Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Recognising subtle forms of sexual harassment in the workplace
The #METOO movement has correctly focused public attention on inappropriate workplace conduct. After all of the media attention, the obvious ways in which sexual harassment can occur are by now, well known. It would be expected that any person who is the recipient of such behaviour would feel they are sufficiently protected, not only by the law, but also by their employer, to speak up and report this kind of behaviour.
What may be less well known is that the more subtle forms of sexual harassment are equally problematic, and are also recognised as improper conduct in the workplace. Employers in particular should be aware that a broad range of conduct on the part of their employees could expose them to internal issues, and possible legal claims.
The Employment Equity Act prohibits sexual harassment as a form of unfair discrimination, and allows victims broad rights to approach a court and seek relief (in this case unlimited monetary relief). The Employment Equity Act also provides guidelines (by way of a Code of Good Practice) as to what may constitute sexual harassment.
The Code of Good Practice recognises that sexual harassment takes place when, for example when an employee is exposed to:
- Innuendos,
- Suggestions,
- Hints,
- Sexual advances,
- Comments with sexual overtones,
- Sex-related jokes or insults,
- Graphic comments about a person’s body made in their presence or to them,
- Inappropriate enquiries about a person’s sex life,
- Whistling of a sexual nature, or
- A strip search (where required for security measures) but which is conducted by or in the presence of the opposite sex.
Also, so called “quid pro quo harassment” occurs where an employer or person in authority influences or attempts to influence an employee’s employment circumstances by coercing or attempting to coerce an employee to surrender to sexual advances. This could take the form of engagement, promotion, training, discipline, dismissal, salary increments or other benefits. It includes sexual favouritism, which occurs where a person in authority in the workplace rewards only those who respond to his or her sexual advances. What is notable, is that reference to gender pronouns was deliberately kept neutral in presenting the legal position. Men, as well as women, may be the victim of sexual harassment. Men should realise that they are equally protected by the laws and that their employer owes them an equal duty of care.
Latest News
When silence becomes complicity: Constructive dismissal, workplace bullying and the cost of doing nothing
by Bradley Workman-Davies, Director Constructive dismissal remains one of the more difficult claims to prove in South African labour law. [...]
Nxele v Chairperson of the Disciplinary Hearing: Mudau NO and others, [2026] 6 BLLR 628 (LC): Clarifying the operation of section 188A(11) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
by Bankey Sono, Director and Sandile Mogweng, Candidate Attorney The Labour Court in Nxele v Chairperson of the Disciplinary Hearing: [...]
No grout about it: The LAC cements section 197 principles
by Bradley Workman-Davies, Director Section 197 of the Labour Relations Act has long been one of the most misunderstood and [...]
Making sense of death: A brief overview of inquest proceedings
by Dakalo Singo, Director and Head of Pro Bono By its very nature, death is tragic. The death of a [...]
Is cryptocurrency ‘capital’? Taking the Mangundhla judgment under the loop
by Deon Griessel, Director 1. Introduction Two Gauteng Division judgements have reached diametrically opposite conclusions on the question as to [...]
Agonists and APIs: High Court Injects Clarity into Compounding Debate
by Neil Kirby, Director and Head of Healthcare & Life Sciences and Slade van Rooyen, Associate The practice of compounding [...]
