Sexual harassment at work

MANILA, Philippines — It has been 30 years since the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 (Republic Act No. 7877) became law. Since then, there have been many cases prosecuting violators of this law.

For the first half of this year, our law office has already had multiple consultations from clients involving complaints and incidents of sexual harassment in the workplace. While such misconduct can occur in any industry, certain sectors appear more vulnerable—particularly retail (including food and manufacturing), business process outsourcing (BPO) or call centers and pharmaceutical companies (those with medical representatives). These industries typically employ larger workforces, which naturally lead to more frequent interpersonal interactions and, consequently, a higher risk of such incidents.

The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act provides that work, education, or training related sexual harassment is “committed by an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment, demands, requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted or not by the object of said act.” (Sec. 3 of RA 7877)

It is significant that the “demand, request, or requirement of a sexual favor” requirement in Section 3 of RA 7877 is not essential before an act can be qualified as sexual harassment (Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Yañez, GR No. 214662, 2 March 2022).

This is because the essence of sexual harassment is the abuse of power by the offender, not the violation of the offended party’s sexuality. What the law intends to correct “is the undue exercise of power and authority manifested through sexually charged conduct or one filled with sexual undertones.”

Not just women

The Supreme Court has clarified that sexual harassment is not about gender because sexual harassment is a power issue.

In a case where both the victim and the perpetrator were male, the Supreme Court declared that the male complainant was a victim of sexual harassment committed by a superior where it also emphasized that sexual harassment can happen to anyone and everyone.

It was explained that while our society has often depicted women as being the weaker sex, and the only victims of sexual harassment, this notion should be corrected. To consider women as the weaker sex is discriminatory and to think that only women can be victims of sexual harassment is discriminatory against men who have suffered the same plight — men who have been victimized by sexual predators. (Toliongco v. Anglo-Eastern Crew Management Philippines, Inc., GR No. 231748, July 08, 2020)

When an employer or company receives a report or complaint of sexual harassment in its organization, the law provides the response and action that has to be undertaken.

Safety nets

Section 4 of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act provides that for administrative cases the employer or the head of the work-related educational or training environment or institution, shall have the duty to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of the acts of sexual harassment and shall:

• Create rules and regulations providing guidelines on proper decorum and rules as well as the procedure for the investigation of sexual harassment cases and sanctions.
• Create a committee on decorum and investigation on sexual harassment to conduct meetings and trainings to prevent as well as to handle and investigate cases of sexual harassment. This committee shall be composed of at least one representative each from the management, union, supervisory and rank and file employees.

Copies of the law shall be disseminated or posted at the premises.

Any administrative sanctions are separate from any civil or criminal liability.

The law provides that the employer, company or the head of the work-related educational or training environment or institution will be held liable for damages when they do not or fail to act on the complaint with promptness and sensitivity. Moreover, the victim, if an employee, is deemed constructively dismissed rendering the employer liable for illegal dismissal. (Sec. 5, RA 7877)

Buban vs Dela Peña

In the case of Buban v Dela Peña (GR No. 268399, January 24, 2024), the complainant, Francheska Buban, was hired by Xerox Business as customer care senior specialist. While at the office, she informed her team leader, Dela Peña, that her headset was not working and was told to get a replacement in the storage room, where she had to go back to on several occasions.

During the times she had to go to the storage room, Dela Peña followed her there, or was there, and spoke to her in a lascivious manner. He also grabbed her waist, tried to kiss and hug her, and groped her breasts. In another incident, he closed the door, and blocked the exit, where he made made advances on complainant, forcing himself on her.

During all of these times, the complainant rejected Dela Peña’s advances and ran away.

However, from then on, the complainant detested going to work and became anxious and paranoid. She would find herself uncontrollably crying whenever she saw Dela Peña. But as she was a single parent, she could not afford to quit and had no choice but to continue working.

Despite resisting his advances and reporting the incident to the company’s Human Resources department, no protective action was taken. Dela Peña remained in the same work area and shift, further distressing the complainant. The company also deducted three days from her salary.

For its part, the company claimed it had referred the matter to its security agency and conducted an investigation but found insufficient evidence to terminate Dela Peña.

Serious offense

The Supreme Court declared that in cases involving sexual harassment, an employee is deemed constructively dismissed if he or she was sexually harassed by his or her superior, and said superior failed to act on the complaint with promptness and sensitivity.

In this case, the company, was held solidarily liable with Dela Peña for damages in the amount of P150,000 plus interest for failing to prevent or resolve the harassment.

To conclude, sexual harassment is a serious offense and victims often feel helpless. This is why the law imposes upon the employers or the head of the work-related educational or training environment or institution the obligation to ensure that violations are prevented and violators punished. /dda

(The author, Atty. John Philip C. Siao, is a practicing lawyer and founding partner of Tiongco Siao Bello & Associates Law Offices and an arbitrator of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission of the Philippines. He teaches law at the De La Salle University Tañada-Diokno School of Law. He may be contacted at jcs@tiongcosiaobellolaw.com. The views expressed in this article belong to the author alone.)