Workplace Harassment and Discrimination: A Critical Analysis

This article provides a critical analysis of workplace harassment and discrimination, including its impact on immigrant women employees and the need for effective prevention strategies. It discusses the legal framework, risk factors, and intersectional disadvantages faced by victims. The case of A.B against her employer is examined, highlighting the compensation awarded. References to relevant studies and reports are provided.

Running head: HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
1) Workplace harassment also identified as ‘workplace misconduct’ or workplace bullying
primarily occurs to individuals harassed by another employee. Such acts of mistreatment are
significantly based on employees’ race, ethnic background, sex, national origin, demographic
factors, disability, or sexual orientation. Feldblum and Lipnic (2016) have noted that workplace
harassment includes any inappropriate or unwanted behaviour towards another employee at the
workplace and is thus considered as an unlawful act in all states. Several state laws have been
positioned in place in order to safeguard employees against any forms of discrimination or
harassment. However, with extensive range of workplace harassment, it is imperative for
employer and employees to obtain comprehensive understanding of workplace harassment and
its type to aid victims cope with these negative experiences (Astrauskaite et al., 2015). For
example, a victim could experience racial harassment because of his or her ethnic background,
national origin, race, skin colour, lineage, sexual orientation or citizenship. A recent workplace
discrimination case in a Canadian-based aviation services company provides a good example of
the type of verbal conduct that can generate a workplace harassment claim. In that case an
employee reported to be harassed because of his national origin which is Palestinian and
belonging to Muslim community (Okechukwu et al., 2014). The employee supposed that his
supervisor passed bigotry comments about Arab.
2) Harassment is extensive in Canadian workplaces. McDonald, Charlesworth and Graham
(2015) have revealed that over 45% of Canadian labour force experience discrimination or bully
in the workplace. However, only 35% of the cases are reported to the employer. While regardless
of report of workplace harassment cases, there has been identified no distinct corrective action to
deal with such events of workplace harassment, thus resulting the victims to lose job engagement
and leave the job. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario recently revealed that several Canadian

2HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
organizations have been focusing on legal eligibility of employees in working in Canada on a
permanent ground on the basis of citizenship (Okechukwu et al., 2014). Such legal eligibility
criteria have been in violation of the province’s Human Rights Code. Furthermore, the Canada
Labour Code establishes employees’ rights to employment free of harassment, thus requiring
employers to take positive action to prevent any forms of workplace harassment. Reports of
Feldblum and Lipnic (2016) have revealed that in 2016, over 8% of Canadian women reported of
being sexually harassed in the workplace in the last year in comparison with less than 2% of
male employees.
3) Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) define workplace harassment as
involving in the course of vexatious behavioural pattern or comment against an employee in the
organization. OHSA establishes rights and duties for occupational health and safety of all parties
in the workplace (Hersch, 2015). The act typically offers enforcement of the law in cases where
compliance has not been voluntarily attained. Hennekam and Bennett (2017) have noted that
one of the key purposes of the OHSA relies on facilitating strong Internal Responsibility System
(IRS) in the workplace.
4) Employers often address workplace harassment by setting up policies which proscribe
workplace hostility. A vital part of preventing harassment claims and further safeguarding the
organization is a documented policy stating that harassment will not be tolerated. Furthermore,
employers can establish effective complaint procedure and create comfortable and flexible
workplaces for employees to distinguish acts of harassment (Astrauskaite et al., 2015). In
addition to this, employers must ensure all relevant policies are updated which should be
accessible to all employees and distinct structure for individuals within the organization.
Okechukwu et al. (2014) have noted that organizations should ensure the leadership of the

3HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
organisation manifestly establishes and openly communicates a zero-tolerance approach to
harassment in the workplace. On the other hand, Hennekam & Bennett (2017) have stated that
the most significant element to efficiently deal with workplace harassment is to create an
inclusive, diverse and supportive culture where employees must develop the sense that
inappropriate behaviours must not be tolerated and that any forms of grievances, complaints or
allegations must be taken into account and properly executed.
Critical Analysis
1) Who-The case of workplace harassment primarily involved a female immigrant from Thailand
who has secured her first job and position of residence with the employer (Hrlsc.on.ca, 2018).
What- By successfully securing her first job, A.B the victim with her previous experiences has
been able to increase not only the security of wages but also has been applicable of receiving
accommodation and other services. However, both the offenders are compelled to pay $200,000
as compensation for detrimental impact, dignity and self-respect (Hersch, 2015).
When- The applicant supposed that personal respondent along with her property-owner and
supervisor has over and over again sexually harassed and molested her since the early 1990’s.
Where- Reports of Bates et al. (2018) have revealed that the sexual assaults, harassment and
molestation and mistreatment have not only occurred at her workplace but also took place in her
apartment.
Why-Such a case of harassment has primarily involved various events of immensely severe
sexual assaults, molestation along with sexual harassment incidents. In addition to this,
Hennekam and Bennett (2017) have revealed that both the organization and the landlord

4HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
primarily indulged in the acts of harassment due to cultural variance and lack of cultural
competence.
2) The case of A.B in opposition to her employer Joe Singer Shoes Limited has shed light
on several cases of mistreatment and harassment for women immigrant employees. Astrauskaite
et al. (2015) have noted that anywhere from 27% to 85% of immigrant women workers have
experienced severe sexual harassment and molestation in the workplace. A range of risk factors
have made low wage employees to be specifically susceptible towards such mistreatment.
Furthermore, the case of A.B nationally originating from Thailand with her son has brought
events of intersectional disadvantages which many women migrating from other nations have
been facing. Okechukwu et al. (2014) have noted that women employed in low income positions
tend to encounter intersectional disadvantages which have been attributed by ethnic
backgrounds, race, and national origin, gender identity along with other attributes beyond gender
which tend to intensify biased and discriminatory behaviour further leading to sexually
harassment. Furthermore, several low waged jobs related to home health assistant or agricultural
worker are disproportionally held by women of colour or immigrants. On the other hand,
McDonald, Charlesworth and Graham (2015) have noted that major proportion of immigrant
female employees tend to encounter language obstacles which hinder their ability to attain
assistance and develop acquaintance unfamiliar with laws against sexual harassment. With
majority of harassment cases being unreported, the fear and apprehension of these victims
intensifies. However, the cases of A.B in opposition to her employer, both the offenders have
been compelled to pay $200,000 as compensation for detrimental impact, dignity and self-respect
(Hrlsc.on.ca, 2018)..

5HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
References
Astrauskaite, M., Notelaers, G., Medisauskaite, A., & Kern, R. M. (2015). Workplace harassment:
Deterring role of transformational leadership and core job characteristics. Scandinavian Journal
of Management, 31(1), 121-135.
Bates, C. K., Jagsi, R., Gordon, L. K., Travis, E., Chatterjee, A., Gillis, M., ... & Fivush, B. (2018). It is
time for zero tolerance for sexual harassment in academic medicine. Academic medicine, 93(2),
163-165.
Feldblum, C. R., & Lipnic, V. A. (2016). Select task force on the study of harassment in the
workplace. Washington: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Hennekam, S., & Bennett, D. (2017). Sexual harassment in the creative industries: Tolerance, culture
and the need for change. Gender, Work & Organization, 24(4), 417-434.
Hersch, J. (2015). Sexual harassment in the workplace. IZA World of Labor.
Hrlsc.on.ca. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.hrlsc.on.ca/sites/default/files/docs/en/Annual-Reports/
2017-18%20Annual%20Report%20FINAL%20Web%20EN.pdf
McDonald, P., Charlesworth, S., & Graham, T. (2015). Developing a framework of effective prevention
and response strategies in workplace sexual harassment. Asia Pacific Journal of Human
Resources, 53(1), 41-58.
Okechukwu, C. A., Souza, K., Davis, K. D., & de Castro, A. B. (2014). Discrimination, harassment,
abuse, and bullying in the workplace: contribution of workplace injustice to occupational health
disparities. American journal of industrial medicine, 57(5), 573-586.