Brussels, 22/11/2007 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament's women's rights and equal opportunities committee held a public hearing in Brussels on 21 November on a subject many people find difficult to accept - sexual harassment in the workplace. The lack of recognition of the problem, the question of how to define sexual harassment, and the powers of equality bodies were highlighted during the hearing. To better combat sexual harassment at work, the MEPs called for campaigns to raise awareness among public opinion and a zero tolerance policy. The president of the women's rights and equal opportunities committee, Anna Zaborska (EPP-ED, Slovakia), called for zero tolerance, regretting the fact that sexual harassment at work was not always taken seriously.
Statistics. John Hurley, researcher at the Eurofound foundation in Dublin, presented the results of a recent study by Eurofound (spring 2007) into sexual harassment at work. The study shows that 3% of women but less than 1% of men are affected by sexual harassment at work. John Hurley said that because of unreported incidents and lack of awareness of the phenomenon, one can assume that the real figures are much higher than this. In Scandinavian countries, which are more aware of the issue than southern European countries, cases of sexual harassment are more likely to be reported and therefore the figures are higher. He said that sexual harassment was particularly frequent among women between the ages of 15 and 29; there were generally more cases of sexual harassment in the education and healthcare industries, the civil service, catering, transport and communications. Factors like age, coming into contact with the public, work intensity (working late, stress at work) also came into play in cases of sexual harassment.
The definition problem. Fernando Perreira, the head of unit for equality and action against discrimination at the European Commission, listed the problems: 1) transposing Directive 2002/73/EC on equal treatment of men and women in terms of employment (for which the deadline ran out on 5 October 2005). Perreira mentioned the problem of defining sexual harassment, explaining that in some legislation, sexual harassment assumed subordinate relations, but this does not comply with the text of the directive; and 2) when it comes to the powers of bodies responsible for equal opportunities ('equality bodies'), such bodies should be given the power to aid victims. Victims of sexual harassment should then contact such bodies, he added in reply to a question from Britta Thomsen (PES, Denmark). Lara Lazzeroni, researcher and lecturer in labour law at Sienna University in Italy, explained that Italy had not had a definition of sexual harassment before the arrival of the 2002 directive. She said a connection had to be made between sexual harassment and sexual violence, and sexual harassment and bad treatment, in order to be able to use the same appeal measures. Jukka Takkala, the director of the Bilbao-based European Agency for Health and Safety at Work, said that the differences in the figures showed that the issue of sexual harassment was a cultural issue. If we want to change mindsets, he said, we have to create a new culture in the workplace. He added that sexual harassment was a 'horizontal' issue which is connected with both health and equality. Healthcare and equal opportunities managers in the workplace should work together, he added.
Social partners share responsibility. Gussje Dolsma, the advisor to the Dutch industry and employers confederation, referred to the framework agreement signed on 26 April 2007 between the European social partners (trade unions and employers) to combat harassment and violence at work (see EUROPE 9415), saying they could base their discussion on it. He added that combating sexual harassment at work is in the interest of employers, who have the duty to protect workers because harassment creates a hostile work atmosphere, leading to loss of productivity and increased absenteeism, and gives a negative image of the company. Stefan Clauwaert, researcher at the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), said that the existing directives were not oriented towards prevention and were not oriented towards the workplace, and this was the main value of the framework agreement which is to be implemented by April 2010. Summing up, Rodi Kratsa (EPP-ED, Greece) stressed the differences in culture which meant that the issue was not even talked about in some member states. (G.B.)