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.

What made this case a turning point was not just who the victim was. It was how little it took. A publicly available photo, a free AI tool, and the decision to use it to humiliate someone. That decision is being made every day now, in workplaces, in professional networks, in group chats where colleagues think no one is watching. Online harassment has found a powerful new instrument in generative AI, and every workspace, physical or digital, is already within its reach.

Online Harassment has a New Toolkit

Deepfakes, which are AI-generated or AI-altered images, videos, and audio, are no longer a niche technological curiosity. The number of deepfake files skyrocketed from 500,000 in 2023 to an estimated 8 million by 2025, and the tools to create them require almost no technical skill. A social media profile, a few public photos, a voice note — that is enough raw material.

Deepfake-related cybercrime cases in India have increased as well. According to a McAfee survey, 75% of Indians have consumed some form of deepfake content in the last twelve months, and 88% have encountered deepfake scams. These are not abstract numbers. The harm is real, immediate, and overwhelmingly gendered.

It is Happening to Ordinary Women, Not Just Celebrities

The Rashmika Mandanna case made national headlines and triggered an FIR. But that incident, visible precisely because of who the victim was, represents a much larger crisis. A 2025 report based on cases submitted to Meri Trustline, a helpline by the Rati Foundation, found that 92% of women reporting deepfake abuse are ordinary women, not celebrities.

The content being created is not limited to viral videos. It includes morphed intimate images circulated in WhatsApp groups, fake profiles built from stolen LinkedIn photos, voice notes doctored to put words in someone’s mouth, and threats to upload manipulated imagery unless a demand is met. These are tools of intimidation, and they are showing up in professional contexts with increasing frequency.

In the workplace, deepfakes can be weaponised to harass, intimidate, retaliate, or destroy reputations, often with limited recourse under traditional employment policies. A fabricated image of a female colleague shared in an office group chat. A cloned voice note made to sound like an employee saying something compromising. An altered photograph used to discredit a woman who raised a complaint. Each of these scenarios is plausible. Several are already documented.

This is Workplace Harassment Under POSH

India’s Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act, 2013 defines harassment to include any unwelcome act that creates a hostile, intimidating, or offensive work environment. The law explicitly extends to the “extended workplace,” meaning any location where work-related interaction occurs. Digital channels are not an exception.

When a colleague’s image is morphed into obscene content and shared through a work group, that is sexual harassment under POSH. When a woman receives AI-generated explicit content from a co-worker, that is a violation. When someone’s voice is cloned to fabricate a conversation that then circulates in professional networks, there is both a POSH complaint and a criminal offence at play.

The challenge is that most Internal Committees have been trained to handle verbal and physical complaints. Digital harassment, especially when it involves social media, anonymous accounts, or content originating outside office hours, is a new frontier that existing IC training rarely covers. The gap between what the law covers and what organisations are prepared to investigate is significant, and closing it is now a compliance priority.

What Indian Law Says

India does not yet have a standalone deepfake law. But existing frameworks offer more protection than most people realise. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, notified by MeitY in February 2026, now impose a strict three-hour takedown window for AI-generated content flagged as harmful, making this one of the most stringent platform liability provisions globally.

Key provisions currently available to victims:

Under Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023:

• Section 336 covers forgery using AI-altered media, carrying up to 7 years imprisonment
• Section 79 addresses outraging modesty, including through morphed images, with up to 3 years imprisonment
• Section 356 deals with defamation through published imagery, carrying up to 2 years imprisonment
• Section 351(3) covers criminal intimidation using morphed imagery as a threat, with up to 7 years imprisonment

Under the Information Technology Act, 2000:

• Section 66C covers identity theft through misuse of someone’s digital likeness, carrying up to 3 years imprisonment and a Rs 1 lakh fine
• Section 66E addresses violation of privacy through publishing someone’s imagery without consent
• Section 67A criminalises publishing sexually explicit synthetic content, with up to 7 years on repeat conviction

Courts have been responsive. In December 2025, Delhi and Mumbai courts granted emergency orders in favour of NTR Jr., R. Madhavan, and Shilpa Shetty, blocking the spread of AI-generated deepfakes and voice clones, and making clear that intermediaries must quickly remove AI-driven impersonations once notified.

What to Do if it Happens to You 

A fast response matters enormously, and under the 2026 IT Rules, acting quickly triggers the platform’s legal obligation to remove content within hours. Whether the victim is you, a colleague, or someone who approaches HR, the steps are the same.

• Preserve evidence first. Screenshot the content, note the URL, and save any profile details of the person who uploaded it. Do not delete anything.
• File a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in) and at the nearest cyber police station. For sexual deepfakes, FIR registration is mandatory.
• Report directly to the platform, triggering their takedown obligation under the 2026 IT Rules.
• Escalate through POSH channels if the content involves any workplace connection, such as a colleague, a manager, or a shared professional network.
• Seek urgent High Court relief in serious cases. Indian courts have granted nearly immediate takedown orders for deepfake materials that are potentially damaging, often within 12 to 18 hours.

Building a Workplace that Takes online Sexual Harassment Seriously

Digital conduct is not a grey area anymore. Organisations have a clear duty, ethical and legal, to treat online harassment with the same weight as anything that happens in a conference room. That means updating POSH policies to explicitly name digital and AI-generated harassment, training Internal Committees to investigate such complaints properly, and communicating without ambiguity that creating, sharing, or threatening someone with manipulated content is grounds for disciplinary action.

The women in your teams are navigating a professional environment where their faces, voices, and identities can be weaponised by anyone with a smartphone and a motive. Recognising that as a workplace safety issue, not just a social media problem, is the first and most important shift an organisation can make.

The post When the Screen Becomes the Weapon: Online Harassment, AI, and What It Means for Your Workplace first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

What “no material evidence” means

Material evidence means something tangible that supports or refutes the allegation: a recording, a document, or a witness who saw the act. If you have none of that, it means you must base your review on what is available: statements, context, circumstances, behaviour, and reliability. Sexual harassment cases and other workplace complaints often face this challenge, as many incidents occur in private and lack independent documentation

Starting with transparency

When you begin the enquiry, note what evidence was sought and what was not found. For example: “No CCTV footage exists of the relevant location on the date in question,” or “No independent witness presented who saw the interaction.” This is not a finding of guilt or innocence; it simply documents what the Committee has already done. That clarity builds trust in the process.

Looking beyond the “documented proof”

In the absence of direct proof, focus on relevant facts and circumstantial indicators. These might include behavioural patterns (has the respondent faced similar complaints?), digital traces (access logs, timestamps), and changes in the complainant’s behaviour. These don’t guarantee the finding, but they allow your Committee to make informed observations.

The role of fairness in your inquiry

Fairness remains the bedrock. Even without strong evidence, you must treat both parties with respect. Offer the complainant and respondent equal opportunity to present their account. Ask honest questions, not leading ones. Your Committee’s neutrality should be clear in how you conduct the enquiry and record its progress. A well-documented, impartial process is critical.

Evaluating what you can conclude

Here, a key principle comes into play — the preponderance of probability. This principle means you are not seeking proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” as done in criminal courts, but rather asking: Is it more likely that the alleged event occurred? If the available information slightly favours the complainant, you can find the allegation proved. If things are evenly balanced, you must say the allegation is not proved. This is because civil investigations function on this standard of “just over 50%” rather than absolute certainty.

Communicating the outcome

How you frame the conclusion is important. Inform both parties privately, use clear and respectful language, and avoid implying blame. For the complainant, emphasise that a finding of “not proved” is not the same as a conclusion of “false”. For the respondent, maintain the presumption of fairness. Remind both parties of confidentiality obligations and protections against retaliation.

Why every such case matters

Even when you don’t find material evidence, the enquiry has value. You demonstrate that the organisation takes complaints seriously, conducts fair reviews, and learns from what happened. The absence of evidence might signal deeper gaps — say, in how behaviours are documented or how records are maintained. As a result, your Internal Committee can recommend improvements to policy, training, record-keeping or supervision.

POSH case without material evidence is still valid

Managing a case without material evidence takes care, discipline and empathy. Your role as an IC member is to ensure the process is fair, transparent, and reasoned — and to base your outcome on whether it is more likely than not that the incident occurred. The principle of the preponderance of probabilities gives you the framework; your careful inquiry gives the process legitimacy. In doing so, you help your organisation reinforce what truly matters: respectful, safe workplaces where allegations are heard, considered and acted upon with integrity.

POSH Cases and the Indian Evidence Act

While inquiries under the POSH Act, 2013, do not fall under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the principles of natural justice and reasoned decision-making still apply. The Internal Committee (IC) is not bound by the strict technical rules of evidence that apply in a court of law. However, given that the POSH Act confers certain powers of a civil court on the Committee, such as summoning witnesses, requiring document production, and examining evidence on oath, the quality and reliability of evidence considered should be such that it would be acceptable and defensible in a court of law if ever challenged.

In practice, this means that while the IC can adopt a flexible, inquiry-based approach, it must still rely on credible, relevant, and verifiable material when forming conclusions. The focus should be on ensuring procedural fairness, transparency, and documentation so that the Committee’s findings stand up to judicial or appellate scrutiny if required.

Reach out to us to train your IC on handling different POSH case scenarios: contact@posh.metisindia.com

The post What happens when there is no material evidence? first appeared on Metis POSH Consulting Service LLP.

But this case opened the door to something much bigger.

While hearing the case, the Court also turned its attention to how the POSH Act has been implemented across the country.

Why Did the Supreme Court Take Action?

Reports submitted by learned lawyers revealed a concerning pattern: even after a decade, many states and union territories had not fully complied with the POSH Act.

There were no committees in some districts, no data on implementation, and no clear process for redressal. What began as one case turned into a nationwide compliance check.

Here’s What the Supreme Court Ordered

To fix the gaps, the Court issued a set of directives that all States and UTs must now act upon:

• Every district must have a fully functional Local Complaint Committee
• Government departments and PSUs must set up Internal Committees
• States and UTs must appoint District Officers and make their details public
• POSH implementation data must be published for transparency
• Ensure proper training for all members of LCCs and ICs

What This Means for Workplaces Across India

This judgment has sent ripples across organisations and administrations nationwide. With POSH compliance now under judicial scrutiny, what was once seen as a requirement on paper is being taken far more seriously. Regulatory pressure is rising, and for many institutions, the shift from policy to action has already begun.

At Metis, we’re seeing a growing number of organisations reach out to assess their compliance status, set up or reconstitute Internal Committees, and strengthen their redressal mechanisms in line with the latest directives.

The post The Supreme Court’s directives on nationwide POSH implementation 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 (2380 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.

To create a culture of trust within your team, sexual harassment complaints must be handled with care, professionalism, and legal awareness. By responding effectively, you not only protect your team members but also strengthen your organisation’s commitment to gender equality, respect and inclusivity.

As the first point of contact in the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) cases, a manager has several key responsibilities that cover the legalities, the complainant, and the rest of the team.

Providing support

The first step is to give them your time. Please do not postpone meetings with employees when they specifically say they need to discuss something important or personal.

You must provide a safe, empathetic environment for the complainant to share their experience without judgement. Refrain from asking questions which sound biased and prejudiced. Remain impartial and avoid making assumptions or taking sides until a formal investigation is conducted. It’s not your job to make a decision or judgement, that’s for the internal committee, your role is to guide them on the next steps they can take.

Once you realise that the issue being reported to you by the employee falls under the purview of POSH, your job is to inform them about your company’s POSH policy. You can then help them reach out to the Internal Complaints Committee to make a formal complaint if that is what they want to do. Do not push them to proceed in a manner that makes them uncomfortable—the decision should be their own. Your role is to present the various options they have going forward. You may even need to seek guidance from your HR if you are in doubt about how to proceed.

Once the POSH investigation begins, support the concerned parties by allowing them time to attend the ongoing meetings and provide any assistance required. This could involve managing workloads and time-off.

Dotting the ‘i’s and crossing the ‘t’s

Never forget that sexual harassment is a serious issue that involves many legalities. As the manager, you need to make sure that these rules are respected.

The most basic rule is to ensure confidentiality. Ensure that the details shared are only disclosed to relevant parties as needed. If in doubt, don’t say anything and check with HR or the IC. Ensure the rest of your team is not discussing the case in the workplace. If confidentiality has been broken, you should address it immediately by telling the parties to refrain from talking about it and report it to the IC.

Make sure that you document every step and detail. Accurately note down the complaint, dates, times, locations, and specifics of the incident while maintaining the complainant’s confidentiality. You will need this information if and when the IC requests you to attend the case proceeding as the manager of the involved parties.

Use this information to cooperate with the IC If you are called during the investigation as a witness or stakeholder. They may need the documents or evidence you have collected or any feedback necessary for the case. Please stay neutral and provide every piece of information that is in your possession.

Managing the rest of the team

As a manager, building a respectful culture is key. The complainant must be protected against any form of retaliation, whether subtle or blatant. As a manager, you should keep an eye out to ensure that the complainant is protected from any further victimisation or retaliation from the team, the accused, or even yourself. You should have the self-awareness to make sure that your behaviour towards them does not change for the worse, particularly in terms of your managerial duties, such as handing out work assignments or performance reviews.

Managers should always stay informed about updates on company POSH policy and ensure their teams are trained on these protocols to foster a respectful workplace. Set up awareness sessions to educate them on any changes and ensure that every one of your employees has completed the required POSH modules.

Communication is key. Take the opportunity to talk about a safe work environment with your team members in your meetings. Provide an environment where employees can reach out without fear of judgment or retaliation. Before team outings or office events, reinforce the company code of conduct, responsible drinking, and safe transport.

Working with IC as an ally

As a manager and primary point of contact for the team, you have an opportunity to set the right tone and build a positive team work culture in a gender-diverse group. To give the right impetus to your efforts, working together with the Internal Committee as a partner and ally could prove truly effective. Employing the IC’s expertise to identify key points in the team’s journey and emphasizing good practices through the year can be a gamechanger. This will ensure that the ball doesn’t drop at any point and interventions are not a knee-jerk reaction when complaints are filed. Instead, a proactive approach towards POSH can create a healthy camaraderie and respectful attitude among the team.

Building a better team

It is crucial to put into practice these simple yet essential strategies for handling POSH complaints to create a safe and open environment for your team. Doing so will make team members feel more supported and secure, leading to better work outcomes. Happy employees who trust that their manager ‘has their back’ are more likely to work better together.

As a team manager, you can help build a better team and work culture by creating a supportive environment and ensuring that allegations are handled with care and professionalism.

The post Manager’s role in handling reports of sexual harassment? 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.