“Aforesaid complaints refer various incidents though specific dates are not mentioned and that Court is not aware that when these complaints were made to ICC as on complaint no date was mentioned in record and also taking note that even in X vs. Nirmal Kanti Chakrabarti (supra) Supreme Court has observed that in certain circumstances delay may not be considered adverse to the extent that complaints may be rejected at threshold as it would not be in consonance of object of POSH Act and that normally such complaints are not made immediately, especially when complainants were working under delinquent as it would affect their respective future.”Various sexual harassment complaints were filed by girl students who had done their PhD under the Petitioner, the Associate Professor at HCRI.

Petitioner sought various documents pertaining to the proceedings of the Internal Complaints Committee, but allegedly was not supplied the same. Eventually, he was found guilty and an order was passed censuring the petitioner and barring him from taking any female students as PHD fellows or research assistants.

Petitioner approached the High Court against the aforesaid order on grounds that the complaints were filed after a delay of 6 months whereas the POSH Act provides that the complaints must be filed before the ICC within 3 months from the incident.  It was also argued that the copies of the complaints and statements of alleged victims was not provided to the petitioner.

The Court observed that there was no reference in the report of the ICC regarding statements and documents being supplied to the petitioner. It noted that no reference was made in the report regarding demand of cross-examination, if any, made by the petitioner. Accordingly, it held that the ICC had not followed the procedure prescribed under the POSH Act.  Holding that merely because dates of incidents were not specified before the Court, the complaints could not be rejected at the threshold, the Court quashed the impugned order.

It nonetheless directed the ICC to consider the time period of allegation, specific date of complaints as well as any explanation by complainants to approach at belated stage and then take a fresh decision, whether complaints have to be rejected at threshold or to proceed further.

Download the judgement copy here :  POSH Allahbad HC Dr. Tapas Kumar Das vs Harush Chandra (46 downloads )

The post Allahabad HC : Belated POSH Complaints Can’t Be Rejected Without Considering Reasons first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

The four elements discussed below provide a useful framework for understanding the facts, evaluating evidence, and assessing whether the alleged conduct may constitute sexual harassment under the POSH Act. When applying this framework, Internal Committees should remain guided by the principles of natural justice, fairness, and the standard of proof applicable to POSH inquiries, namely, the preponderance of probabilities rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt.

1. Perpetrator

Definition: The individual alleged to have committed the act.

What the Internal Committee needs to keep in mind

When examining a complaint, the Internal Committee should first identify who the respondent is and understand their relationship with the aggrieved woman. It is important to consider whether there was a power imbalance between the parties—for example, if the respondent was a reporting manager, senior leader, colleague, client, vendor, consultant, or any other person connected to the workplace.

The Committee should also assess whether the respondent’s position, authority, influence, or seniority may have affected either the alleged conduct or the complainant’s ability to respond, object, or report the incident.

At the same time, the Committee should remain objective and avoid making assumptions based solely on a person’s designation, length of service, performance record, or reputation within the organisation.

Questions to Consider
• Who is alleged to have committed the conduct?
• What was their role and position relative to the complainant?
• Did they have any supervisory or decision-making authority over the complainant?
• Were there previous complaints or concerns involving similar conduct?

POSH Lens: Focus on the conduct and evidence, not the individual’s status or organizational importance.

2. Mens Rea (Guilty Mind / Intent)

Definition: The mental state or intention behind the conduct.

What the Internal Committee needs to keep in mind

In POSH inquiries, it is often difficult to determine exactly what a person intended, as there is rarely direct evidence of their thoughts or motives. However, the Internal Committee can understand intent by looking at the person’s actions, the surrounding circumstances, and their communications.

The Committee should consider:
• Was the behaviour intentional or could it have been accidental?
• Did the respondent know, or should they reasonably have understood, that the behaviour was unwelcome?
• Did the conduct continue even after the complainant expressed discomfort, objected, or asked the respondent to stop?
• Is there evidence of similar behaviour occurring more than once or with others?
Looking at these factors can help the Committee understand whether the conduct was a one-time misunderstanding or part of a deliberate pattern of behaviour.

Questions to Consider
• Does the available evidence suggest that the conduct was intentional, careless, or a one-time mistake?
• Would a reasonable person have understood that the behaviour could make someone uncomfortable?
• Did the respondent continue the behaviour after the complainant showed discomfort or indicated that it was unwelcome?
• Do emails, messages, meeting interactions, or witness statements suggest that the conduct was deliberate rather than accidental?

This version encourages the Internal Committee to focus on facts and context rather than legal terminology.

Important POSH Perspective

A finding of sexual harassment does not always require proof of malicious intent. The impact on the recipient and whether the conduct was unwelcome are often more relevant than the respondent’s claimed intentions.

Example:
A respondent may say, “I was only joking.” The inquiry must assess whether the conduct was unwelcome and created discomfort, regardless of the stated intention.

3. Actus Reus (Guilty Act)

Definition: The actual conduct or behaviour complained of.

What the Internal Committee needs to keep in mind

This is often the most important part of a POSH inquiry because it focuses on the facts of the case and the evidence available to support them.

The Internal Committee should seek to clearly understand:
• What exactly is alleged to have happened?
• When and where did the incident(s) take place?
• Was it a one-time occurrence or did it happen repeatedly?
• What evidence is available to support or challenge the allegation, such as emails, messages,    documents, CCTV footage, or witness statements?
• Whether the alleged behaviour involved spoken comments, inappropriate jokes, messages     or emails, physical contact, requests for personal meetings, sharing explicit material, non-         verbal actions such as staring or gestures, or retaliatory treatment following the                           complainant’s rejection of the behaviour.

A clear understanding of the facts helps the Committee assess the complaint objectively and arrive at a fair conclusion based on the available evidence.

Questions to Consider
• What was said or done?
• Is there documentary evidence?
• Are there witnesses?
• Is there consistency between statements and evidence?

POSH Lens: Focus on facts, context, frequency, and workplace impact rather than isolated interpretations.

4. Injury (Resulting Harm)

Definition: The harm, impact, or adverse consequence resulting from the conduct.

What the Internal Committee needs to keep in mind

When assessing a complaint, the Internal Committee should remember that the impact of sexual harassment is not limited to physical harm. The alleged conduct may also affect a person’s emotional well-being, sense of dignity, confidence, career progression, or overall experience at work.

The Committee should consider whether the complainant experienced:
• Emotional distress, anxiety, or stress
• Humiliation, embarrassment, or loss of dignity
• Fear or discomfort in the workplace
• A hostile, intimidating, or uncomfortable work environment
• Negative effects on work performance or career opportunities
• Retaliation, victimisation, or unfair treatment after reporting or rejecting the behaviour

Understanding the impact of the conduct helps the Committee assess not only what happened, but also how it affected the complainant and the workplace environment.

Questions to Consider
• How did the conduct affect the complainant?
• Did it interfere with work performance?
• Did it create an intimidating or hostile environment?
• Did the complainant avoid meetings, travel, or interactions because of the conduct?

Important POSH Perspective

Even where significant harm is not demonstrable, conduct may still constitute sexual harassment if it falls within the definition provided under the POSH Act and is objectively unwelcome.

How should the Internal Committee look at cases

Think in four layers

• Element Key – Perpetrator | Inquiry question – Who allegedly engaged in the conduct?
• Element Key – Mens Rea | Inquiry question – What can reasonably be inferred about the intent, awareness, or recklessness behind the conduct?
• Element Key – Actus Reus | Inquiry question – What exactly happened and what evidence supports it?
• Element Key – Injury | Inquiry question – What impact did the conduct have on the complainant and workplace environment?

Key Takeaway for the Internal Committee

A well-conducted POSH inquiry examines who acted (Perpetrator), what was done (Actus Reus), why or with what awareness it was done (Mens Rea), and what impact it caused (Injury). Looking at cases through these four lenses helps consultants conduct fair, structured, evidence-based assessments while remaining aligned with the objectives of the POSH Act and principles of natural justice.

The post Guiding IC Members: Four Elements of Complaint Assessment first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

In the context of POSH and workplace ethics, IDAHOBIT reinforces the importance of creating safe and inclusive environments free from bullying, harassment, discriminatory jokes, intimidation, or exclusion based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Recognizing this day encourages employees to foster empathy, respect diversity, and uphold every individual’s right to work with dignity.

Homophobia, Biphobia, and Transphobia refer to prejudice, fear, discrimination, harassment, or hostility toward people because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Homophobia : Negative attitudes, bias, or discrimination against people who are gay or lesbian.

Examples:

• Mocking someone for being gay
• Excluding a colleague because of their sexual orientation
• Using slurs or offensive jokes

Biphobia: Prejudice or discrimination against bisexual people (people attracted to more than one gender).

Examples:

• Saying bisexuality is “just confusion”
• Treating bisexual employees as untrustworthy or “indecisive”
• Making inappropriate sexual comments

Transphobia:  Fear, hatred, discomfort, or discrimination toward transgender or gender-diverse individuals.

Examples:

• Refusing to use a person’s chosen name or pronouns
• Humiliating or questioning someone’s gender identity
• Denying equal opportunities or creating a hostile work environment

How this relates to POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment)

Under POSH principles, workplace harassment is not limited to physical misconduct or sexual advances. A hostile, humiliating, intimidating, or offensive environment based on gender, sexuality, or identity can also amount to workplace harassment.

In many organizations and modern workplace policies:

• Homophobic, biphobic, or transphobic remarks can create a hostile work environment
• Repeated jokes, comments, bullying, exclusion, or targeting LGBTQIA+ employees may qualify as sexual harassment or gender-based harassment
• POSH committees are increasingly expected to handle complaints involving dignity, respect, inclusion, and discrimination linked to sexuality or gender identity

Examples in a workplace POSH context

Could Be POSH Violations

• Repeatedly making jokes about someone being gay
• Asking invasive questions about a transgender colleague’s body or personal life
• Sharing memes mocking LGBTQIA+ people in office groups
• Refusing to work with someone because of their sexual orientation
• Outing someone’s sexuality without consent
• Misgendering someone intentionally after correction

These behaviors can:

• Affect psychological safety
• Create humiliation or intimidation
• Impact equal participation at work

Why Organizations should include this aspect in POSH Trainings

Modern POSH and workplace dignity programs aim to ensure:

• Respectful behavior for all employees
• Inclusion and equal opportunity
• Freedom from bullying and identity-based harassment
• Safe workplaces irrespective of gender identity or sexual orientation

This aligns with:

• Indian constitutional principles of dignity and equality
• The Supreme Court’s recognition of LGBTQIA+ rights (e.g., Navtej Johar judgment)
• DEI (Diversity, Equity & Inclusion) frameworks adopted by many companies

The post International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia & Transphobia first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

The POSH Annual Report is much more than a mere formality; it is a statutory obligation under India’s POSH Act that offers a reflection of how seriously an organization takes workplace safety. Every organization under the Act is required to submit this report annually, capturing details about complaints received and resolved, pending cases, and awareness programs conducted throughout the year. It is a legal requirement that must be filed with the appropriate district officer, emphasizing the importance of accountability and transparency within organizational cultures.

Welcome to Posh Conversations—a space where voices that matter come together to discuss safety, dignity, and inclusion in the workplace. In today’s blog, we’re diving deep into the nuances of the POSH Annual Report, a document that every organization must file but few truly understand. From what the report captures to why it matters, we aim to simplify, clarify, and shed light on this crucial element of workplace compliance.

Why the Emphasis on the POSH Annual Report?

One of the common inquiries from organizations is why so much emphasis is placed on this report. The POSH Annual Report is a measure of accountability and it demonstrates to regulators and stakeholders that an organization addresses complaints through due process. It sends a strong internal message that complaints are acknowledged and tracked, contributing to not just compliance but also fostering a culture of awareness and respect.

Answering Common Questions

• Who Prepares and Submits the Report

The Internal Committee (IC) is responsible for preparing the annual report, though submissions are typically made by the employer or HR. Once submitted, the district officer forwards a brief report to the state government.

• Does the Report Contain Names or Case Details?

Absolutely not. The POSH Annual Report maintains confidentiality by only reporting figures such as the number of complaints received, resolved, pending, and awareness activities conducted.

• What If There Were No Complaints?

Organizations must still file a “nil report,” which is a valid submission even if no complaints were registered during the year.

• Consequences of Non-Compliance

Failure to file the report can lead to penalties and raises red flags during audits. It is increasingly scrutinized by boards, investors, and external stakeholders.

• Filing for Locations with Fewer Than 10 Employees

According to Section 21, locations with fewer than ten employees are exempt from submitting an annual report.

• Who Signs the Report?

The report is typically signed by the Internal Committee’s Chairperson or Presiding Officer

• Including Conciliation Details

Even if a case is resolved amicably through conciliation, such details must still be reflected in the annual report.

• Awareness Sessions and Workshops

The report should declare all workshops, training sessions for IC members, and awareness programs conducted for employees through various formats.

• Determining the District office for Submission

Organizations need to identify the correct district officer based on their location. Contact details are usually available online, and verification is recommended to ensure accuracy.

The Story Behind the Numbers

It is a misconception that the report is only about numbers. The numbers tell an important story about the organization’s awareness, response to complaints, and effectiveness of the IC. A report with no complaints does not necessarily equate to a problem-free environment but could indicate a lack of awareness or reporting issues within the company.

It is a misconception that the report is only about numbers. The numbers tell an important story about the organization’s awareness, response to complaints, and effectiveness of the IC. A report with no complaints does not necessarily equate to a problem-free environment but could indicate a lack of awareness or reporting issues within the company.

What to include?

• Number of complaints of sexual harassment received in the year
• Number of complaints disposed of during the year
• Number of cases pending for more than ninety days
• Number of workshops or awareness programme against sexual harassment carried out
• Nature of action taken by the employer or District officer

Annual Report Format

To download the Annual Report Format Click Drafts – “POSH Annual report format ” (28672 downloads )

The post Understanding the POSH Annual Report – Annual Report Format first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

Two significant Bills were introduced in the Rajya Sabha on December 5, 2025, proposing fundamental changes to the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). The intent is clear: to make the law more inclusive, accessible, and stringent in its enforcement.

Key Changes Proposed Across Both Bills

1. Broader Scope and Gender Neutrality – One Bill proposes replacing the term “women” with “persons” throughout the Act.

• Gender-neutral protection:
  The Act’s coverage would be expanded to protect persons of all genders from sexual harassment at the workplace. This aligns with constitutional principles and the NALSA judgment.
• Inclusion of gig and platform workers:
  The definitions of “employee” and “employer” would explicitly include gig and platform workers.
• Internal Committee representation:
  Where the complainant is of a gender other than female, an additional representative of that gender must be nominated to the Internal Committee or Local Committee.

2. Strengthening Complainant Rights and Enforcement – The second Bill focuses on improving procedures, timelines, and accessibility.

• Extended complaint filing period:
  The time limit for filing a complaint would be extended from 3 months to 1 year.
• Faster implementation of IC recommendations:
  Employers or District Officers must act on Internal Committee recommendations within 30 days, reduced from the earlier 60-day timeline.
• Right to replace IC/LC members:
  A complainant may request the replacement of any committee member if trust or confidence is lost during the inquiry.
• Stricter confidentiality provisions:
  Confidentiality obligations are strengthened, with penalties for disclosure of the complainant’s identity or inquiry details, including removal of the IC/LC member responsible for the breach.
• Higher penalties for employers:
  The penalty for non-compliance would increase from ₹50,000 to ₹2 lakh.
• More inclusive Local Committees:
  Local Committees must include representation from the informal sector (including domestic work, construction, gig work, etc.) to improve access to justice.

Why This Matters

These proposed amendments represent a significant step toward creating a truly inclusive and equitable legal framework for Indian workplaces. They also reinforce the importance of robust, accessible, and time-bound mechanisms for addressing workplace sexual harassment.

The post Proposed amendments to the POSH Act. 2013 first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

Petitioner was working as District Programme Officer, Kushinagar when he was suspended by an order passed by Chief Secretary Child Development and Nutrition, Uttar Pradesh on grounds that words said do not amount to sexual harassment, the internal complaint committee was not duly constituted under the Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

Counsel for petitioner submitted that as per the statement of the complainant, the petitioner had called her fatty and had often suggested that she go on evening walks with him and also invited her to have meals with him. It was argued that this by itself does not constitute sexual harassment. It was also argued that procedure prescribed for dealing with such complaints was not followed by the internal complaints committee.

Per contra, counsel for respondent argued that body shaming of the complainant and all events taken together constituted sexual harassment under the Act. It was argued that since the petitioner’s statement was recorded, he could not now say that he could not put up his defence. He should have filed an application before the internal complaints committee for cross-examination.

An FIR lodged against the petitioner regarding sexual harassment of another female was also brought on record before the Court to argue that many women working in petitioner’s department have felt uncomfortable. The Court observed that suspension is not a punishment but a measure to prevent the delinquent from influencing the proceedings against him. “An employee is placed under suspension by the employer only to ensure that he is not able to influence the enquiry in any manner, in as much as he is not able to interfere with the evidence or also in such cases where the employer finds it necessary to place an employee under suspension so as to have smooth disposal of disciplinary proceedings.” Holding that a head of a department’s suspension pending inquiry leads to confidence building, the Court observed that the way in which the remark was made “may” constitute sexual harassment, however, it refrained from making any final remarks as the disciplinary proceedings were ongoing. It held that prima facie case was made out for suspension of the petitioner. The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appellate authority.

Download the Judgment copy here – Allahabad HC - Suspension Of HOD In Sexual Harassment Case (2468 downloads )

The post Allahabad HC – Suspension Of HOD In Sexual Harassment Case first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

A recent survey indicates a 31% increase in complaints during the 2022-23 fiscal year compared to the previous year, reflecting a significant rise in reported incidents. This upward trend is projected to persist into 2025. However, there has also been a rise in the number of false complaints. The troubling misuse of the policies framed to protect victims of harassment can have severe and far-reaching consequences.

The Vishaka Guidelines, established by the Supreme Court of India in 1997 to address sexual harassment in the workplace, gave birth to the POSH Act. The crucial legislation was enacted to create a safe working environment for women. Unfortunately, when false complaints are made, the very foundation of the Act gets undermined.

Understanding false complaints

Any complaint filed under the POSH Act where the complainant has made intentionally false allegations against the respondent, with an intention to malign their reputation are termed as false complaints. In fact, the courts are also calling out a recurring pattern in the blatant misuse of law through the false complaints route. Late last year, the Supreme Court noted a ‘worrying trend’ of disgruntled partners seeking to term long-term consensual relationships as harassment under penal laws.

However, non-availability of evidence should not be construed as false complaints.

Serious ramifications

False complaints may be driven by personal vendetta, a desire to save their own skin, or worse, as a prank. Regardless of motive, the ramifications of false complaints are nothing but devastating for all parties involved and may include loss of reputation and even career disruption. Moreover, after a false complaint, employees may become excessively cautious and may begin to constantly second-guess their behavior in order to steer clear of even the smallest hint of harassment.

The impact on genuine victims of false complaints is profound, as each false accusation undermines trust and makes it more difficult for real victims to come forward. Despite neutral investigations, doubt can taint new cases, causing genuine victims to fear that their reports will not be believed.

Most importantly, this erosion of trust extends to the POSH Act itself. Many employers and employees are of the view that this Act is problematic rather than protective, and allows frivolous complaints and misuse. The prevalence of these kinds of complaints reinforce these misconceptions, undermining the credibility of genuine ones and the critical purpose of the Act.

False complaints can also significantly drain company resources, requiring extensive time for investigations, documentation, and legal procedures. This resource drain is particularly problematic for organisations that already view POSH as a challenging area, as it exacerbates existing concerns and leads to a pervasive mistrust in the system.

The false complaints can create a toxic work environment, resulting in fissures within teams, reducing morale, and fostering a culture of suspicion. Employees may become hesitant to interact with colleagues, fearing false accusations, which stifles collaboration and productivity. The cumulative effect of these factors can severely undermine the overall workplace atmosphere and efficiency.

Punishments

The IC should first investigate sexual harassment claims and judge whether they are true or false. To do this, the IC should follow due process and conduct a thorough investigation while ensuring it is unbiased and impartial.

Under the POSH Act, if an inquiry committee finds that a sexual harassment complaint is false or made with malicious intent, the complainant could face serious consequences, including termination of employment. The purpose of this is to prevent false or frivolous claims, while ensuring that the grievance redressal process remains fair and just for everyone involved.

How organisations can address the issue

To mitigate the impact of false complaints, organisations should adopt a balanced approach that upholds the integrity of the POSH Act, while protecting individuals from wrongful accusations at the same time.

It is also imperative for organisations to ensure that the ICs are in place and that all investigation processes are thorough, impartial, and fair. For this, organisations must also provide training to the ICs on how to handle all complaints objectively and sensitively.

That apart, there should be clear consequences for those found to be making false complaints. This will majorly help deter individuals from misusing the system, while reinforcing the importance of genuine reporting.

Most importantly, organisations must conduct regular training sessions on the importance of the POSH Act and the ramifications of false complaints, which can help foster a culture of trust and transparency. Educating employees about the serious consequences of false reporting can act as a deterrent.

Conclusion

While the rise in false complaints is a troubling trend, it is crucial to remember the original intent behind the POSH Act – to create a safe and inclusive workplace for all. By addressing the issue of false complaints head-on and implementing measures to protect both genuine victims and the wrongfully accused, organisations can uphold the integrity of their workplace policies and ensure a respectful and supportive environment for everyone.

By adopting a balanced approach, including robust investigation processes, clear consequences, support systems, and continuous education, organisations can effectively mitigate the impact of false complaints and maintain a fair and safe workplace.

The post The ramifications of false complaints in the workplace first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

There are clear guidelines for the police, courts, and media on how to conceal the details of
the victims in sexual assault cases. Despite this, the officials involved in handling the recent
sexual harassment case in Anna University, Chennai failed to uphold the victim’s right to
privacy. The FIR of the case was uploaded in the public domain, revealing the identity of the
victim, her phone number and address, and the details of the incident.

The FIR leakage is a serious lapse in the investigation process, with high chances of
deviating and destabilising the ongoing investigation. The negligence has potentially
exposed the victim to discrimination and harassment. The Madras High Court ruled in favour
of the victim and directed that the Tamil Nadu government pay an interim compensation of
Rs. 25 lakh to the victim. This would be recovered from those who were responsible for the
dereliction of duty and leaking of the FIR.

The Confidentiality Mandate

Maintaining the confidentiality of the victims of sexual harassment is of utmost importance.
This is a critical mandate even in PoSH cases . Complainants will only come forward if they
firmly believe that they can trust the process – with an assurance of safety and security by
ensuring anonymity.

In the P v. A & Ors case from 2021, the Bombay High Court issued important guidelines for
maintaining anonymity in PoSH cases. The High Court acknowledged that the identities of
the persons involved in the case must be protected from both intentional and accidental
exposure. The court outlined specific minimum standards to shield the identities of the
people.

● The names of the parties should not be included in the body of the order.
● The orders should be titled only with the first letter of their names during the proceedings. For example, the A v. B case, and P v. S case.
● Any information that might aid in identifying the survivor, the harasser, and the
witnesses will not be included in the order.
● These orders will not be uploaded publicly.

The privacy standards are intended to act as a functioning framework for courts handling
PoSH Act matters. This case is a benchmark for ensuring victim protection in PoSH cases
during legal proceedings.

Role of Internal Committees in Maintaining Privacy

Similar to courts, ICs handling PoSH cases are required to safeguard confidentiality during the investigation with extreme care. It is strictly forbidden by the PoSH Act to divulge case details to outside parties. The employer is the only person who may be given such information, ideally on a need-to-know basis. The employer must be notified when the complaint is first filed and when the final report needs to be actioned. Putting such interim measures into place aids the investigation.

Consequently, the Employer and the ICs must take all reasonable steps to safeguard case-
related data, such as witness and party identities. ICs should anonymise these reports once
the final version of the investigation is part of the records and ensure their safe storage.

Confidentiality is indispensable because it is a promise of safety for the victims coming
forward with their cases. A breach of confidentiality is a breach of their confidence in the
system.

There should be regular training for IC members on confidentiality protocols.

How ICs can build more trust in the organisation

Victims are empowered to come forward only when they are aware of the company’s
policies on PoSH and how they address these cases. Organisations should take active steps
to create awareness among the entire workforce regarding the PoSH Act, its guidelines, and
redressal mechanisms especially educating victims to come directly to the IC without talking
about the case with colleagues as this could lead to gossip.

A major barrier to people reporting sexual harassment at workplaces is the fear of
information leakage, which can in turn make the working environment more hostile for the
victim. The victim might have to face cultural stigma around such cases. Therefore, the ICs
responsible for resolving PoSH cases must be sensitised, and understand their duty to make
a cultural shift towards empathy and victim protection.

If you wish to know more please do reach out to us on contact@posh.metisindia.com

The post Confidentiality Is Non-Negotiable first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

One mandate of the POSH Act is that every employer with 10 or more people in their workforce must set up an Internal Committee (IC) to help drive prevention, awareness, and sensitisation and put in place formal mechanisms for complaints, redressal, and remedial actions. The committee must have at least four members, including one external member.

This external member is generally expected to represent either a non-governmental organisation or an association working towards women’s causes or should be someone cognizant with sexual harassment matters and pertinent rules. This member has, perhaps, the most crucial role to play in ensuring that the IC functions and delivers as expected.

Why bring an ‘outsider’ into ‘internal’ affairs?
In February 2020, India’s apex court asserted that “the purpose of having such a member is to ensure the presence of an independent person who can aid, advise and assist the Committee. It obviates an institutional bias…” These are pertinent points.

Prevention and remedial processes must be robust and trustworthy for the law to be truly effective in upholding the conditions of a safe work environment for women. Trust and transparency are vital factors. Victims and witnesses are more likely to come forward if they have a good understanding of the organisation’s stance and policy on sexual harassment matters at the workplace. Complainants will come forward only if they can repose enough faith and confidence in the system. Potential instances of harassment can be prevented only if would-be harassers understand there would be consequences for them that serve as effective deterrents.

That’s why the right external IC member can bring several advantages including:

Gravitas
Without doubt, members of the IC must be armed with ample knowledge, competencies, and tools to function properly and create real impact. They must have adequate training to take on nuanced complaints and tangled investigations besides a clear grasp of the legal and ethical aspects. A competent IC also treats every complaint with gravitas and without bias, facilitating mediation and counselling sources as the situation requires. They must investigate complaints with thoroughness and neutrality, making timely enquiries and report findings with recommended actions against the person accused of harassment.

Broader perspective and expertise
However, this is easier said than done. Confidence in the system is a lot harder to achieve than competence. Here, the importance of the external member’s role cannot be emphasised enough. While other members of the IC understand the inner workings of the organisation well, an external member can ensure that the focus on the issue is unwavering. Unlike internal members who might have other work priorities, the external member is essentially an expert with a primary focus on dealing with these matters. They also bring in a wider variety of experiences working with other organisations, expertise in the POSH Act, documentation, enforceability, timelines and so on.

Objectivity and unbiased approach
Objectivity and neutrality are of utmost importance for ICs to be efficient and effective. Organisations must seek an external expert who is well-trained in schooling their emotions. Such a member would not carry any baggage of preconceived notions or existing relationships that can divert or impact the course of inquiries and redressal – internal members may not always be able to avoid biases.

The inclusion of such a member in the IC will greatly boost the outcomes of its inquiries, investigations, and decisions and improve employees’ trust in the system which is so elusive but essential.

The post Why an efficient external IC member is crucial first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

While office parties are often a great setting for colleagues to bond, get to know each other, and just have some fun as a team, they cannot be an excuse to normalise unacceptable behaviour. Many let their guard down when drunk and become loose-lipped. They may let go of their sense of judgment and overstep personal boundaries while trying to be friendly.

Toeing the fine line

There is a fine line between the personal and the professional. Office parties are meant to get colleagues to relax, have fun, and mingle freely for better in-office collaboration. While being friendly is welcome as a way to build a personal rapport with teammates and colleagues, maintaining a balance is essential.

Anything that could end up creating an uncomfortable situation at work should be deliberately avoided. As an example, if you tend to get really brash after two drinks, stay aware of your limits and steer clear of controversies. Alcohol cannot be a license to behave badly and do and say as you please. The ‘I was drunk’ excuse will not cut it anymore.

Intent versus perception

While your intent may not be wrong, perception matters. If your actions can potentially put a strain on your working relationships, avoid indulging in those actions. While you may believe that you are just being friendly, the other party may get offended or consider your actions a violation of personal boundaries. In certain instances, misbehaviour (even perceived) at such events has led to even more serious repercussions.

The same applies to bystanders too. If you find a colleague crossing the line in their interactions with another colleague, speak up and find ways to diffuse the situation.

Also, it does not matter whether it is a formal work event, a company-sponsored party, or an informal team meet-up outside the office, the rules are the same.

Social events at work are a great opportunity to get to know your colleagues as people- to find shared interests, talk about hobbies, and build camaraderie at work. However, never lose sight of professional boundaries and basic human decency even as you let your hair down.

The post Get social, but not unprofessional, at office parties first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.