What are the consequences when some of the employers dissuade the presiding officer and employee-members of the internal committees, constituted by themselves, not to involve and associate the non-employee member (external) with internal committee proceedings?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
214From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Consequences of Employers Dissuading Non-Employee Members from Internal Committees
In the scenario described, where employers dissuade the presiding officer and employee-members of internal committees from involving the non-employee member (external) as mandated by the Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal) Act 2013, there are significant legal and operational implications for such actions. Here are the consequences:
1. Legal Penalties: The Sexual Harassment Act of 2013 clearly outlines the composition of internal committees and the inclusion of a non-employee member (external) to ensure impartiality and fairness in addressing harassment complaints. Employers who interfere with this composition can face legal penalties and sanctions under the law.
2. Non-Compliance Risks: By dissuading the involvement of the non-employee member, employers risk being non-compliant with the statutory requirements of the Act. Non-compliance can lead to reputational damage, legal actions, and financial penalties.
3. Compromised Fairness: Excluding the non-employee member compromises the objectivity and fairness of the internal committee proceedings. The presence of an external member is crucial to provide an unbiased perspective and ensure a just resolution of harassment complaints.
4. Employee Distrust: Employees may lose trust in the internal committee and the organization if they perceive interference in the committee's composition. This can lead to decreased morale, increased grievances, and a negative work environment.
5. Impact on Organizational Culture: Failure to adhere to the legal requirements and principles of workplace safety and equality can have a detrimental impact on the organizational culture. It may signal a lack of commitment to addressing harassment issues effectively.
6. Reputational Damage: Public perception of the organization can be tarnished if it is found to be flouting legal provisions related to preventing sexual harassment at the workplace. Reputational damage can affect employee recruitment, retention, and stakeholder relationships.
In conclusion, it is imperative for employers to uphold the integrity of internal committees and comply with the legal framework established to prevent and address workplace harassment. By ensuring the proper composition and functioning of internal committees, organizations can foster a safe and respectful work environment for all employees.
References:
- Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal) Act 2013. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstre...1/A2013-14.pdf
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the scenario described, where employers dissuade the presiding officer and employee-members of internal committees from involving the non-employee member (external) as mandated by the Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal) Act 2013, there are significant legal and operational implications for such actions. Here are the consequences:
1. Legal Penalties: The Sexual Harassment Act of 2013 clearly outlines the composition of internal committees and the inclusion of a non-employee member (external) to ensure impartiality and fairness in addressing harassment complaints. Employers who interfere with this composition can face legal penalties and sanctions under the law.
2. Non-Compliance Risks: By dissuading the involvement of the non-employee member, employers risk being non-compliant with the statutory requirements of the Act. Non-compliance can lead to reputational damage, legal actions, and financial penalties.
3. Compromised Fairness: Excluding the non-employee member compromises the objectivity and fairness of the internal committee proceedings. The presence of an external member is crucial to provide an unbiased perspective and ensure a just resolution of harassment complaints.
4. Employee Distrust: Employees may lose trust in the internal committee and the organization if they perceive interference in the committee's composition. This can lead to decreased morale, increased grievances, and a negative work environment.
5. Impact on Organizational Culture: Failure to adhere to the legal requirements and principles of workplace safety and equality can have a detrimental impact on the organizational culture. It may signal a lack of commitment to addressing harassment issues effectively.
6. Reputational Damage: Public perception of the organization can be tarnished if it is found to be flouting legal provisions related to preventing sexual harassment at the workplace. Reputational damage can affect employee recruitment, retention, and stakeholder relationships.
In conclusion, it is imperative for employers to uphold the integrity of internal committees and comply with the legal framework established to prevent and address workplace harassment. By ensuring the proper composition and functioning of internal committees, organizations can foster a safe and respectful work environment for all employees.
References:
- Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal) Act 2013. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstre...1/A2013-14.pdf
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
What Employers are Looking for in You.ppt
Performance appraisal for Admin Officer.doc