The 1997 SC judgment made it mandatory for employers to set up a redressal committee to address sexual harassment complaints.
Seemaa Kamdar & Anshika Misra
The 1997 SC judgment made it mandatory for employers to set up a redressal committee to address sexual harassment complaints
KPMG-India is learnt to be the first corporate house in Mumbai to be booked for not having a sexual harassment committee in place in violation of an apex court order.
On July 16, an FIR was lodged against the top brass of KPMG by an ex-director of the firm alleging sexual harassment at her workplace and the company’s failure to provide a redressal mechanism, as reported in DNA on Thursday. According to the complainant’s lawyer, Poornima Advani, “This is the first complaint under Section 188 of the IPC, which carries a maximum jail term of six months.”
The 1997 SC judgment made it mandatory for employers to set up a redressal committee to address sexual harassment complaints. “However, the biggest drawback is that the order did not prescribe any punishment for violation,” Advani added.
According to Sanjeevani Kutty, former member-secretary of Maharashtra State Commission for Women (MSCW), private companies are either ignorant of the SC order or don’t feel the need to set up such a committee. In the KPMG case, the complainant alleges that she approached the MSCW only after her complaint “was not taken seriously” and her services terminated.
Though sexual harassment is common at most workplaces, the MSCW has received only 30 complaints in the last two years. “There is a tendency to disbelieve the complainant,” says a woman, whose male colleague made passes at her and booked a single-room for both of them while on an outdoor assignment. Her boss sceptically asked her, “Are you sure you haven’t misunderstood?”
The corporate house, which did not have a committee, set up one after her complaint. But when this committee, too, didn’t take her seriously, she dropped the matter.
In several cases, the complainant is accused of having an ulterior motive and is victimised, says lawyer and activist Nirmala Samant-Prabhavalkar. Many women prefer to leave the job than lodge a complaint, knowing that the going would be tough. Even the seat of state power, Mantralaya is divided on a complaint against a bureaucrat attached to the Home Department charged with sexually harassing his woman subordinate.
The case which surfaced almost a year ago is still to be settled by Mantralaya’s sexual harassment committee. While most women IAS officers are solidly with the complainant, many of their male colleagues are backing the official, calling it a witch-hunt.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}