Africa as no exception. It is generally accepted that women constitute the vast majority of sexual harassment victims. Sexual harassment is therefore one of the major barriers to women’s equality as it is a significant obstacle to women’s entrance into many sectors of the labour market. The Constitution now provides that no person may unfairly discriminate against anyone on grounds of, inter alia, sex and gender. The Employment Equity Act now provides that harassment is a form of unfair discrimination. It has been said that harassment is discriminatory because it raises an arbitrary barrier to the full and equal enjoyment of a person’s rights in the workplace. Much can be learned from the law of the United States and that country’s struggle to fit harassment under its discrimination laws. The Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment Cases attempts to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace by providing procedures that will enable employers to deal with occurrences of sexual harassment and to implement preventative measures. The Code also encourages employers to develop and implement policies on sexual harassment that will serve as a guideline for the conduct of all employees. Although the Code has been subject to some criticism, particularly regarding the test for sexual harassment, it remains a valuable guide to both employers and employees alike. The appropriate test for sexual harassment as a form of unfair discrimination has given rise to debate. Both the subjective test and the objective test for sexual harassment present problems. Some authors recommend a compromise between these two tests in the form of the “reasonable victim” test. The Employment Equity Act makes the employer liable for the prohibited acts of the employee in certain circumstances. The Act, however, places certain responsibilities on the employer and the employee-victim before the employer will be held liable for sexual harassment committed by an employee. Sexual harassment committed by an employee constitutes misconduct and can be a dismissible offence. An employer may also be held to have constructively dismissed an employee, if the employer was aware of the sexual harassment and failed to control such behaviour, and the employee is forced to resign. The test for determining the appropriateness of the sanction of dismissal for sexual harassment is whether or not the employee’s misconduct is serious and of such gravity that it makes a continued employment relationship intolerable. However, for such a dismissal to be fair it must be both substantively fair and procedurally fair.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:11062 |
| Date | January 2004 |
| Creators | Ristow, Liezel |
| Publisher | University of Port Elizabeth, Faculty of Law |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Masters, LLM |
| Format | 71 pages, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds