Learn more about the Anti-***ual Harassment Act of 1995

[lc1]

Nothing is as unwelcome as advances that are unsolicited and indecent. It can come in all shapes and forms. Thankfully, the law now penalizes such acts in REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7877 (AN ACT DECLARING ***UAL HARASSMENT UNLAWFUL IN THE EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR TRAINING ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES) otherwise known as the “Anti-***ual Harassment Act of 1995.”

In particular, the law seeks to protect “workers, employees, applicants for employment, students or those undergoing training, instruction or education” and to penalize “all forms of ***ual harassment in the employment, education or training environment (Section 2).”

By whom committed

However, the law’s definition of harassment seems too limited. It only happens when “an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment, demands, requests or otherwise requires any ***ual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said act.” (Section 3)

Those who induce the commission of ***ual harassment, or who cooperate in the commission thereof shall also be held liable under the law. (Section 3)

The legal definition begs a couple of critical questions: Can’t ***ual harassment be committed by a peer or a subordinate? Can’t it be committed without demanding, requesting or requiring ***ual favors? The answers are what prompt us to consider the legal definition as too narrow. Being a key component of ***ual harassment, “***ual favors” are further discussed below.

Read the rest from the Legally Inclined blog at http://thelegallyinclined.wordpress.com/.

[BoyL3]

nosebleed ako...

[v6dreamer]

Nothing is as unwelcome as advances that are unsolicited and indecent. It can come in all shapes and forms. Thankfully, the law now penalizes such acts in REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7877 (AN ACT DECLARING ***UAL HARASSMENT UNLAWFUL IN THE EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR TRAINING ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES) otherwise known as the “Anti-***ual Harassment Act of 1995.”

In particular, the law seeks to protect “workers, employees, applicants for employment, students or those undergoing training, instruction or education” and to penalize “all forms of ***ual harassment in the employment, education or training environment (Section 2).”

By whom committed

However, the law’s definition of harassment seems too limited. It only happens when “an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment, demands, requests or otherwise requires any ***ual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said act.” (Section 3)

Those who induce the commission of ***ual harassment, or who cooperate in the commission thereof shall also be held liable under the law. (Section 3)

The legal definition begs a couple of critical questions: Can’t ***ual harassment be committed by a peer or a subordinate? Can’t it be committed without demanding, requesting or requiring ***ual favors? The answers are what prompt us to consider the legal definition as too narrow. Being a key component of ***ual harassment, “***ual favors” are further discussed below.

Read the rest from the Legally Inclined blog at http://thelegallyinclined.wordpress.com/.

Ang tanong. Would they really inforce that law in the Phils and what are the guarantee (Job protection) of those common workers if he/she filed a complaint of ***ual harassment to the bigger man? Hindi ba palakasan na naman sa husgado then the little person is now in the brinks of losing his/her job and the case will be dismiss.