20 Years on: The Challenges Continue - Chapter 2
20 Years on: The Challenges Continue.
Chapter 2: Incidence and experience of sexual harassment
2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an overview of some of the main findings
of the national telephone survey on the incidence and nature of sexual
harassment. Section 2.2 discusses the incidence rate of the experience
of sexual harassment in the community generally, and more particularly
the incidence rate of sexual harassment in the workplace experienced in
the five years prior to conducting the survey. These findings are then
compared to other studies on the incidence of sexual harassment conducted
in Australia and overseas. The incidence rate of the witnessing of sexual
harassment in the workplace in the five years prior to the survey is also
presented.
Also discussed in this chapter are the findings of the
telephone survey in relation to the nature and severity of sexual harassment
experienced in the workplace by interviewees in the five years prior to
the survey.
2.2 Sexual harassment in the general population
2.2.1 Incidence of sexual harassment experienced
Twenty-eight per cent of interviewees between the ages of 18
and 64 years said they had personally experienced sexual harassment. Breaking
this down by gender, a total of 41 per cent of women and 14 per cent of
men stated that they had ever experienced sexual harassment.
Figure 2.1 shows that approximately two-thirds
(65 per cent) of interviewees who experienced sexual harassment had experienced
it in the workplace. This translates to 18 per cent of all interviewees
aged between 18 and 64 years of age stating that they had experienced
sexual harassment in the workplace (and of those, 22 per cent say it happened
in the last year). Again, breaking this down by gender we find that 28
per cent of women and seven per cent of men had experienced sexual harassment
in the workplace at some time. A total of 11 per cent of interviewees
aged between 18 and 64 years report that they have experienced sexual
harassment in the workplace in the last five years.
Of the 28 per cent of the Australian population aged
between 18 and 64 years who experienced sexual harassment, three per cent
experienced it in the provision of goods or services, four per cent experienced
sexual harassment in an educational institution, and 28 per cent indicated
that the sexual harassment had occurred elsewhere. [11]
Figure 2.1
Q1. Have you ever personally experienced sexual harassment?
(Sample size = 824; Margin of error + 3%)
Q2. Where was that sexual harassment experienced? (Asked
of those who have experienced sexual harassment; Sample size = 255; Margin
of error + 6%)
Q4. When did this harassment start? (Asked of those
who had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace; Sample size =
167; Margin of error + 8%)
2.2.2 Comparison with other surveys
These statistics are comparable with other surveys on
sexual harassment in Australia and overseas. A survey of 5,000 people
by TMP Worldwide conducted around March 2002 found that one in three (or
33 per cent) of Australian women and 11 per cent of Australian men had
been victims of sexual harassment in the workplace over the three months
prior to the survey.[12] Another survey of
employer-subscribers to the newsletter Discrimination Alert in
December 1997 found that 42 per cent of respondents had experienced a
sexual harassment complaint in the past 12 months, with a number having
experienced more than one complaint.[13] A poll conducted by the Sydney Morning Herald on 14 November 2003
found that 45 per cent of the 2,141 respondents to the poll had been sexually
harassed at work.[14]
A national survey of 1,000 people aged 18 years and over
commissioned by the New Zealand Human Rights Commission in August 2002
found that 22 per cent of New Zealanders had ever experienced sexual harassment.
Broken down by gender, 31 per cent of women and 13 per cent of men had
experienced sexual harassment. Of those who experienced sexual harassment,
67 per cent had experienced it at work. This translates to just under
15 per cent of all New Zealand respondents aged 18 years and over and
just under 22 per cent of all adult female New Zealand respondents stating
that they had ever experienced sexual harassment in the workplace,[15] which is just slightly less than the 18 per cent of adult Australian interviewees
and 28 per cent of adult Australian women who have ever experienced sexual
harassment in the workplace.
Earlier research conducted in the United States of America
provides similar findings. A telephone survey conducted by Louis Harris
and Associates and released on 28 March 1994 found that of the 782 workers
polled, 31 per cent of female workers and seven per cent of male workers
claimed to have been harassed at work.[16] A survey undertaken in Los Angeles indicated in 1995 that 44 per cent
of women stated that they had experienced sexual harassment at work.[17]
2.2.3 Incidence of witnessing sexual harassment
Figure 2.2 shows that a total of 14 per cent of
interviewees between the ages of 18 and 64 years say they have witnessed
sexual harassment in the workplace in the past five years. Of these, the
majority (87 per cent) say they took some sort of action when it occurred:
- 76 per cent talked or listened to the victim;
- 67 per cent offered advice to the victim;
- 45 per cent confronted the harasser;
- 32 per cent reported the incidence to their employer; and;
- 15 per cent took some other type of action.
Figure 2.2
Q22. Have you witnessed sexual harassment
in your workplace in the last five years? (Sample size = 1006; Margin
of error +3%)
Q23. Did you take any of the following
actions after witnessing this? (Asked of those who witnessed sexual harassment
in the workplace in last five years; Sample size = 142; Margin of error
+ 8%)
The fact that the majority of witnesses to workplace
sexual harassment chose to take some action, whether that be assisting
the target of the sexual harassment, confronting the harasser, or reporting
the incident to their employer, demonstrates that most employees who perceive
certain conduct as sexual harassment are highly likely to take some action
about it.
Employers would be well advised to provide training to
a greater range of employees to give them the skills to effectively deal
with the sexual harassment they observe in the workplace.[18]
The sample sizes are too small to definitively show the
gender breakdown of the action taken by witnesses of sexual harassment
in the workplace. However the data indicate a tendency for women witnesses
to be more likely to talk or listen to the target of harassment or to
offer advice to the target than male witnesses.
2.3 Sexual harassment in the workplace
2.3.1 Nature of the sexual harassment
The telephone survey asked interviewees to indicate which
of 13 descriptions of common sexually harassing behaviours described the
sexual harassment they experienced.[19] Importantly,
interviewees to the telephone survey who experienced sexual harassment
in the workplace in the last five years selected an average of five different
descriptions of harassing behaviour (out of a possible 13) to describe
the sexual harassment experienced.
These 13 descriptions of sexual harassment were aggregated
into physical and non-physical sexual harassment. Physical sexual harassment
was defined as including those interviewees who described the sexual harassment
as:
- sexually explicit physical contact;
- actual or attempted rape or assault;
- unwelcome touching, hugging, cornering or kissing; or
- unnecessary familiarity such as deliberately brushing up against you.
Non-physical sexual harassment was defined exclusively as those
interviewees to the survey who did not experience the physical forms of
sexual harassment outlined above.
Table 2.1 shows the incidence rate of each type of sexual
harassment and the average number of descriptions of the sexual harassment
indicated by interviewees subjected to each particular type of harassment.
Table 2.1
|
Type of sexual harassment
|
Average number of descriptions of sexual
harassment experienced |
|
|
Including physical sexual harassment [21] |
62
|
6.2
|
|
Exclusively non-physical sexual harassment [22]
|
38
|
3.8
|
These data indicate that most sexual harassment experienced
in the workplace in the past five years involved elements of physical
sexual harassment. Moreover, those interviewees who were subjected to
sexual harassment which included physical sexual harassment were more
likely to be subjected to a range of other sexually harassing behaviour
than were interviewees who experienced exclusively non-physical harassment.
This may indicate that physical sexual harassment does not seem to happen
on its own, it either occurs with or progresses after other forms of sexual
harassment. It seems that physical forms of harassing behaviour tend to
occur together. For example, an interviewee who states that she/he was
subjected to "unnecessary familiarity such as brushing up against you"
is also very likely to say that she/he was subjected to "unwelcome touching,
hugging, cornering or kissing".
The fact that interviewees who experienced exclusively
non-physical sexual harassment selected, on average, fewer descriptions
to illustrate the sexual harassment experienced than those interviewees
who experienced sexual harassment which included physical sexual harassment
may indicate that non-physical forms of sexual harassment overlay physical
forms of sexual harassment. Since the telephone survey did not ask interviewees
about the progression of harassing conduct this inference is more speculative
than evidence driven. The notion of progression or escalation of harassing
conduct warrants further research and analysis.
Interviewees who experienced physical forms of sexual
harassment were more likely to make a formal report or complaint about
the sexual harassment than interviewees who experienced exclusively non-physical
sexual harassment. Only one in four of the interviewees who were subjected
to exclusively non-physical sexual harassment reported the harassment,[23] compared with 37 per cent of those who experienced physical forms of sexual
harassment.[24]
Interviewees who were subjected to sexual harassment
which included physical sexual harassment also reported that the harassment
tended to continue for a longer period of time than targets of exclusively
non-physical sexual harassment. Table 2.2 shows that this is particularly
the case where the sexual harassment continued for more than one year.
Again this may suggest a pattern of progression from non-physical to physical
sexual harassment occurring over time. It is also true that progression
from non-physical to physical sexual harassment could occur quickly in
some cases and more slowly in others.
Table 2.2
|
Length of sexual harassment
|
Interviewees who experienced
sexual harassment which included physical sexual harassment (%)[25] |
Interviewees who experienced
exclusively non-physical sexual harassment (%)[26] |
|
One off
|
11
|
21
|
|
Less than 1 month
|
10
|
12
|
|
1 to 3 months
|
28
|
29
|
|
4 to 6 months
|
12
|
7
|
|
7 to 12 months
|
11
|
7
|
|
More than one year
|
24
|
16
|
|
Ongoing/sporadic
|
3
|
7
|
Table 2.3 shows that of those harassers in superior
workplace positions to interviewees, the boss or employer harasser is
significantly more likely to engage in physical sexual harassment rather
than non-physical. Co-worker harassers are more likely to engage in non-physical
sexual harassment than physical sexual harassment.
Table 2. 3
|
Harasser's relationship
to interviewee |
Interviewees who experienced
only non-physical sexual harassment (%)[28] |
|
| Supervisor/manager |
12
|
16
|
| Boss/employer |
26
|
10
|
| Co-worker |
44
|
56
|
| Co-worker (more senior) |
1
|
3
|
| Client/customer |
13
|
6
|
| Others in workplace |
4
|
9
|
Another characteristic of the physical versus non-physical
sexual harassment analysis is related to the gender of the harasser. Table
2.4 shows that male harassers are more likely to subject women to sexual
harassment which includes physical sexual harassment but less likely to
subject men to sexual harassment which includes physical harassment. Where
the harasser is a female there is no difference between the two types
of sexual harassment.
Table 2.4
|
Gender of Harasser/Victim
|
||
| Male to Female sexual harassment |
72
|
66
|
| Female to Male sexual harassment |
19
|
19
|
| Male to Male sexual harassment |
7
|
13
|
| Female to Female sexual harassment |
2
|
2
|
2.3.2 Severity of the sexual harassment
To fall within the legislative definition of sexual harassment under the SDA,
the behaviour must be such that a reasonable person would anticipate that
the person targeted would feel offended, humiliated or intimidated by
the conduct. [31]
In an attempt to measure the seriousness or severity
of the sexual harassment experienced by interviewees to the telephone
survey, those who had experienced sexual harassment at work in the past
five years were asked to rate on a five-point scale how offended and how
intimidated the sexual harassment made them feel (one being not offended
or intimidated at all and five being extremely offended or intimidated).[32] Figure 2.3 shows that on average, interviewees felt more offended than
intimidated by the sexual harassment experienced.[33] Half of the interviewees stated that the sexual harassment made them feel
very or extremely offended, while 2 in 5 interviewees reported that the
sexual harassment made them feel very or extremely intimidated. Only 10
per cent of interviewees did not feel at all offended by the sexual harassment,
compared with 23 per cent not feeling at all intimidated.
Figure 2.3
Q5b. How offended did the harassment make you feel?
Q5c.Overall how intimidated did the harassment make
you feel? (Sample size = 183; Margin of error + 7%)
The fact that the experience of sexual harassment made interviewees
feel on average more offended than intimidated may indicate that sexual
harassment is also perceived as an affront to a person's professionalism
or as inappropriate workplace behaviour.
Women of all ages who had experienced sexual harassment
at work in the past five years were more likely to have felt more offended
and more intimidated by the harassment than male interviewees. Female
targets on average rated the offensiveness of the sexual harassment experienced
as 3.7. Male targets on average rated the offensiveness of the sexual
harassment experienced as 3.0. Female targets of sexual harassment on
average rated the harassment experienced as 3.3 on the intimidation scale,
compared with male targets who on average rated the sexual harassment
experienced as 2.5. This may suggest that the sexual harassment suffered
is different in kind for men and women or that similar experiences are
perceived differently by men and women, however the sample size for male
interviewees (31) is too small for further analysis or to draw firm conclusions.
Further research on the nature and impact of sexual harassment on men
is needed.
Reporting the harassment
A positive relationship between interviewees feeling
offended and intimidated and the probability of reporting the sexual harassment
was found. Feeling more offended or intimidated increases the probability
of formally reporting the sexual harassment, and reporting the harassment
immediately or the next business day. Of those interviewees who rated
the offensiveness of the sexual harassment they experienced as between
one and three, only 19 per cent formally reported the harassment.[34] In contrast, of those interviewees who rated the offensiveness of the
sexual harassment they experienced as between 4 and 5, 45 per cent formally
reported the harassment.[35]
Of the interviewees who rated the sexual harassment they
experienced as between 1 and 3 on the intimidation scale, 22 per cent
reported the harassment.[36] Of those who
rated the sexual harassment as between 4 and 5 on the intimidation scale,
46 per cent formally reported the harassment.[37] The severity of the sexual harassment, so far as it can be measured by
the offensiveness and intimidation scales, does impact on the likelihood
of reporting the harassment.
This suggests that if an employee reports sexual harassment
in the workplace, it is likely to be serious. The seriousness of the sexual
harassment needs to be taken into account by employers when dealing with
the complaint.
Type of harassment
On average, interviewees to the telephone survey felt
more offended and more intimidated by physical forms of sexual harassment
than non-physical. In terms of offensiveness, non-physical forms of sexual
harassment were given an average rating of 3.2 while physical forms of
sexual harassment were rated 3.7. On the intimidation scale, non-physical
sexual harassment was given an average rating of 2.8 compared with an
average rating of 3.2 for physical forms of sexual harassment. In so far
as the offensiveness and intimidation scales measure the severity of sexual
harassment, it suggests that the experience of physical sexual harassment
is more severe than non-physical.[38]
Prevalence of sexual harassment in some workplaces
Of the 11 per cent of Australians between the ages of 18 and
64 years who reported that they have experienced sexual harassment in
the workplace in the past five years, 58 per cent say it has happened
to someone else in the same place of work. Of these, 33 per cent say sexual
harassment is common in their workplace, 37 per cent say it has occurred
sometimes, 19 per cent say it is rare in their workplace, and 11 per cent
say it is very rare.
This finding may suggest that in those workplaces where
sexual harassment is occurring, it is more likely to be happening to more
than one employee.
Footnotes
11. "Elsewhere"
included at bars/pubs, at people's houses, at parties. Sexual harassment
in these situations may not constitute unlawful sexual harassment under
the SDA because the SDA only prohibits sexual harassment occurring in
certain areas of public life, including employment, educational institutions,
and the provision of goods, services, and accommodation.
12. TMP Worldwide, Undated media release
"Sexual Harassment on the Rise", March 2002.
13. "40% suffer harassment" 53 Discrimination
Alert 9 December 1997, p1.
14. http://smh.com.au/polls/national/results.html As a self-report, positive responses are likely to be high.
15. Human Rights Commission of New Zealand
"One in three women sexually harassed survey shows" http://www.hrc.co.nz/index.php?p=13856
16. Capstone Communications "Statistics
on Sexual Harassment" Louis Harris & Associates Telephone Poll 28 March
1994 http://www.capstn.com/stats.htm
17. G Wyatt & M Reiderle "The prevalence
and context of sexual harassment among African American and White Amercian
women" (1995) 10(3) Journal of Interpersonal Violence 309.
18. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: A Code of Practice for
Employers HREOC Sydney 2004, p26.
19. These categories of sexually harassing
behaviour included "suggestive comments or jokes", "staring or leering",
"sexually explicit emails or SMS messages", "sexually explicit pictures
or posters", "intrusive questions about your private life or body", "unnecessary
familiarity, eg. deliberately brushing up against you", "unwelcome touching,
hugging, cornering or kissing", "unwanted invitations to go out on dates",
"insults or taunts based on your sex", "sexually explicit physical contact",
"actual or attempted rape or assault", "requests or pressure for sex",
and "other". The "other" category included the following descriptions:
"calls outside work", "in the leering part he was also stimulating himself
at the same time", "kept showing her cleavage/wearing a low-cut top",
and "turning up at your home".
20. Based on a sample size of 200, with
a margin of error of plus or minus 7 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
21. Based on a sample size of 125, with
a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
22. Based on a sample size of 75, with
a margin of error of plus or minus 11 percentage points at the 95 per
cent confidence level.
23. Based on a sample size of 75, with
a margin of error of plus or minus 11 percentage points at the 95 per
cent confidence level.
24. Based on a sample size of 125 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
25. Based on a sample size of 125 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
26. Based on a sample size of 75 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 11 percentage points at the 95 per
cent confidence level.
27. Based on a sample size of 125 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
28. Based on a sample size of 75 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 11 percentage points at the 95 per
cent confidence level.
29. Based on a sample size of 125 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 per cent
confidence level.
30. Based on a sample size of 75 with
a margin of error of plus or minus 11 percentage points at the 95 per
cent confidence level.
31. See section 28A of the SDA.
32. While the "reasonable person" test
in the SDA is an objective test, the rating of the offensiveness or intimidation
of the sexual harassment experienced by interviewees is a useful tool
to measure the severity of the harassment. See Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: A Code of
Practice for Employers HREOC Sydney 2004, p13 for information about
the objective test under the SDA.
33. The average rating for how offended
was 3.5; for how intimidated the average rating was 3.0.
34. Based on a sample size of 91. Margin
of error plus or minus 12 per cent.
35. Based on a sample size of 88. Margin
of error plus or minus 12 per cent.
36. Based on a sample size of 109 and
a margin of error of plus or minus 12 per cent.
37. Based on a sample size of 72 and
a margin of error of plus or minus 12 per cent.
38. Note that there were individual
instances in which exclusively non-physical sexual harassment was rated
as extremely offensive and extremely intimidating.
Chapter 1 << Chapter 2 >> Chapter 3
Last updated:
24 March 2004.