These are clearly not small amounts, but they are not the only consequences of workplace harassment for employers.

The EEOC cites “a host of indirect costs that, while often invisible, can tower over the direct costs.” What would those be? According to the EEOC those hidden costs include, without limitation, decreased productivity, increased turnover, and reputational damage. To those who might think reputational damage is not so significant, consider that an employer with a bad reputation will often have trouble attracting and retaining quality talent, which in turn will impact productivity and ultimately, the bottom line.

Now that we understand that workplace harassment persists, that underreporting continues, and that there is in fact a compelling business reason to do something, what exactly do we do? That question really is the main focus of the EEOC’s report. The EEOC essentially advocates a holistic approach, starting with promoting a culture committed to preventing harassment. That commitment must start with the top echelons of management (leadership). Employers must then have systems in place that hold all employees accountable for complying with this company culture (accountability).

Many have seized on one particular (and unfortunately misinterpreted) finding, namely that training in its present form does not seem to have prevented harassment. Does that mean that training is not necessary? According to the EEOC, no – training must change and new and different approaches to training must be explored.

What does this mean, that training should change? Change to what? The EEOC’s findings were that much of the training done over the last 30 years focused primarily if not solely on avoiding legal liability. Instead, the EEOC recommends that training be tailored to the specific needs and circumstances of each employer, and not be a one-size-fits-all approach. Training should take into account the invaluable role that first-line supervisors and middle managers can play in preventing and stopping harassment – when they are trained correctly. Finally, training should be part of a “holistic culture of non-harassment that starts at the top”, rather than something that is done in a vacuum without consideration of the specific workforce and workplace.

It’s all fine and well to say that “New and different approaches to training must be explored”, but what does that mean? Thankfully, Commissioners Feldblum and Lipnic provide some specific ideas that “may show promise for harassment training”. Specifically, they mention “bystander intervention training”, which has been used to combat sexual assault on campuses, and would empower co-workers, giving them tools to intervene when they witness harassing behavior that “may show promise for harassment prevention”, and “workplace civility training” that focuses on promoting respect and civility in the workplace generally, rather than eliminating offensive behavior based on protected characteristics protected under anti-discrimination laws. These options that Feldblum and Lipnic seem to feel have promise are decidedly proactive in contrast to the majority of current efforts, which appear more reactive.

Employers may also be pleased that the EEOC has plainly acknowledged tensions between anti-discrimination laws and the National Labor Relations Board’s recent interpretations of the NLRA, and has recommended the following:

Employers can actually benefit from reading the full report, which includes very informative, helpful information in a readable format and can be found here.

For more information, contact Ahmed Younies at (800) 708-3655, Extension 703 or ayounies@hurunlimitedinc.com.

The post Is it Time for a New Approach to Workplace Harassment Prevention? The EEOC Says “Yes” appeared first on Affirmative Action | HR Unlimited, Inc..

http://www.hrunlimitedinc.com/harassment-prevention/