Workplace Harassment- Why Some Still Choose Silence

When there is an investigation into harassment in the workplace, it unearths more than the original inquiry. Sometimes findings reveal years and repeated infractions that have persisted over a long period of time and lay hidden within the fa?ade of the corporate environment causing serious emotional stress and resulting in other problems like decreased engagement, absenteeism, and in some departments continuous unexplainable attrition.

The question is, why the silence for so long? The reticence can be propelled by a multitude of circumstances, both deliberate and inadvertent, sometimes even resulting from a confluence of factors.

Oftentimes, it’s as simple as “if it's not written, then it doesn't exist”. Employers are in many jurisdictions now mandated to have policies and processes that address the subject of harassment in the workplace and all employees are to be educated about the application of the policy, including when in a situation where harassment or bullying is happening. However, when these policies are absent or haphazardly executed, faith in the process wanes, and employees choose silence.

Similarly, in the application of policies, when an investigation into an allegation of harassment is not meticulously done, either because of failure to maintain confidentiality, implement the recommendation from the investigation, or the use of an investigator who is not compromised, the result is the same. Employees will be reluctant to speak out.

An equally revealing factor emerges when an organization lacks a robust framework to shield whistleblowers from retaliation and reprisals. This engenders fear, exacerbating employee reluctance to voice their concerns, thereby subjecting themselves to silent suffering, shame, and grave psychological repercussions. This predicament intensifies when certain demographics, such as visible minorities, women, or those perceived as occupying lower rungs in the hierarchy, are involved.

The responsibility of reducing incidents of bullying and harassment is not limited to the HR function. People managers within the organization should be educated about policy, equipped to act, and also held responsible if incidents are not acted upon or properly handled. Where managers are under-competent in this regard, their team members struggle silently and will often leave the organization abruptly without warning or much context.

At a higher echelon, the manner in which an organization dispenses rewards and recognition can significantly influence its capacity to effectively combat harassment. Employee discernment of leadership body language can lead to diverse interpretations. When the upper echelons of an organization disregard employee safety—both physical and psychological—through their priorities and strategic choices, employees internalize this cue and adjust their behavior accordingly. Moreover, the acknowledgment or reward of errant leaders or employees by the organization further cements pessimism, signaling that employees are undervalued. Consequently, many retreat into silence, harboring resentment or discreetly plotting their exit.

Silence is not always an indicator that all is well, even with strict regulations and well-drafted policies, an organization must be proactive and sensitive to employees’ psychological safety at work just like physical safety. Harassment can be sometimes latent and complicated within teams. It takes a combination of policy, strong leadership, and swift response to boost the confidence of employees in the process.

This confidence gets stronger with each occurrence that is properly identified and adequately addressed by the employer!

?