Status of Women Committee on May 28th, 2013

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Welcome to all of our witnesses.

To LEAF in particular, it's great to see you again. I have long been a big supporter of the work that you've done in my many years in political office. I have heard from you on different things.

I had been very focused with regard to concerns about the RCMP and the sexual harassment and intimidation that unfortunately are clearly smearing the reputation of an icon in Canada, an organization that we Canadians all admire and respect. We've been trying to work through some issues so that some changes can ultimately be made and so that people who choose that kind of career—and women in particular—can do so without being intimidated and being labelled troublemakers, and so on and so forth.

They have all the policies that you could ask for on paper, as does much of the federal service, but the actual carrying out of many of these complaints to the right bodies does not seem to be happening. It doesn't happen because they don't want to be labelled or transferred out. As for going to the Human Rights Tribunal, that just seems to me to be the wrong place to deal with these kinds of issues, especially in the federal workplace.

Now, in your brief, you talk about a third-party complaint process, which is something that I'm quite interested in. Could you elaborate a bit on how you think that might function in a positive way? What kinds of negative things would come out of this? I can only see positives, but I'm sure there must be some other issues. Can you elaborate a bit on that?

[Ainslie Benedict]

LEAF is not proposing a particular model, obviously. We're just identifying the issues that are there. But the positive things that could come out of it would be that the moment you remove that barrier to reporting, which is the “my career is over” barrier.... Many people make a complaint knowing that they're making that decision. They say, “I can't stand this and my health is ruined anyway, so I'm going to finally come clear with this.”

So having a mechanism, a third-party neutral model—not necessarily an adjudicative model but adjudication is usually the end of the line and certainly in formal processes—that can be accessed early, before so much damage has been done to an individual's health and career, that's going to be better. If there is such a process, there will be more awareness generally. There will be education. The climate will change and the climate has to change. The RCMP obviously is a huge example of that. I think that when you're on the front page of the paper over and over again, the climate will change.

I was heartened by the law society's comments in the statistics, if you read the brief, about male lawyers reporting other male lawyers' misconduct. That's in keeping with the comments I was making about the occupational health and safety requirement, where it's everybody's obligation to have a safe and harassment-free workplace. When women become free to speak out, to call people on the harassing behaviour, and when male colleagues are calling other male colleagues on the harassing behaviour, all of that, with some third-party independent place where the women can go in the first place to talk about their issues, is going to elevate the tone of everything. It's not going to allow these poisoned workplaces to go on year after year.

When we're talking about the 25-year history of the individual you were referring to before, that's a lot of people who were aware of the problem and didn't say anything. The more access to talking about it, the more education, and the more everybody is educated that this is not acceptable, that's what is going to change things.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

It has a lot to do with that culture. In having a round table with some males in the RCMP and asking the question about where they were when some of these other activities were going on with their female colleagues, the attitudes and the responses back were, “Well, we know it's going on, but we just turn a blind eye because otherwise we'll become labelled in the same way.”

It's just quite unbelievable when you're looking at men who are a fair size, who shouldn't be intimidated easily, and who just turn a blind eye. This goes back to your comment. It has to become unacceptable for absolutely anybody, whether you're a caretaker or a top commissioner, if you hear or see any of this going on. It's encouraging to know that the law society has taken some action.

We communicate to all of the people who work in the federal public service, regardless of where, that if they see or hear it, they have an obligation to report, but that doesn't seem to get enforced. How do we embolden people to stand up for other people who don't have the courage to stand up for themselves?

[Ainslie Benedict]

Because of the focus on this issue, you are going to have departments and agencies where, even if in their own minds, their thinking hasn't changed, what they are saying and the overall attitude has to change.

If it becomes acceptable for individuals who are observing something to have the courage to actually intervene and call somebody out, rather than running off and reporting it somewhere, the whole tone of the workplace changes. It gives women the courage to comment as well. Men are also victims of sexual harassment—there are lots of incidents of that. It's just lifting up the rock. It's making it something that is recognized as misconduct and not tolerated, not just something discouraged on paper.

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you. Your time has expired.

Once again, in the name of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, we wish to thank our five witnesses for coming in front of this committee. On that, I will suspend the committee to make sure that we can welcome the next witnesses and start back up.

Thank you very much. The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

We now resume the 80^th meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Today, we have with us Lynn Bowes-Sperry, who is testifying before the committee as an individual. She is an associate professor of management in the College of Business, Western New England University.

Madame Bowes-Sperry, thank you for being with us today.

I will give you 10 minutes for your opening remarks. I will have to stop you after 10 minutes, and we'll go to our question-and-answer round.

Without further remarks, I give you the floor, Madame Bowes-Sperry.

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Associate Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, As an Individual]

Thank you for inviting me to contribute to your study of sexual harassment in Canada's federally regulated workplaces.

I would like to start my testimony by echoing a point raised by a former witness, Mr. David Langtry of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, “You will never get a complete picture of the problem from the number of complaints that come forward.”

Research on reporting of sexual harassment identifies numerous responses to sexual harassment, including avoidance and denial, for example interpreting behaviour as a joke; social coping, for example discussing the behaviour with friends; confrontation negotiation, for example asking the harasser to stop; and finally, advocacy seeking, for example filing a formal report.

Findings indicate that whereas many targets engage in avoidance responses, few ever formally report their experiences. Such passive coping strategies may seem strange, given the negative consequences targets of harassment suffer, for example physical violation, psychological harm, lower job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and the deterioration of work relationships.

Research suggests that following a harassment incident, targets of sexual harassment juggle competing goals—their desire to end the harassment weighed against such objectives as avoiding reprisal by the harasser and maintaining their reputation and status in the work group. Furthermore, employees who believe their organization has a high tolerance for sexual harassment believe that reporting sexual harassment is risky, that complaints are unlikely to be taken seriously, and that there would be few consequences for perpetrators even if the harassment were reported.

Despite the tendency for targets of harassment to refrain from reporting their harassment, some targets do take formal action. Research indicates that various factors influence whether or not targets of harassment engage in advocacy seeking, such as formal reporting.

With regard to personal factors, targets with higher levels of education, previous experiences of sexual harassment, and lower occupational status, are more likely to engage in advocacy seeking. With regard to the sexually harassing behaviour per se, target reporting was found to be more likely when harassers are supervisors, when there are multiple harassers, and when the type of behaviour is sexual coercion, that is to say, where job conditions are made contingent upon compliance with requests of a sexual nature.

Based on the preceding information, it seems that efforts to end sexual harassment that rely primarily on target reporting are unlikely to be successful because most targets do not report their experiences. Therefore, we must look at alternative sources or methods for dealing with sexual harassment.

One method I have studied is observer intervention. Observers are individuals who see harassment occurring but are not directly involved in the incident. Especially in the case of hostile environment harassment, in which the work climate itself becomes poisoned, there often are individuals present who observe the harassment and who might take action to stop it or prevent future incidents.

In my research, my co-author and I conceptualize ways in which observers of sexual harassment can intervene in terms of a typology that includes two dimensions. One is immediacy of intervention, where observers can respond during the unfolding incident of sexual harassment or after the incident has occurred. Two is level of involvement, where observers can respond in a way that maintains their anonymity or immerses them publicly in the event. Crossing these two dimensions results in four categories of intervention. In the interest of time, I will highlight only a few possible observer interventions.

Potentially useful responses from observers of sexual harassment include telling the harasser to stop the behaviour or reporting the harasser to management, interrupting the incident—for example, by removing the target from the emerging harassment—or simply providing support to the target of harassment after it has occurred.

In addition to developing a typology of observer intervention, we also developed a model of observer intervention in sexual harassment based on previous research on bystander intervention. Before observers intervene, they must first recognize that the situation requires action, determine that it is their responsibility to take some action, determine if they should take action now or later, and determine the level of involvement based on the perceived net costs of involvement.

I was very pleased to learn that observer intervention is encouraged of employees working for your Department of National Defence. According to a previous witness before this committee, Ms. Jacqueline Rigg of the Department of National Defence, the policy and guidelines indicate it’s not even just the responsibility of the person who feels they’re being abused, but it’s also the responsibility of anybody else who observes this type of behaviour. They have a responsibility as well to report, to talk to that person, and to encourage them to report as well.

In my dissertation, I found that observers were most likely to recognize conduct as sexual harassment and to express the intent to intervene when they perceived social consensus that the conduct was sexual harassment and believed that sexual harassment was an ethical issue. This suggests that organizational culture plays an important role in the phenomenon of sexual harassment. In organizations that educate all employees—not just managers—on sexual harassment, there is more likely to be social consensus regarding the types of actions that constitute sexual harassment and employees are more likely to see sexual harassment as an ethical issue rather than a social or personal issue. Studies suggest that organizational policies and actions influence observers’ sense-making processes around sexual harassment. For example, observers—especially men—working in organizations with sexual harassment awareness training are more likely to label sex-related behaviour as sexual harassment than those in organizations without training.

Another former witness for this committee, Mr. Ross MacLeod of the Treasury Board Secretariat noted that from his perspective, culture is the key. He stated that culture underlies respect for people. Lack of respect underlies harassment. If you change the culture and create a respectful work environment, then we’ll see change. That’s very much the theme we’re pursuing in dealing with departments on this issue.

Research on sexual harassment supports his testimony. A meta-analytic review of 41 studies indicates a robust relationship between organizational climate and sexual harassment. In two studies of women in the United States federal court system, results provided support for the co-occurrence of sexual harassment and workplace incivility, in that almost all women who experienced sexual harassment also experienced incivility. These studies highlight that sexual harassment occurs within a broader context of mistreatment and disrespect. Part of this broader context is ambient sexual harassment, which is similar to the concept of second-hand smoke in that members of a target’s work group who are exposed indirectly to sexual harassment experience negative psychological and job-related consequences similar to those experienced by the target of sexual harassment.

This concludes my testimony. Once again, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak before this committee.

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you very much, Madame Bowes-Sperry, very good timing.

We're now starting our question round with Madame Ambler. You have seven minutes.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much, professor, for being here and for giving us a very detail-packed presentation.

I wanted to ask about reporting in general, and specifically, I really appreciated your comments about culture and that this is a social issue in the workplace. If I could ask you in particular about men. I believe you mentioned that men with training are more likely to observe and report incidents of sexual harassment. Do men who haven't received the training fail to even notice sexual harassment if it's happening close by?

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

Actually, that study that I referenced talked about men working in organizations with sexual harassment awareness training being more likely to label sex-related behaviour as sexual harassment. That study did not focus on whether they're more likely to report it, but simply that they see a behaviour and they say, "yes, that's sexual harassment”. Without the training, they might think it's goofing around, or something personal between the people.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

You also mentioned mistreatment and incivility. Do you think that there's a slippery slope of sexual harassment in the workplace? If it's not detected early, when it is simply incivility or some kind of mistreatment, “fun and games”.... If this happens to an individual who's a little bit shy and doesn't really know what to think of it except that she feels a bit uncomfortable, she is not likely to report something that's just a co-worker being uncivilized.

Is that what you mean when you talk about the culture needing to change so that even the smallest incidents are seen as unacceptable, because these incidents can eventually lead to sexual harassment?

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

That is part of it. A lot of times it is passed off as just goofing around. What happens typically is that when a person is first harassed, they say, "What was that? Did that person just say something to me like that?" It doesn't really register with them. They have a large sense-making process around it. Typically, they'll talk to their friends and say that this happened to them and what do they think about it. The first time it happens, it's likely not a big deal to the person. It's more of a curiosity. Then when it happens a couple more times, that's when they start to feel the negative consequences, rather than just thinking, “What the heck was that?”

I do think it's a slippery slope. I think the culture extends to words used, like “bitches”. I don't want to be rude but it extends to situations where there's that kind of language denigrating women and it is tolerated. Another thing with culture is that if reports of harassment are shrugged off instead of being taken seriously, then people will not want to report it. If there's any backlash for reporting, that would be a really negative culture.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

How do we get observers to feel that it is their responsibility to report?

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

That's a really good question, and there's not an easy answer to that question. One thing is, when you focus on training, to make sure that they understand that it's not a personal issue. They need to understand that it's a social issue or a workplace issue. If you can make them think of it in ethical terms, that someone is being harmed or hurt, then that's even better.

How do you make them do it? Just training won't necessarily make someone do that; it just makes them aware of it. I think you need to have a policy in place. I think I read that at the Department of National Defence they actually say that observers are responsible for reporting or getting involved in something that they witness. I think taking that step beyond the training would also encourage people.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

How important is anonymity in getting observers to feel comfortable speaking up about an incident?

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

That's a good question. I think that if anonymity is possible, the person who's reporting feels better because there are no repercussions for them, no possible backlash. I think anonymity is important. I know that in the United States, a lot of times they cannot maintain anonymity. They have to reveal who the person involved is, and I think that can be difficult.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Fair enough.

In general, would you say—and you touched on this in your remarks—that the formal dispute mechanisms are not as successful as informal early intervention mechanisms, in dealing with sexual harassment in the workplace?

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

A 20-second answer, please, Madame Bowes-Sperry.

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

Yes, because a lot of—

Oh, are we done?

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

No, sorry. You still have a few seconds for a very short answer, please.

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

Yes, I think that's true because people are more reluctant to go through formal reporting policies. It doesn't mean that some won't, but it discourages many people.

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you very much, Ms. Ambler.

I now give the floor to Mrs. Day, who has seven minutes.

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Bowes-Sperry.

We have heard from a lot of witnesses. We are particularly astonished to still be hearing the same things. The situation is pathetic. Figures on sexual harassment are buried and combined with figures on harassment. So we have very little data on sexual harassment.

Groups, mainly made up of male employees, have appeared before us and have denied the situation, though they have been the subject of 3 to 6 complaints of harassment in a year. The complaints are often dealt with “secretly“, under a code of silence. Complaints are received internally and suppressed by the system itself. That is the conclusion I come to.

Have you heard about that kind of situation?

[Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry]

I haven't heard that directly but it wouldn't surprise me.

What I have heard is that sometimes when people report, it is not taken seriously and nothing is done about it. That then sends a negative message to other people who might want to report.

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

But you are aware of the fact that people who undergo harassment then experience problems with anxiety, which increases the amount of sick leave they take and adversely affects their performance. They are often the ones who quit the job, not the harasser.