Scope of Problem
Sexual harassment continues to pose significant problems within the Federal and Postal workplace. You may wonder how much sexual harassment is occurring. The question was posed: How many employees experienced sexual harassing in the last two years? Between 1987 and 1995, incidents of reported sexual harassment increased among females from 42 to 44% and among males from 14 to 19%.[1]

What is sexual harassment, anyway? A clear majority of both male and female respondents agreed that sexual harassment included such things as:

(1) pressure for sexual favors; (2) deliberate touching or cornering; (3) letters, calls, or materials of a suggestive nature; (4) pressure for dates; (5) suggestive looks and gestures; or (6) sexual teasing, jokes, or remarks.[2] The most common forms of reported sexual harassment include sexual teasing, jokes, or remarks.

(1) Quid pro quo sexual harassment, which encompasses acts where employment decisions are based on submission to or rejection of sexual advances or requests for sexual favors. (2) Hostile environment sexual harassment, which encompasses acts of unwelcome sexual remarks, advances, or unwelcome physical contact; or a sustained hostile and abusive work environment so severe as to change the terms or conditions of one's employment.

Why Sexual Harassment is Illegal
Sexual harassment violates federal law, specifically Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as amended. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines on this subject indicate that sexual harassment occurs when:

(1) submission to such conduct is made explicitly or implicitly a a term or condition of one's employment. (2) Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting that person. (3) Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.[3]

Unwelcome Behavior
Sexual harassment arises when the behavior at issue is unwelcome to the victim. This issue creates a degree of confusion, in that comparable behavior may be very welcome to one person and deeply offensive to another. Unless the behavior is egregiously abusive or blatantly sexual, the definition of hostile environment requires that the behavior be sustained and severe, persisting even though it is not welcome to the recipient. Because people differ in their ideas about what is acceptable behavior, it is crucial that the victim's individual point of view be clearly understood.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Harris v. Forklift Systems(1993),[5] reasoned that unless the victim perceived the environment to be hostile or abusive, then Title VII has not been violated.
I an appellate level decision, Ellison v. Brady (1991),[6] a case of claimed sexual harassment, was developed the application of the "reasonable woman" standard. This concept is not unlike the "reasonable person" standard for judging conduct against the expected behavior of a reasonable person in compensation claims or behavior within societal standards in lawsuits. The court's reasoning in Ellison was that a sex-blind "reasonable person" standard still would tend to ignore systematically the perspectives and experiences unique to women.

Sexual Discrimination
Not all sexual discrimination issues involve outright harassment. It can be construed that "third party" sexual discrimination takes place when a person who is having a relationship with a manager gains career opportunities, promotions, bonuses, or favors not generally available to the other employees.[7]

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically prohibits discrimination because of pregnancy or reproductive health issues. This Act provides that an employee cannot be terminated or denied employment due to pregnancy. Nor may an employer fire or refuse to hire a woman simply because she exercised her right to have an abortion.[8]

The Postal Service has a clearly articulated policy on sexual harassment, but achieving meaningful change requires action, not mere words. As union officers, we are often double bound by the need to defend the victim from ongoing harassment and then defend the perpetrator if that person is also in our bargaining unit. It is significant to note that official USPS policy does invite the victim of sexual harassment to seek relief through the grievance process among other avenues. The essential question for union leaders is this: Are we in labor leadership positions serious about providing meaningful grievance representation or other forms of advocacy in sexual harassment cases?

The ELM policy is repeated below:

Employee and Labor Relations Manual

671.13 Sexual Harassment

671.131 The USPS is committed to providing a work environment free of sexual harassment in any form. Sexual harassment is improper and unlawful conduct which undermines the employment relationship as well as employee morale, and the USPS will not tolerate its presence in the workplace. Employees who are found to have engaged in sexual harassment should expect serious disciplinary action, including removal.

671.132 Postal employees who believe that they are the victims of sexual harassment may seek relief through the EEO complaint process, grievance-arbitration procedures for bargaining unit employees under the collective-bargaining agreements, and the grievance procedures for nonbargaining unit employees. Any possible criminal conduct should be reported to the Postal Inspection Service.

671.133 Employees who choose not to pursue a complaint through one of the above established procedures may instead bring the situation to the attention of impartial supervisors or managers at the appropriate organizational level.

• Are sexual harassment or gender discrimination valid issues of concern for Postal unions?
  Definitely! Management seems to do very little when the perpetrator is a supervisor. Also, the EEO at informal levels is a "non-punitive" process, so the strongest pursuit of an EEO complaint will be by a union advocate or lawyer.

• Can sexual harassment be grieved?
  Certainly! It is vital that we fight such conduct if we are ever to attain a just and safe workplace. This grievance can be filed under Article 19, citing ELM § 671; Article 3, which requires Postal Service management to conduct the business in accordance with applicable law, including Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; and/or Article 2 Non-Discrimination and Civil Rights.

• How would I document the grievance?
  The allegation of the victim, alone, might be enough to prevail, especially if supported by written notes or a journal. Impartial witness statements showing an actual knowledge of the event would be highly probative if attainable. A showing that the perpetrator has a history of abuse would lend support, but not real proof, of the current event.

[1] Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, 1995, p. 14
[2] ibid., p. 6
[3] A Working Woman's Guide to her Job Rights, U.S. Department of Labor, 1992, p. 26
[4] Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, 1995, p. 48
[5] ibid., p. 50
[6] ibid., p. 49
[7] "What Is Sexual Harassment," Postal Life, September/October, 1996, p. 16
[8] A Working Woman's Guide to her Job Rights, U.S. Department of Labor, 1992, p.23