Hong Kong bosses must do much more to tackle sexual harassment at work
- At the heart of the problem is that sexual harassment often occurs in the context of a power imbalance, which can deter victims from speaking up
- Employers must have a clear anti-harassment policy and complaint-handling procedures, and give periodic awareness training
Imagine your boss cracking an offensive sexual joke in front of you, or a colleague caressing your hip in the office without your consent. Would you file a report?
The survey, which sampled more than 5,000 people aged 18-64, marked the city’s first-ever representative study on sexual harassment involving the general population rather than a specific industry or sector.
The most commonly reported form of workplace sexual harassment was sexually suggestive comments or jokes made in the victim’s presence (61.5 per cent). Some respondents had also been exposed to inappropriate physical contact (22.6 per cent), indecent emails or texts (14.6 per cent), and voyeurism or non-consensual taking of intimate images (8.5 per cent).
Alarmingly, almost half (46.1 per cent) of the victims who did not take any action thought that doing so “would be useless”. They also worried about being labelled a troublemaker (39.7 per cent) and jeopardising their relationship with the harassers (35 per cent).
At the heart of the problem is that sexual harassment often occurs in the context of a power imbalance, which can deter victims from breaking the silence. The study indicated that there was a larger proportion of victims among interns (25.5 per cent) and contract workers (15.9 per cent), than permanent staff (11.4 per cent). Over 24 per cent of the harassers were the victim’s immediate supervisor or higher-ranked colleague.
It is crucial, then, for employers to establish a clear and transparent anti-sexual harassment policy and complaint-handling procedure, one that would give employees the confidence of being treated impartially and getting adequate redress after speaking up.
The EOC is equally alerted to the higher risks of sexual harassment created by advances in digital technology. The survey revealed that 17.8 per cent had reportedly been subject to online sexual harassment in the preceding 24 months.
Gender equality at work: how do Hong Kong, Singapore and others compare?
This takes us back to the role employers can play in combating sexual harassment. In mainland China, the Civil Code imposes an positive duty on organisations to take reasonable precautions to prevent sexual harassment from those who can take advantage of their position and power.
A similar duty exists under the 2010 Equal Opportunity Act in Australia’s Victoria state, requiring employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate sexual harassment as far as possible.
The EOC has recommended that the government explore the feasibility of a similar duty on employers under Hong Kong’s Sex Discrimination Ordinance.
Sexual harassment between people working for different organisations but sharing the same workplace is also prohibited after amendments in 2020. On both counts, the government took in the EOC’s proposals to fill gaps in the law.
Sexual harassment at work: it comes down to corporate culture
This is not to say that employers are immune from liability. The law already provides that an employer can be vicariously liable for sexual harassment committed by employees.
The only defence available is where the organisation can show it has taken reasonably practicable steps to prevent the harassment.
Prevention is better than cure. In its study, the EOC has called on employers of all sizes to provide awareness training to their staff periodically. Employees, as potential witnesses to sexual harassment, should be encouraged to intervene appropriately rather than remain silent bystanders.
Ultimately, everyone needs to recognise that sexual harassment is a violation of our fundamental right to dignity and body autonomy. It should not have any place in our society, and certainly not at work.
Ricky Chu Man-kin is chairperson of the Equal Opportunities Commission