Sexual Harassment Investigation

grahamcracker · May 2005

When investigating a situation of a supervisor having a consentual affair with a subordinate that has been reported by a third individual, what are some questions to ask each party during the investigation?

TN HR · May 2005

Welcome to the forum Cracker! I'm not sure I understand your post. Are you investigating harrasment or are you perhaps investigating the possibility of an affair between two consenting adults, as reported by someone else?

Be careful where you go with this one.

Gene

grahamcracker · May 2005

An employee has reported an affair between two other individuals who are supervisor and subordinate. We need to investigate which will require questioning all three parties. I was interested in some suggestions of questions that would be appropriate to ask, particularly the subordinate who has not yet claimed harassment. This situation could be perceived as having created a hostile environment.

Dasher · May 2005

We have a specific policy about supervisors dating those who report to them, as it impacts the work relationship between the two and others in the department. Is this your case?

grahamcracker · May 2005

We do not have a "dating" policy. The situation is that an employee has reported that two other individuals are having an affair. The two individuals are supervisor and subordinate. The subordinate has not raised a sexual harassment claim but the reporting employee infers a hostile environment. In investigating the situation, I will need to question all parties. I was asking for any suggestions of appropriate questions to ask.

lynn2008 · May 2005

The place to start is having the complaining employee document/write down the details of the complaint, to define the issue.

If the hostile environment mentioned can be defined, then you have a starting point to investigate.

I have had a similar issue between a supervisor/subordinate, and the coworkers did not like to watch the lunch and break time lap dance and face sucking in their work areas.

If their is any perceived problem, it should be discussed with the supervisor. The supervisor does have a responsibility to act professionally at work, regardless of the existance or lack of a fraternization/dating policy. Will he/she like the conversation? Of course not - but he/she should be aware of potential problems. Most people are not aware of their behavior when it is induced by excess hormones, but need to be told before it gets out of hand.

Expect no grins and giggles on this one! Good luck!

System · May 2005

If there was a report from another employee regarding preferential treatment, unfair treatment, discriminatory treatment or likewise, wouldn't there be a duty to investigate the manner in which the Supervisor was running his area? Then why do some of you feel that a claim of hostile environment/fratenization is any different just because it's rumor or inuendo? The company has a duty to investigate, but not imply any wrongdoing. The investigation should focus on the supervisor's alleged unfair treatment of others, and should ask the question "is there any reason why any of your employees would percieve you as engaging in preferential treatment? If the relationship is revealed, the company should then make a strong demand that the relationship not effect the work of the supervisor, the underling and others in the dept., and that should that occur, serious repurcussion will result. Then quickly retreat to your office and develop a non-frat policy, and disseminate it to all. Office romances rarely work out, and many result in extreme disruption to the workplace, if not litigation.They should be strongly discouraged, if not outright forbidden.

marc · May 2005

This sounds like more of a fraternization issue than a harrassment case. But if you investigate, start with the question regarding the consent. Then just for fun, have them each sign a form acknowledging the relationship. Further, some statements regarding separating work from personal and that harassment/retaliation will not be claimed by either during their careers at XYZ Company (these are possible portions of a fraternization policy).

The reporting relationship is a problem, not just because of the possibility of favoritism whilst the affair is happening, but also because of the perception of favoritism by other EEs.

Next, when the affair hits a bump or two, the subordinate is in a great position to make everyone uncomfortable - then you can have your harrassment investigation.

Lots of places to go with this, but start with your company policies. Do you have a fraternization policy? If not, it might be a good idea to put one in place this afternoon.

Dasher · May 2005

Yes to all that Marc covered above,

There can be a hostile environment charge by others who witness and/or are in the position to be influenced by this relationship, i.e., raises, promotion, training opportunities, etc.

In January, my very best assistant had to resign because of a similar situation. As good as she was, I am relieved. So glad not to be in your shoes right now.

dchr9203 · May 2005

This would be tough because, without a no frat policy nor a complaint of harassment or hostile environment, you've got no grounds to "investigate". You'll definitely want to carefully monitor the subordinate's employment (i.e. raises, promotions) moving forward. If you feel like you absolutely must talk to them, maybe you could start with the supv and be direct.
1. Its been reported that you're in a relationship with so & so. What say ye?
2. Do you understand the potential ramifications of this relationship?
3. What assurance do we as the employer have that you can and will conduct yourselves professionally and maturely now or in the event the relationship sours?
Then ask the subordinate the same things. Then document, document, document. If you intend to implement a policy, let them know its coming, but I'm not sure that since they're "before the fact", you can do much about it. Good luck.

Don D · May 2005

It would be a monumental mistake to launch an investigation based on rumor, inuendo, reports from third parties, speculation, theories about potential hostile environment and what you or I might like or not like about cavorting employees.

If you have no policy in place and have no complaint, you have no responsibility nor right to investigate.

You investigate ME for something like that and start with all this crap and I'm gonna ask, "Oh yeah, where's the company policy?"

LarryC · May 2005

I'm going to give you my perspective from personal experience. I was that "supervisor" in a previous life. Actually I was the plant manager and I was dating a machine operator who was in my direct line of report two levels below. In the end, I was fired over it. The operator remained. The company did it right, in my opinion, and even without a specific policy regarding this situation, I agree with what they did.

My boss, whom I had a very good working relationship with, interviewed me several times, "letting me in on" rumors and "shop talk" that had become known to him. At one point he told me that this was becoming too disruptive and something would have to be done. (The shop or floor talk, grahamcracker, will simmer and eventually get to the point of being disruptive.)
Even with our best efforts to keep our affair under wraps, the talk on the floor had reached an uproar, I had become ineffective, and my boss could not continue dealing with this powderkeg. I was let go. This whole scenario played out over a period of about nine months and was a terrific strain on the organization. It was a relief for everyone (including me) when it was over.

This is not an easy one, grahamcracker. Some of the posts have some good advise regarding the favoritism, potential sexual harassment should the relationship sour, and policies, etc.

How did my situation turn out? The operator became my wife (going on 14 years now)and she is now a production supervisor of said company. I also attend company functions with her and network with the HR guy who is one of the best in the field that I've seen.

Ain't this just the sweetest story you ever heard?

TN HR · May 2005

Thank you Don. That's exactly where I was going with this at the very top, first post.

Also, I just realized that I referred to grahamcracker as simply cracker. Please no one take any sort of offense to that as it was very innocent.

Gene

Crout · May 2005

I wouldn't make mountains out of molehills with this one, but the fact that they are supervisor and subordinate does make it worthy of a conversation, rather than an investigation. You could sit down with the supervisor and let him/her know that there are rumors flying around about the affair, and that you're concerned about the potential effects it might have on the work environment. The supervisor might then tell you to go pound sand, but at least you'll have given him/her the message that they need to keep the relationship on the "DL" as they say.

Don D · May 2005

Had the question that GCracker posed in any way related to the scenario Larry rolled out, I would agree that it would be in the company's interest to take action. However, based on the question, and the question alone, I say no action is appropriate, absent a policy. Otherwise you're investigating/disciplining for something in the absence of a problem, based on conjecture, what ifs and opinion.

I can appreciate that Larry's situation rolled out the way it did, complicated matters for the company, impacted productivity and got him fired. But, I don't think we're about making those sorts of crystal-ball predictions up front.

I am also surprised that this woman has let Larry hang around for fourteen years. Just kidding.

LarryC · May 2005

First of all, Don, I'm surprised too that she has tolerated me for this long. God Bless her young, good looking heart.

Second of all, I really do think that a sitdown with the supervisor is a good idea and necessary as a first step in the "employer knew or should have known" defense. Hopefully, for his sake, the sitdown will be enough to persuade him to KEEP things cool. I wasn't that smart.

Gillian3 · May 2005

There is nothing to do other than to talk to the supervisor first - is what we have been told true?Is this consensual? If so, you do understand the problems that can be caused by supervisor/employee relationships, don't you? You do understand the company has the right to be concerned about issues that can create problems in the future, right? If there is no policy in place, state your expectations about professional conduct at work and the steps that you will take if the conduct is not professional. For the employee, all that is necessary is to make sure that the relationship is consensual and that there has been no unwanted pressure. This is not an investigation of sexual harassment, unless you find out from the employee that it is not consensual.

It would be a good idea to have a policy to prohibit supervisor/employee relationships, however, that will be worthless unless the CEO buys into that and states that it is his/her expectation that managers/supervisors will follow the policy. Otherwise, it will just be an HR thing and won't have the impact of top management support.

Dasher · May 2005

Well, I love love too, however, the concern would be with the potential problems for the workplace. Once the company is on notice (someone reported that) it must take steps to ameliorate possible harm. Red flags are all over the place. That does not mean storming in and making demands of the employees involved in an affair. However, it is prudent to hold that conversation mentioned above now, and document it, and get ready for some disEase in the workplace. HR's role in this is not to strong arm, but to be proactive. The supervisor gave up his/her rights to say "butt out" when he/she started dating a subordinate. Trust me, when and if a legal suit should result (either by the (now) consenting employee, or an impacted employee who may charge favoritism because of the relationship -- the company will have to be involved.

TN HR · May 2005

I continue to monitor this thread and am still in awe at the response many of you have offered. It is this continuous wrap-around-the-axle, investigate everything-at-all-costs mentality that plagues our profession.

I've said it one hundred times before and I will say it again. We are paid to use our judgement and sift through these issues. We cannot, I repeat, if we are ever to be valued at the table, cannot continue with this wanton one-size-fits all mentality of investigating everything simply because it fits one of our buzz-word or buzz-situation templates.

Do this long enough and you will lose credibility.

Gene

System · May 2005

Or ignore a potential claim and lose more than your credibility. You're right that we cannot waste our time looking into every little bitch, moan and whine, but when you have a situation where a supervisor is possibly doin' the help, you should at least look into the merits of the allegation. If it appears meritless, ignore it and move on; but if there is evidence that the supervisor is engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate, I'd nip that in the bud pretty quickly. And quit worrying about your "place at the table". Your worth will speak for itself.....

marc · May 2005

GCrackers second post had the complaining EE infering hostile work environment. I am not sure that inference necessitates an investigation, but once burdened with knowledge, I think you have to act.

I would also say that even a strong hint of a supervisor subordinate relationships would call for an investigation in some departments. For instance if your A/P clerk and the person doing your bank reconciliations were having an affair, the opportunity for collusion to circumvent financial controls becomes to great to ignore.

I won't go into all the methods that could be employed to illegally divert company cash into personal usage, but trust me, such a collusion could be devastating and not be discovered for some time.

There are types of supervisor subordinate relationships that could easily circumvent normal controls achieved by segregation of duties. The likelihood of that circumvention is greater if an intimate relationship exists.

Just thought I would point out some circumstances when being burdened with such knowledge might require additional investigation.

Gillian3 · May 2005

It really isn't an investigation situation. There would certainly be a problem if the relationship was one which could create a conflict of interest. If so, it is one of dealing with the possible violation of company ethics policy and that means a talk with the supervisor. Maybe we have a semantics problem and taking to the supervisor and employee is viewed as an investigation. I don't call it that but maybe others do.

Further, some organizations seem not to have a big issue with relationships between employees and supervisors and if that is OK with them, then there isn't a problem. Hopefully, they would take a harder line with the conflict examples you described.

Whatever · May 2005

One of the questions has to concern why there is a thrid party? Have they witnessed something that made them uncomfortable or do they have an axe to grind. An inference of a hostile environment is not the same as being told there is a hostile environment. You need further information. You cannot investigate simply because there is an relationship between two consenting adults.

Furthermore, now may be the time to come up with a "dating" policy.

POPEYE · May 2005

I think it all boils down to Party #3 is jealous because the supervisor is directing all of their attention to Party #2 and not Party #3.

Sexual Harassment Investigation

Comments