases. Talking with a party outside the agency such as a lawyer, civil rights group, someone from Congress, or other agency official, was found to be most successful for the few male and female victims of "most severe" sexual harassment and female victims of "less severe" sexual harassment who tried it. Most workers did not talk with any one about their incident and when they did, they usually spoke with friends and relatives or other workers.
We found that very few victims took formal institutional remedies against the sexual harassment--only 2 to 3%. The majority who took formal actions reported that their doing so made things better. This would indicate that in
p. 12
Narrators' Informal Responses to Sexual Harassment
Percentage of Narrators Who Indicated that Taking These Informal Actions "Made Things Better" (Question 23)NOTE: Many respondents indicated that they took more than one action.
p. 13
Narrators' Formal Responses to Sexual Harassment
Percentage of Narrators Who Indicated that Taking These Informal Actions "Made Things Better" (Question 28)NOTE: Some respondents indicated that they took more than one formal action.
p. 14
Costs of Sexual Harassment
Women Men Total Job Turnover Cost to offer a job1 $ 6.4 $ 1.2 $ 7.6 Background checks2 2.0 0.4 2.4 Training3 24.1 2.7 26.8 Total Cost of Job Turnover $ 22.5 $ 4.3 $ 26.8 Emotional Stress 3.9 2.1 5.0 Individual Productivity 37.7 34.4 72.1 Absenteeism 5.3 2.6 7.9 Work Group Productivity 32.6 44.3 76.9 TOTALS $102.0 $ 86.7 $188.7 1 Source: Office of Program Management and Evaluation, Office of Personnel Management
2Source: Division of Personnel Investigations, Office of Personnel Management
3 Source: "Employee Training in the Federal Service -- FY 1979," published by the Office of Personnel Management, Workforce Effectiveness and Development Office.
contrast to the lack of faith in formal remedies expressed by most respondents in Chapter 8, the system does work for some. However, a sizeable minority (41%) indicated that filing the formal action either had no effect or in fact made things worse.
In addition, victims in general reported a mixed response from management to their formal complaints, although the response of management seemed to depend somewhat on the sex of victim and the severity of the harassment. Generally, victims were more likely to find a favorable management response than a hostile one. However, male victims were more likely to encounter hostility than were women and few victims of either sex reported that management "corrected the damage done to them."
Impact and Cost of Sexual Harassment
We found that a conservative estimate of the cost to the Federal Government due to sexual harassment over the two-year period was $189 million -- a sum equivalent to the total salaries of all 465 agency heads and all 7000 senior Federal executives (members of the Senior Executive Service) for six months. The greatest costs were associated with the loss of individual and workgroup productivity as reported by the victims. These figures are conservative for three reasons:
Victims were far less likely to report a decline in their productivity than a decline in their physical or emotional well-being. Since physical or emotional well-being may in fact affect productivity, the number of victims who reported a drop in productivity may actually be closer to the larger number who stated that their emotional or physical condition declined. Thus, the numbers used to compute the loss due to individual productivity are probably low.
We assumed that where reported, individual productivity declined by only 10%.
We assumed that where reported, work group productivity declined by only 1%.
We also found that most victims reported that their careers and work situations did not change as a result of their sexual harassment experience, although a sizeable minority of women and men reported adverse consequences,
p. 15
such as leaving their jobs. Although most women and men victims in general indicated that their sexual harassment experience did not negatively affect their personal well-being or work performance, this varied with the severity of the harassment. Victims of the more severe forms of sexual harassment were more likely to report adverse effects. The adverse effects were particularly dramatic for the victims of "most severe" sexual harassment. As stated above, most women and men were much more likely to perceive that their sexual harassment experience affected their personal well-being or morale than their work performance or productivity. Again, this finding may be one of perception.
In contrast to the reported effect on the individuals themselves, we found that few victims felt that the morale or productivity of their immediate work groups were negatively affected by their sexual harassment experiences. One reason for this may be that few coworkers knew about the experience and its effects on the victim since only about one-third of the victims reported that they spoke with coworkers about the incident.
Awareness of Remedies and Their Effectiveness
To discover whether victims and supervisors were even aware of formal remedies for sexual harassment, we asked whether they believed that the following actions were available to those who had been sexually bothered by others:
requesting an investigation by the organization
requesting an investigation by an outside organization
filing a grievance or adverse action appeal
filing a discrimination complaint
filing a complaint through special channels set up for sexual harassment complaints
Although most of these actions are in fact available to most employees, we found that most victims and supervisors were relatively unaware of them. The one remedy about which the respondents were most knowledgable was "filing a discrimination complaint."
When we asked respondents whether they thought those same formal remedies were effective in helping victims of sexual harassment, we found that relatively few victims or supervisors thought that the formal remedies would definitely be effective.
However, to the largest number of victims, particularly those who have not experienced the most severe form of sexual harassment, filing a formal complaint simply may not be an appropriate response. They prefer to handle the situation informally. Most victims indicated that they "saw no need to report" the incident as a reason for not filing a formal complaint. However, the female and to a lesser extent the male victims of the more severe forms of sexual harassment were much less likely to cite this reason for not taking a formal action than fear of adverse consequences or belief that nothing would be done.
In contrast to the somewhat pessimistic view of formal remedies, most Federal workers believe that employees successfully can take informal steps to stop the unwanted sexual attention. Both victims and supervisors most often endorsed direct assertive actions by the employees as being effective in stopping unwanted sexual attention. In contrast, few respondents thought that there was little an employee could do about the situation.
In addition, most Federal workers also think that there is much that management can do to reduce sexual harassment. Management actions involving tougher sanctions and enforcement generally were endorsed most often. However, a majority of victims and supervisors also endorsed actions involving publicizing management policies on sexual harassment. Women were more likely than men to endorse actions intended to help victims cope with the problem, such as setting up a special counseling service.
Conclusions
From these findings the following five general conclusions can be drawn about sexual harassment in the Federal workplace. This Final Report provides explanations for these conclusions.
1. Sexual harassment is a legitimate problem in the Federal workplace.2. In the past, agency managers have not been as successful as they could be in resolving problems of sexual harassment.
p. 16
Perceived Effectiveness of Individual Actions
Percentage of Victims and Supervisors Who Thought Employee Actions
Would Stop Sexual Harassment (Question 10)NOTE: Many respondents indicated more than one action would be effective.
p. 17
Perceived Effectiveness of Management Actions
Percentage of Victims and Supervisors Who Thought Management Actions Regarding Sexual Harassment
Would Be Effective (Question 11)NOTE: Many respondents indicated more than one action would be effective.
3. There is much that management can do about the problem of sexual harassment in the future.4. There are effective actions that victims can take to solve the problem of sexual harassment.5. Sexual harassment by its nature and in its various forms has differing effects on victims.Recommendations
The final report goes into more detail regarding the recommendations that are summarized here. It is strongly urged that these recommendations be implemented as both a cost savings measure and one designed to produce a positive work atmosphere where morale and productivity can prosper. These recommendations can be incorporated within current mechanisms without undue expense to the Government.
For the few who choose to pursue formal remedies, the complaint channels need to be responsive to their needs. However, because of the sensitivity of the issue, most victims have not and probably will not in the future take formal actions to stop sexual harassment. The most effective way to aid these individuals and have the greatest impact on reducing most instances of sexual harassment is to take steps
p. 18
to prevent sexual harassment in the first place and to help victims handle the situation informally. Of the following recommendations, the first two are remedial in nature, the second two preventive, the fifth, designed to assist victims and the last designed to monitor compliance and provide follow-up.
Agencies should provide strong and effective enforcement against sexual harassment and issue sanctions where appropriate.
Complaint channels for sexual harassment should be clarified and streamlined.
Managers and other agency officials should be made aware of their responsibilities and held accountable for enforcing Federal Government and agency policy prohibiting sexual harassment at the Federal workplace.
Agencies should develop a training strategy to aid in preventing sexual harassment.
Agencies should provide information to victims on effective techniques for resolving incidents of sexual harassment.
A number of other activities should be instituted to assure compliance with law and regulation, as well as to provide followup to this study both within the Federal Government and in the other public and private sectors.
Conclusion
The Federal Government has a responsibility to be a model employer that maintains "high standards of honesty, integrity, impartiality and conduct to assure proper performance of the Government's business and the maintenance of confidence of the American people … Sexual harassment is a form of employee misconduct which undermines the integrity of the employment relationship. All employees must be allowed to work in an environment free from unsolicited and unwelcome sexual overtures."5
To mount a strong campaign to reduce sexual harassment is in keeping with this policy and is cost-effective.
5 OPM Policy Statement, see Appendix E.
p. 19
1 Introduction
Sexual harassment in the workplace is a subject about which much discussion is currently taking place. Do any of these statements sound familiar?
Sexual harassment is just another example of what men do to women to keep them from advancing in the workplace.
The issue of sexual harassment has been greatly exaggerated -- because of all the publicity men will be afraid to talk to women for fear of being accused of sexual harassment.
Women in low-pay and low-status positions are more likely to be harassed than others and are afraid to make waves about it for fear of losing their jobs.
The Government should not try to legislate love -- it has no business interfering in the personal (sex) lives of employees.
As statements such as these suggest, there have been disagreements about what constitutes sexual harassment, how widespread it is and its consequences for employees in their careers, morale, and work performance.
As a result of this publicity about the issue of sexual harassment, the Subcommittee on Investigations of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, under the leadership of Chairman James M. Hanley, conducted a preliminary investigation of sexual harassment in the Federal Government and held hearings in October and November, 1979. The findings from the investigation, which included an examination of 100 employee allegations, were serious enough to cause the Subcommittee to request that the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) conduct a thorough and authoritative study of sexual harassment in the Federal workplace. Since no such thorough study had ever been conducted on this subject in either the private or public sectors, the Subcommittee wanted to discover whether the results of their preliminary investigation would be borne out by a scientific study.
To establish a Federal Government-wide approach to sexual harassment the Subcommittee also asked the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to (1) prepare a policy statement about sexual harassment, (2) prepare a training module on sexual harassment issues, and (3) encourage agencies to issue policy statements and provide training. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was also asked to (1) develop and issue interpretive guidelines clarifying the status of sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
p. 20
1964 (Title VII), (2) require agencies as part of their affirmative action plans to inform Federal agencies that sexual harassment is prohibited by Title VII, and (3) require agencies to take steps to make the work environment free of sexual intimidation.1 MSPB was directed to examine the following questions using the definition of sexual harassment already developed by OPM:
What kinds of behavior constitute sexual harassment? Do the attitudes of men and women differ in this regard?
To what degree does sexual harassment occur within the Federal workplace? What is the frequency? What are the manifestations?
Are victims or perpetrators of sexual harassment found in disproportionate numbers within certain agencies, job classifications, geographic locations, racial categories, age brackets, educational levels, grade levels, etc.?
What forms of express or implied leverage have been used by harassers to reward or punish their victims?
What has been the impact of sexual harassment on its victims in terms of job turnover, work performance, physical and emotional condition, financial and career well-being?
What effect has sexual harassment had on the morale or productivity of the immediate work group?
Are victims of sexual harassment aware of available remedies? Do they have confidence in those remedies?
Top agency officials of the MSPB, OPM, and EEOC reported the status of their charges regarding sexual harassment at a hearing held by the Subcommittee on September 25, 1980. The Chairwoman of the MSPB and the Director of the Office of Merit Systems Review and Studies (MSRS), the MSPB office given responsibility for conducting the study, reported on the preliminary findings at the hearing. These findings were preliminary in that they included information only on women victims and only for some of the data. This Final Report considerably expands the preliminary study, notably by including data on male victims and providing policy recommendations.
In developing the plan for the study, the MSRS research team first examined the relevant issues by reviewing the legal case law and the relevant available literature.
Review of Relevant Case Law
We reviewed the OPM policy statement prohibiting sexual harassment as well as the limited but growing case law on sexual harassment in order to observe the legal basis for prohibiting sexual harassment. OPM defines sexual harassment as: "deliberate or repeated unsolicited verbal comments, gestures or physical contact of a sexual nature which are un-welcome."2 This definition allows the recipient of the behavior to determine whether the contact is "unwelcome" and is more broadly defined than other interpretations construed by the courts and EEOC.
Under recently published EEOC interpretive guidelines, sexual harassment is considered to be sex discrimination under certain conditions: (1) when submission to it is a term or condition of employment, (2) when it is used as the basis of employment decisions, or (3) when it creates an intimidating or hostile work environment.3 With the exception of the recent
1 Memoranda of Understanding between the Subcommittee on Investigations of the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service and the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Office of Personnel Management concerning the Problem of Sexual Harrassment of Federal Employees; see Appendix E.
2 Office of Personnel Management Policy Statement and Definition of Sexual Harassment; see Appendix E.
3 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, November 10, 1980, 29 CFR Part 1604.11, 45 FR 25024; see Appendix E.
p. 21
Court of Appeals decision in the case of Bundy v. Jackson, D.C. Civil Action No. 77-1359 (D.C. Cir., January 12, 1981), most courts have found that prohibited sex discrimination has occurred only when submission to the sexual harassment is a term or condition of the victim's employment.4 The OPM definition is broader than these interpretations in that it expands the definition of sexual harassment to include unacceptable behavior that, although not necessarily sex discrimination, may be a prohibited personnel practice or a violation of the standards of conduct in the Federal workplace. Thus, unwelcome sexual attention, however defined, is seen at most as a form of sex discrimination that is prohibited by law and at least as a violation of the standards of conduct in the Federal workplace that is prohibited by Government policy or regulation.
Survey of the Literature
To conceptualize the study, we wanted to determine whether any of the questions posed in the Congressional mandate had been addressed in the available literature on sexual harassment.
We found that only within the last six years has sexual harassment gained public notice both as a catch-word to describe a situation and as a work related issue.5 Since that time a number of authors have examined the issue and several common patterns have emerged from their writings. First, most of the literature has been descriptive in nature with little or no explanation for the underlying social process involved. Second, most of the writers have been feminists who have focused on the behavior almost exclusively as it affects women, and not men, the larger society, or the work organization. Third, there has been no common denominator in the literature about what behaviors constitute sexual harassment. Fourth, much of the literature has drawn upon individual case studies to generalize about the victims of sexual harassment, how the experience affects them and how they have responded.6
Most of the studies that did attempt to discern the extent of sexual harassment and to explore other factors such as the characteristics of victims and perpetrators, are not scientifically valid.7 Therefore they are not useful to measure the actual pervasiveness of sexual harassment in the workplace.
The groups surveyed in most of these studies were small and self-selected.8 In addition, in none of these studies was sexual harassment defined in the same way, making comparison of results difficult. Another drawback was that most of these studies asked about experiences of sexual harassment over the respondent's lifetime (relying on their recall ability), rather that using a conceptually stronger finite and more immediate period of time.
However a few studies have had some degree of scientific control.9 Although they shed some light on the topic, none have addressed all of the issues covered in the Congressional mandate, none have involved Federal employees, all have been restricted to a particular geographic region and/or work setting, only one has included men as well as women as potential victims, and most have restricted harassment to heterosexual behavior.
Major Views of Sexual Harassment
Three major views of sexual harassment have emerged from most of this literature: one concerning the underlying social-political basis for the behavior, the second concerning the vulnerability of particular groups to sexual harassment and the third, concerning the motivation behind the behavior.
The three views are:
1. That sexual harassment is an abuse of power that is exercised by those with power, usually male supervisors, over low-status employees, usually women.4For a further discussion of this case law see Appendix H.
5For a fuller review of the literature see Appendix G.
6For example, see Backhouse and Cohen, 1978; Farley, 1978; Martin, 1978; Appendix H.
7Since the results were not based on information derived from a scientifically selected probability sample, predictions for the population at large are usually not valid.
8See for example, Kelber, 1979; Lang, 1979; New Responses, Inc., 1979; Safran, 1976; Working Women's Institute, 1979; Appendix H.
9See Benson and Thompson, 1979; Gutek and Nakamura, 1980; Livingston, 1979; Appendix H.
p. 22
The first two views are closely related. They grow out of a belief that sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination and abuse of power used to keep women in their place at the low end of the economic scale. This view is based on the fact that on average women earn only 59 cents for every dollar that a man earns and that sexual harassment is one example of the sex discrimination that maintains this disparity.
The first view sees sexual harassment primarily as an expression of power (see for example, Backhouse and Cohen, 1978; Farley, 1978; Appendix H.). One example of this perspective sees sexual harassment as a form of violence or threat of violence used as a mechanism of social control over women to limit their access to certain jobs or their job success and mobility (Bularzik, 1978). Others emphasize that sexual harassment is used as a powerful lever to maintain the status quo in traditional economic and social relationships (Silverman, 1976-77).
The second major view about sexual harassment that emerges from the analytic literature has to do with the vulnerability of particular groups of women working in particular kinds of jobs. It has been suggested that women, particularly women from minority groups, working for low wages in low-status jobs are particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment because of their economic dependence on their jobs (see for example, Hooven and McDonald, 1978). Another group considered to be particularly vulnerable to harassment are women working in traditionally male occupations because they have invaded a private male preserve (Silverman, 1976-77; also see Martin, 1978, on harassment among women police officers).
The third view reflects a fundamentally different view of the sex roles of men and women and the impact that these roles have on their relationships to each other on the job. This theory grows out of a belief that rather than being a source of power of men over women, the vagueness and broad nature of the definitions of sexual harassment used by both OPM and EEOC will undoubtedly lead to a barrage of trivial and unfounded complaints against men. Followers of this view also might be inclined to believe that the sexual relationships between men and women are expressions of personal attraction, and that although some of the consequences of these relationships may involve harassment, it is not appropriate for an employer to become involved (Berns, 1980). This study will review the evidence for these three views.
Study Design
Of primary concern in developing the study was the desire to develop a scientifically valid survey instrument that would determine whether sexual harassment was a problem in the Federal workplace and address the questions posed in the Congressional mandate. Secondarily, we wanted to gather information that would permit examination of the major views about sexual harassment in order to make appropriate policy recommendations.10
With the assistance of OPM, a disproportionately stratified random sample11 of civilian employees in the Executive Branch was selected to be in the study. The four variables on which the sample was stratified were: (1) sex, (2) minority status, (3) salary, and (4) organization.
As a result of revising the survey instrument through pretests on a cross section of Washington, D.C.-based Federal employees, the final product contained 12 pages with 63 questions. Over 23,000 men and women received questionnaires in May 1980, which were sent to the respondents' homes to preserve their confidentiality and anonymity. The rate of return from two mailings of the questionnaire was 85% -- a rate considerably higher than is usually required for statistical reliability. The members of the sample were asked to base most of their answers on their work experience during the 24-month period from May 1978 to May 1980. Both the preliminary findings presented at the Congressional hearing in September 1980 and the Final Report were prepared by the MSRS research team based upon the data gathered from the survey.
10 A more detailed description of the methodology employed by the research team is given in Appendix A.
11 See footnotes 1 and 2 in Executive Summary for explanation.
p. 23
Disclaimers and Cautions in Interpreting the Data
In reading this report and interpreting the data, some issues should be kept in mind. First, the incidence data is based upon the number of respondents who personally indicated that they had received what they believed to be uninvited and unwanted sexual attention. Thus, the method of identifying victims for this report involved a self-defining process on the part of the respondents. This approach seemed to be a reasonable way to measure incidence of sexual harassment and in line with the OPM definition of sexual harassment, which also relies on self-identification of victims. This method of determining incidence cannot measure whether the initiator believed that the behavior was sexually harassing, although the questionnaire afforded some opportunity for those who had been accused of sexual harassment to describe their experiences.
A second major caution in interpreting the data concerns the perceptual and language differences that may have been operating on the men and women who took this questionnaire. That men and women look at sexual behavior differently is important to keep in mind when looking at the reported experiences of men victims in the following chapters.12 There is an indication from the data that the behavior that is referred to as unwanted and uninvited sexual attention, particularly for reported cases of actual or attempted rape or sexual assault, may be different for men and women respondents.13
Also, men and women may have different reactions to the unwanted behavior. Sexual behavior that may be offensive to women may be more or less offensive to men when they are the recipients. Social norms have encouraged men to be sexually aggressive and women to be sexually passive (Faltzman, 1974). As modern attitudes have altered these stereotypical expectations, it is not surprising that stress or confusion often results when these sex roles reverse.
For example, one study that was conducted on young adults found that when men and women were asked their views about sexual behavior that could happen to them, the men were much more likely to see less severe behaviors, such as pressure for dates, as more offensive than did women. The men felt uncomfortable as the recipients of these actions since their typical sex role was reversed, whereas, the women, were not as offended since they saw the unwanted attention as part of normal dating behavior.14
In addition, the degree to which victims felt bothered by their sexual harassment could not be measured closely in this study. There is reason to believe that men who indicate that they have been sexually harassed are not only talking about different behavior (language difference) than women victims, but are affected in very different ways. The only other scientific study on sexual harassment that involved male respondents found that in general male victims were more likely to think that sexual harassment was flattering or ego-enhancing and the women victims were more likely to think that the experience was threatening or interfered with the effective conduct of their work (Gutek and Nakamura, 1980).
A final caution in interpreting the data in terms of the experiences of male and female victims is raised. That is the belief that it is not reasonable to equate the sexual harassment of men with the sexual harassment of women, since men traditionally have had more opportunities for advancement in the workplace. This view states that since this is a society where laws have had to be enacted to ensure women their rights, the sexual intimidation of men is not logically as severe or discriminatory as that of women (McKinnon, 1979).
Presentation of the Report
The Final Report is organized into eight additional Chapters plus Appendices. The Chapters are as follows:
Chapter 2: View of Federal Workers Toward Sexual Harassment -- the attitudes of men and women toward sexual behavior in the Federal workplace.
Chapter 3: Extent of Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace -- the overall incidence level of such behaviors among women and men.
12 Janet Faltzman Chafetz, Masculine -- Feminine or Human? Overview of the Sociology of Sex Roles, F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc., Itasca, Illinois, 1974.
13 See Chapter 3.
14 Martha R. Burt and Rhoda E. Estep, "Assessing the Impact of Sexually Intrusive Events," unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota, 1976.
p. 24
Chapter 4: Victims of Sexual Harassment -- the personal and organizational characteristics of women and men victims and their work environment.
Chapter 5: Perpetrators of Sexual Harassment -- the characteristics of those who initiate sexual harassment.
Chapter 6: Incidents of Sexual Harassment -- the perceived use of leverage by harassers, as well as victims' responses to the sexual harassment.
Chapter 7: Impact and Cost of Sexual Harassment -- actual dollar cost of sexual harassment to the Federal Government, as well as the perceived consequences to victims.
Chapter 8: Awareness of Remedies and their Effectiveness -- opinions of victims and their supervisors toward informal and formal institutional remedies for stopping sexual harassment.
Chapter 9: Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations.
The Appendices are as follows:
Appendix A: Methodology -- explanation of the methodology used in preparing the study, including the development of the questionnaire, the selection and design of the sample, conduct of the study, the preparation and analysis of the data, and the confidentiality and anonymity of participants.
Appendix B: Definitions of Terms -- definitions of commonly used terms that appear in this report.
Appendix C: Survey Questionnaire -- a copy of the cover letters and questionnaire used in the survey.
Appendix D: Additional Statistical Analyses -- back-up data for figures and tables that appear in the report, as well as additional figures and tables.
Appendix E: Official Policy Documents -- copies of Memoranda of Understanding Between the Investigations Subcommittee and MSPB, EEOC, and OPM; OPM Policy Statement and Definition of Sexual Harassment; EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex; and EEOC Instructions for Prevention of Sexual Harassment in the Workforce Plans.
Appendix F: Agency Actions Regarding Sexual Harassment -- recent steps taken by agencies to reduce sexual harassment.
Appendix G: Survey of Literature -- a review of the current literature on the subject of sexual harassment.
Appendix H: Annotated Bibliography -- an annotated listing of major or useful works classified as general theory and analysis, studies and surveys, mass media articles, legal commentaries, miscellaneous reports, booklets and guides, and bibliographies.
p. 97
9
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations that follow grow directly out of the discussions in the preceding eight chapters. The major findings are summarized and conclusions drawn to facilitate the development of the policy recommendations on ways to remedy sexual harassment in the Federal work force.
The recommendations are directed to those institutions -- Congress, Federal agencies, OPM, EEOC -- that have responsibility for assuring that the Federal workplace is free from unsolicited and unwelcome sexual overtones. Each of these institutions can play an important role in bringing this about by effectively implementing the recommended actions. Most of these actions do not require extensive outlays of funds and resources and are cost effective when compared to the dollar, psychic, and productivity costs of prohibited sexual harassment on the job.
Summary of Findings
View Of Federal Workers Toward Sexual Harassment
A variety of uninvited sexual behaviors are considered to be sexual harassment by both men and women.
Both men and women Federal workers generally agree that uninvited behaviors of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment.
Federal workers believe supervisors should be held to a higher standard of conduct than other workers regarding sexually oriented behavior on the job.
The attitudes of men and women Federal workers about sexual behavior at work vary.
Both men and women Federal workers believe sexual activity, whether voluntary or otherwise, should not occur between people who work together.
Men show a greater tendency than women to think victims are somewhat responsible for bringing sexual harassment on themselves and are inclined to believe the issue of sexual harassment has been exaggerated.
Both men and women Federal workers think sexual harassment is something people should not have to tolerate.
p. 98
Extent Of Sexual Harassment In The Federal Workplace
The incidence rate of sexual harassment in the Federal workforce is wide-spread.
One out of every four Federal employees reported being sexually harassed on the job over a 2-year period.
Women are much more likely to be victims than men -- 42% of all female Federal employees, but only 15% of male employees, reported being sexually harassed.
Sexual harassment can take many forms, and every form except attempted or actual rape or sexual assault was experienced by a sizeable percentage of both men and women.
Many sexual harassment incidents occur repeatedly and are of relatively long duration.
Sexual harassment is not just a one-time experience -- many victims were repeatedly subjected to harassing behaviors, particularly the less severe forms.
Incidents of sexual harassment are not just passing events -- most lasted more than a week, and many lasted longer than 6 months.
The majority of Federal employees who had worked elsewhere feel sexual harassment is no worse in the Federal workplace than in state and local government or in the private sector.
Victims Of Sexual Harassment
Individuals with certain personal and organizational characteristics are more likely to be sexually harassed than others.
Age, marital status, and sexual composition of the employee's work group have a relatively strong effect on whether a Federal employee is sexually harassed.
Factors having a somewhat weaker relationship are employee education level, race or ethnic background, job classification, traditionality of the employee's job, and sex of the employee's immediate supervisor.
Sexual harassment is widely distributed among women and men of various backgrounds, positions, and locations.
Some agencies have a greater incidence of sexual harassment than do others.
Sexual harassment is more likely to occur in work environments where employees have poor communications with their supervisors and feel pressured to participate in activities of a sexual nature.
Perpetrators Of Sexual Harassment
The personal and organizational characteristics of those who harass women are somewhat different from those who harass men.
Most victims are harassed by people of the opposite sex.
Most harassers act alone rather than in concert with another person.
Most harassers of women are older than their victims, and most harassers of men are younger.
Most harassers are married, but many men report being harassed by divorced or single women as well.
Most harassers are of the same race or ethnic background as their victims but minority men report being harassed by those of a different race or ethnic background.
Most harassers are coworkers, but many women are harassed by supervisors.
Many harassers are reported to have bothered more than one victim at work.
Few employees report having been accused of sexually harassing others.
Incidents Of Sexual Harassment
Those who are sexually harassed by supervisors and those who experience the more severe forms of sexual harassment are more likely than other victims to foresee penalties or possible benefits for not going along or going along with the unwanted sexual attention.
A number of informal actions were found by victims to be effective in stopping the sexual harassment.
p. 99
Most victims respond to the sexual harassment by ignoring it, but few find that technique improves the situation.
The most direct and assertive informal responses, such as telling the harasser to stop, are reported to be the most effective actions to take.
Few victims talk about their experiences with others, but those who do find talking to someone with independent authority or organizational responsibility to be more helpful than talking to coworkers, family, or friends.
Filing a formal complaint was also found to be relatively effective for the few who tried it.
Few victims take formal actions, but many who do find them helpful.
The reported response of agency officials to informal and formal charges of sexual harassment has been mixed.
The Impact And Cost Of Sexual Harassment
The cost of sexual harassment to the Federal Government between May 1978 and May 1980 is conservatively estimated to have been $189 million.
Although their experiences do not change the careers and work situations of most victims, a sizeable number of women and men do leave their jobs or suffer other adverse consequences.
A majority of victims did not think their personal well-being or work performance declined as a result of their experience, but a sizeable minority do.
Victims are much more likely to think sexual harassment negatively affected their personal well-being or morale than to believe that their work performance or productivity suffered.
Most victims report that, as far as they know, the morale and productivity of their immediate workgroup are little affected by their personal experience of sexual harassment.
Awareness Of Remedies And Their Effectiveness
Federal workers are generally unaware of formal remedies and even fewer are convinced of their effectiveness.
Most victims and supervisors are relatively unaware of the formal remedies available to victims of sexual harassment.
Relatively few victims and supervisors consider formal remedies effective in helping victims of sexual harassment.
Taking assertive informal action is thought to be the most effective way for employees to make others stop bothering them sexually.
Most victims and supervisors think there is much management can do regarding sexual harassment.
Conclusions
These findings lead to five general conclusions that can be drawn about the sexual harassment in the Federal workplace. In addition, several views about the nature of sexual harassment are discussed.
1. Sexual harassment is a legitimate problem in the Federal workplace.
We have seen that sexual harassment is indeed a widespread and legitimate problem. As shown in Chapter 2, the vast majority of both supervisors and others alike agreed that sexual harassment is behavior that should not be tolerated and a sizeable number of victims indicated that it was a problem where they worked. Chapters 3 and 4 provided information on how widespread and prevalent sexual harassment is among female and male Federal workers. Another indication that sexual harassment is a legitimate problem is the sizeable dollar cost to the Federal Government of the effects of sexual harassment, as conservatively estimated in Chapter 7.
2. In the past, agency managers and supervisors have not been as successful as they could be in resolving problems of sexual harassment.
We found that in the past, management overall has been somewhat less than effective in resolving issues of sexual harassment that have been raised. Chapter 5 shows that few victims talked to supervisors for advice or reported the
p. 100
behavior formally and when they did, they had only a 60-40 chance of having the problem resolved. Problems may also arise when supervisors who do not actually participate in the sexual harassment give tacit approval to the subordinates who engage in the behavior. Since these supervisors have responsibility for employee conduct in their offices, they should take charge in eliminating it from their workplaces rather than approving or ignoring it. The basis for this lack of commitment may be partially explained by the findings in Chapter 2 that a number of supervisors think that the problem of sexual harassment has been exaggerated and that victims are somewhat to blame for bringing the sexual harassment on themselves. Clearly, these attitudes of supervisors tend to undermine the authority and force of agency policy statements prohibiting sexual harassment and have the effect of thwarting their implementation.
3. There is much that management can do about the problem of sexual harassment in the future.
We found that there is much management can do about the problem of sexual harassment in the future to both prevent its occurrence and remedy the effects. Chapter 8 contains information on a number of actions which respondents felt would be helpful in reducing sexual harassment. Chapters 4 and 5 provide data on the characteristics of individuals most likely to be harassed and to do the harassing.
Some of these characteristics are under the control of management and can be adjusted to reduce the rate of sexual harassment. For example, individuals in nontraditional jobs, such as women law enforcement officers, have been shown to experience sexual harassment at somewhat higher rates than others. Supervisors of these employees as well as the employees themselves can be made aware of this fact and appropriate preventive and remedial steps implemented.
4. There are effective actions that victims can take to resolve the problem of sexual harassment.
A number of actions have been discussed that victims themselves can take regarding the sexual harassment. As shown in Chapter 5, the most assertive informal actions are the most effective: talking to someone with either outside or organizational responsibility sometimes helps, and filing a formal complaint as noted above has an average chance of helping the victims. Chapter 8 indicates that victims as well as supervisors need to be made aware of the existence of available remedies so that they can use them if needed. However, Chapter 5 indicates that most victims would prefer to settle the matter informally rather than taking a formal action that would tend to escalate this highly personal matter. Appendix H lists publications that offer additional advice on effective techniques for dealing with sexual harassment.
5. Sexual harassment has varying effects on victims, which probably account for the differences in repercussions.
In studying the effects of sexual harassment on its victims, we found variance in the repercussions, depending on a number of factors. It appears that some victims experience dramatic consequences as a result of this experience and others do not. The causes are various, but contributing factors appear to be the level of severity of the sexual harassment, personal and organizational characteristics of the victim, the organizational level of the harasser, and the perceived motive or demeanor of the harasser.
Some victims were more likely to be sexually harassed than others, and some reported suffering greater consequences, particularly when the harasser had greater power. For example, women victims of actual or attempted rape or assault who were harassed by their supervisors were more likely than other victims to report fearing and suffering negative job consequences as a result of their sexual harassment experience. These victims of "most severe" sexual harassment were also much more likely to report experiencing emotional or physical problems or reductions in their work performance.
However, it should be pointed out that the findings indicate the level of severity by itself does not control whether adverse consequences will occur. Some victims of seemingly mild forms of sexual harassment have reported adverse consequences. For example, an individual who received repeated lewd comments ("less severe" behavior) from her supervisor might suffer greater consequences than an individual who was pressured for sexual favors ("severe" behavior) by a coworker.
p. 101
What Is the Nature of Sexual Harassment?
Although sexual harassment has been demonstrated to be a problem that management can combat, the question still remains: what is the underlying nature of sexual harassment in the first place? Three explanations that were discussed in Chapter 1 have been raised in the literature. The first two views are somewhat interrelated in that those who have low power are thought to be more vulnerable to those with greater power. Based upon the findings in the study, we concluded that the first two explanations appear valid under some circumstances and we rejected the last. The three views are:
That sexual harassment is a form of power that is exercised by those in control, usually men, over low-status employees, usually women.
That individuals with certain low-power characteristics, such as youth and low salaries, are more subject to sexual harassment than others.
That sexual harassment is an expression of personal attraction between men and women that is widespread and cannot and should not be stopped.
The following briefly discusses these views in light of the findings from the study.
Sexual Harassment is an Abuse of Power
This theory grows out of the view that sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination designed to keep women from advancing from low paid, powerless jobs. Women do comprise only about one-third (31%) of the jobs in the Federal workforce and most women occupy the lowest paid jobs compared to men.1
However, the findings show that most victims, both men and women, are harassed by coworkers rather than supervisors who presumably have more power. On its face this finding would tend to disprove the power theory, however, one must look closer at the data. The findings also show that victims, regardless of severity of the harassment, were more likely to perceive and experience adverse consequences if their harasser was a supervisor rather than a
1 See Office of Personnel Management, Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics, Equal Employment Opportunity Statics, November 1978, p. xv. coworker. This seems to indicate that, although not all harassment is an outgrowth of organizational power, those cases where consequences are greater are more likely to be examples of abuse of organizational power. The sexual harassment by coworkers probably has more to do with personal power and sex roles than with organizationally derived power. In any event, further research would be helpful in exploring this issue.
Individuals with Certain Characteristics are More Vulnerable to Sexual Harassment
The view that those with low status and power characteristics are more vulnerable to sexual harassment has been proved in some respects and disproved in others. Some with low power and status, such as younger men and women and trainees, did report receiving sexual harassment disproportionately, but others, such as those in low salary levels, low education levels, and women office and clerical workers, did not.
Sexual Harassment is Not an Expression of Personal Sexual Attraction
The theory that sexual harassment is an expression of personal sexual attraction grows out of a view that sexual harassment is part of standard behavior between the sexes and that employers have no business interfering with these matters of love or personal attraction. This theory has been disproved on several counts.
That many harassers were reported to have harassed more than one victim casts doubt on the idea that sexual harassment is simply a matter of unique personal attraction. The finding that the rate of sexual harassment is not constant among all Federal agencies also somewhat negates the idea that sexual harassment is appropriate sexual behavior that occurs everywhere; that many victims report severe consequences also tends to negate that this behavior is and should be standard practice. In addition, the vast majority of respondents stated that sexual harassment is not something that "people should have to put up with." All of this indicates that sexual harassment should not be considered standard behavior at the workplace and is very much a matter of concern for employers such as the Federal Government.
p. 102
Implications
Understanding that sexual harassment does not affect all victims in the same way is important in developing recommendations on ways to effectively reduce sexual harassment in the Federal workplace.
To help reduce most instances of sexual harassment, where the effects are not so adverse or presumably debilitating, an awareness campaign that focuses on prevention would be the most effective. This campaign should advise managers of their responsibilities and hold them accountable, as well as provide aid to victims in informally resolving these matters.
For the smaller number of instances where the sexual harassment has an extremely adverse or punitive affect, the response of management should be swift and thorough in imposing sanctions against the behavior and in aiding the victim.
These concepts are more thoroughly explored below.
Recommendations
Since sexual harassment has been clearly shown to be a problem in the Federal Government, managerial policies should be instituted stating sexual harassment is unacceptable conduct that will not be condoned. A number of agencies have already begun to do this.2 The Federal courts and Federal regulations3 have also stated that under many circumstances, sexual harassment is a violation of both civil law and criminal law. Therefore, it is both cost-effective and managerially responsible to take effective steps to reduce the amount of sexual harassment in the Federal Government.
Sanctions and Enforcement
1. Agencies should provide strong and effective enforcement against sexual harassment and issue sanctions where appropriate. To do this:
Agencies should conduct swift and thorough investigations to discover evidence of sexual harassment and take appropriate action.
2 See Appendix F for data on these agencies.
3 See Appendix H for a discussion of the legal analysis of sexual harassment.
Agencies should emphasize their strong commitment to prohibiting sexual harassment on the job by imposing sanctions where appropriate against the behavior, including:
enforcing penalties against those who sexually bother others, and
enforcing penalties against managers who knowingly allow this behavior to continue.
2. Complaint channels for allegations of sexual harassment should be clarified and streamlined.
Agency management has a responsibility to investigate and eliminate prohibited behavior, such as sexual harassment. The sanctions imposed and the remedial action taken, as with other violations of the law, should be commensurate with the violation. What is key, however, to render this recommendation effective is that allegations be taken seriously so that forceful and fair resolutions result. This will help to restore the faith of victims as well as supervisors in formal channels for processing complaints or grievances.
No additional legal or regulatory mechanisms appear to be necessary to enforce sanctions against sexual harassment if strong enforcement can be accomplished within current channels. However, the channels must be made more efficient and responsive to the fact that sexual harassment is a legitimate problem that must be handled as seriously as other violations of the law, standards of conduct, or prohibited personnel practices.
Publicizing Managerial Policy and Commitment
3. Managers and other agency officials should be made aware of their responsibility and held accountable for enforcing Government and agency policy prohibiting sexual harassment at the workplace. This can best be accomplished by agency managers:
issuing strong policy statements
otherwise clarifying acceptable behavior for supervisors, and
holding supervisors responsible for the conduct of their offices with regard to sexual harassment through the performance appraisal system.
p. 103
Agencies should emphasize the use of preventive measures and informal resolution of complaints as a means of combating sexual harassment since processing formal complaints is both time-consuming and costly. Since most victims do not file complaints, these measures will also affect the largest number of victims and harassers. The costs of preventing sexual harassment may be more than offset by the savings to the Government in reducing sexual harassment and, thus, reducing job turnover and increasing job productivity and morale.
It is also important to note that a knowledgeable observer with a widespread clinical practice for the last decade finds that enunciating regulations clearly and specifically can be very effective in reducing sexual harassment.4 Buttressing this argument is the finding in Appendix F that the agency with the highest rate of sexual harassment for women also had not issued a policy statement of sexual harassment at the time this survey was conducted.
However, Dr. Rowe cautions that because of heightened awareness caused by publicizing the policy, the number of informal and formal complaints of sexual harassment may temporarily increase in the short run.
4. Agencies should develop a training strategy to aid in preventing sexual harassment; this strategy will be instrumental in targeting those groups that should receive training on a priority basis to best utilize limited training resources.
This training can include inservice classroom training either as a separate course or as part of other courses, publishing pamphlets or handbooks for employees and supervisors on the subject, and providing other awareness activities through lectures and short workshops. An effective training strategy should include at least three target audiences:
managers and supervisors whose responsibility is the conduct of the workplace;
other agency personnel such as personnel and EEO officials who have responsibility to advise victims and supervisors on procedural and other matters regarding sexual harassment, and
4 Mary P. Rowe, Ph.D. Assistant to the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, conversation March 1981.
victims or potential victims requiring information on their rights as well as useful techniques on coping with the sexual harassment informally.
Providing Assistance to Victims
5. Agencies should provide information to victims on effective techniques for resolving incidents of sexual harassment.
Agencies should provide all employees with information (in pamphlet or other written format) regarding:
what the most effective actions are for them to take to stop sexual harassment,
what their rights of redress of sexual harassment are, including the availability of formal complaint channels,
which agency officials have responsibility for processing complaints or assisting with problems associated with incidents of sexual harassment; officials may include Federal Women's Program managers, EEO counselors, EEO officers or personnel officers, and
The study indicates that most victims try to resolve their sexual harassment incidents by ignoring the behavior but that this very rarely solves the problem. Victims should be advised that the most assertive responses are the most effective. Since a sizeable number of victims report suffering negative personal effects that result in losses to the Federal Government, steps should be taken to mitigate some of these effects.
6. Outside agencies, such as the Office of the Special Counsel in the MSPB, should also publicize the availability of their services as resources allow.
7. Federal employee labor unions should be encouraged to instruct shop stewards and other union officials about counseling techniques and legal redress for union member victims of sexual harassment who seek assistance from the union.
p. 104
Follow-up
8. A number of other activities should be instituted to assure compliance with law and regulation as well as to provide follow-up to this study both within the Federal Government and in the private sector.
Steps that should be taken include:
Copies of the MSPB Final Report documenting the incidence of sexual harassment should receive wide distribution among the agencies.
The Congress should continue to monitor the activities of the various Federal agencies regarding sexual harassment.
Agencies should ensure that their training courses developed to prevent sexual harassment are effective.
EEOC should continue its review of actions taken by agencies to combat sexual harassment.
Other research groups, both public and private, should be encouraged to do further analysis on this subject using the MSPB data tape in order to increase understanding and awareness of the problem; agencies should be encouraged to use the MSPB questionnaire to conduct research of organizations within the agencies for purposes of comparison.
State and local governments, universities, as well as companies in the private sector should be encouraged to conduct research on sexual harassment among their own employees or students. The MSPB survey questionnaire should be made available to use as a model.
As with the laws that the Federal Government enforces against the private sector, the laws and policies regarding sexual harassment in the Federal workplace should also be monitored and enforced. The most cost effective approach is to include the monitoring of sexual harassment policies in conjunction with evaluation programs already in place.
back to top