In what has been described as a “hidden epidemic,” a report from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) finds that nearly 7 in 10 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people report being sexually harassed at work (TUC, 2019). Although the focal article (Hayes et al., Reference Hayes, Kaylor and Oltman2020) offers a number of avenues to invigorate sexual harassment training, the consideration of gender and sexual minority experiences relating to sexual harassment can advance this agenda even further. The focal article notes that the number of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints based on sexual orientation or identity harassment has increased from about 808 in fiscal year 2013 to 1,811 in fiscal year 2018 (EEOC, n.d.). These estimates are indicative of a growing problem for LGBTQ+ workers and may interfere with their full participation in the workforce. This perspective is important for three key reasons: (a) new research indicates a high victimization rate of LGBTQ+ workers, (b) two court cases pending adjudication by the Supreme Court have the potential to provide federal protection for millions of LGBTQ+ workers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and (c) individuals at higher risk for victimization (i.e., LGBTQ+ workers) can greatly benefit from training in the identification of harassment and in overcoming fears of reporting-associated stigma. The aforementioned areas are reviewed with a focus on advancing an agenda that improves sexual harassment training for all workers.
The prevalence of sexual harassment and special concerns for LGBTQ+ workers
Although the #MeToo movement has brought issues of sexual harassment to the forefront of national discourse, the voices of LGBTQ+ people have rarely been heard on this issue and little research has sought to properly understand their unique experiences. To address this gap, the TUC conducted a study of more than 1,000 LGBT workers to understand their experiences of sexual harassment at work and its impact on their physical and mental health. This study revealed shockingly high levels of sexual harassment and sexual assault at work across all different types of harassing behaviors for LGBT workers (TUC, 2019).
Most concerning is the finding that 68%, or nearly 7 in 10, of respondents had experienced at least one form of sexual harassment at work (TUC, 2019). In addition to this, more than two in five LGBT individuals (42%) report experiencing unwelcome comments or questions about their sex life, and 27% report unwelcome verbal sexual advances (TUC, 2019). Although this report found unacceptably high levels of sexual harassment for both LGBT men and women, research supports the notion that women are more likely than men to experience sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). In addition to this observed difference, Black and minority ethnic (BME), disabled, and LGBT women are disproportionately affected by sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). Even when compared to GBT men, LGBT women report significantly higher levels of sexual harassment across a range of behaviors, including unwelcome sexual messages, sexual advances, and sexual assault (TUC, 2019).
LGBQ+ workers face a unique concern in that sexual orientation is largely considered an “invisible identity” that only becomes visible when these individuals communicate it via the “coming out” process (Ragins, Reference Ragins2004). LGBTQ+ employees must weigh the choice to disclose their sexual orientation or gender identity at work and face an ongoing and often challenging process of negotiating their identity in the workplace (Ragins, Reference Ragins2004). Findings from the TUC survey report that two-thirds (66%) of respondents did not report the harassment to their employers, and 25% of these respondents said it was because they feared being “outed” at work (TUC, 2019). These fears are well-founded, given research showing that individuals who choose to disclose their orientation or undergo a gender transition are more susceptible to discrimination on the job (Brewster et al., Reference Brewster, Velez, Mennicke and Tebbe2014; Croteau, Reference Croteau1996). Stereotypes surrounding LGBTQ+ identities as intrinsically focused on sexual activity appear to be linked to incidents of sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). The sexualization of LGBTQ+ individuals serves as an unwelcome invitation to make sexualized comments or ask inappropriate questions about an LGBTQ+ person’s sex life, especially if these individuals are “out” (TUC, 2019).
In line with findings indicating that gay men are often unwilling to report sexual orientation harassment (Mims & Kleiner, Reference Mims and Kleiner1998), the TUC survey found that gay men were less likely than other groups to report their experiences of sexual harassment to their employer. In fact, 72% of gay men did not report the sexual harassment to their employer compared to 67% of lesbians/gay women and 62% of bisexuals (TUC, 2019). Given that gender, sexual orientation, ability, and race do not operate as mutually exclusive identities, it may be difficult for individuals to identify their experiences of sexual harassment as separate from other forms of discrimination. Increasing the representation of LGBTQ+ experiences within the public discourse and organizational practices surrounding sexual harassment offers one way to help break down these barriers to identifying and reporting sexual harassment.
Protecting gender and sexual minorities under Title VII
Presently, the United States lacks federal protections for gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination, and state protections are only available in 21 and 22 states, respectively (Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2020). While at its inception, the Civil Rights Act may have only been applied to specific cases, it has been upheld in cases of discrimination based on both gender identity and sexual orientation. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act pertains specifically to employment issues and mandates that employers cannot discriminate based on color, national origin, race, religion, or sex. Under Title VII, it is unlawful to harass a person because of their sex, and sexual harassment falls under this protection.
Although there remains disagreement surrounding the groups protected under Title VII, Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989) set an early precedent for this protection by deciding that discrimination from failure to meet sex-related stereotypes is protected by the Civil Rights Acts. Though the guidance has since been reversed, the EEOC under the Obama administration determined that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination and therefore prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The EEOC supported these claims in the case of Baldwin v. Foxx (2015). Further, EEOC v. Scott Medical Health Center, P.C. (2016) clarified that sexual orientation cannot be considered without regard to a person’s biological sex and is a form of sex discrimination.
Two cases surrounding gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination have made their way to the Supreme Court and have the potential to affect millions of LGBTQ+ workers. The case of EEOC v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. (2019) seeks to rule on whether or not transgender people are protected by federal sex discrimination laws, and in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (2019) will rule on whether these protections apply to sexual orientation. If the court decides that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to LGBTQ+ employees, these employees could gain basic protections to which other groups have access. Currently, these appeals are pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Improving training and organizational practices
The careful development of training content is paramount to creating effective training programs (Salas et al., Reference Salas, Tannenbaum, Kraiger and Smith-Jentsch2012). Regarding the content of sexual harassment training, the focal article notes that both sexual harassment and unlawful racial discrimination training have overwhelmingly focused on the trainee as the source of the undesirable behavior that needs to be remedied. Alternative models of training can focus on targeting those who have been harassed, training employees to intervene in instances of harassment as bystanders, and developing interventions targeted at increasing self-advocacy, community, and self-efficacy. Although leaders often have the power to identify changes for policy or procedure implementation, individuals at higher risk for victimization (i.e., LGBTQ+ workers) may be a strategic target population for training (Eatough et al., Reference Eatough, Waters and Kellerman2019).
Given the unique challenges facing LGBTQ+ workers, such individuals can benefit from training in the identification of harassment and in overcoming the stigma associated with reporting (Eatough et al., Reference Eatough, Waters and Kellerman2019). A first step to achieving this aim is increasing the representation of LGBTQ+ experiences within the public discourse and organizational policies surrounding sexual harassment. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) recommends having clear definitions of what constitutes harassment, examples of prohibited conduct, an explanation of how victims and viewers of harassment should report harassment, and clear HR processes and disciplinary measures for handling complaints. Importantly, to reduce fear of retaliation and being “outed” in the workplace, all complaints should be treated as confidential.
Organizations should strive to ensure that all policies, especially those on harassment and sexual harassment, use LGBTQ+-inclusive language, examples, and case studies (TUC, 2019). Using LGBTQ+-inclusive language and examples can help these individuals better identify their experiences of sexual harassment as separate from other forms of discrimination. Given the role of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists in ensuring the legal defensibility of organizational practices, along with the moral obligation to uplift employees of all identities, I-O psychologists can aid organizations in designing training programs that recognize this “hidden epidemic” for LGBTQ+ workers.
You have
Access
In what has been described as a “hidden epidemic,” a report from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) finds that nearly 7 in 10 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people report being sexually harassed at work (TUC, 2019). Although the focal article (Hayes et al., Reference Hayes, Kaylor and Oltman2020) offers a number of avenues to invigorate sexual harassment training, the consideration of gender and sexual minority experiences relating to sexual harassment can advance this agenda even further. The focal article notes that the number of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints based on sexual orientation or identity harassment has increased from about 808 in fiscal year 2013 to 1,811 in fiscal year 2018 (EEOC, n.d.). These estimates are indicative of a growing problem for LGBTQ+ workers and may interfere with their full participation in the workforce. This perspective is important for three key reasons: (a) new research indicates a high victimization rate of LGBTQ+ workers, (b) two court cases pending adjudication by the Supreme Court have the potential to provide federal protection for millions of LGBTQ+ workers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and (c) individuals at higher risk for victimization (i.e., LGBTQ+ workers) can greatly benefit from training in the identification of harassment and in overcoming fears of reporting-associated stigma. The aforementioned areas are reviewed with a focus on advancing an agenda that improves sexual harassment training for all workers.
The prevalence of sexual harassment and special concerns for LGBTQ+ workers
Although the #MeToo movement has brought issues of sexual harassment to the forefront of national discourse, the voices of LGBTQ+ people have rarely been heard on this issue and little research has sought to properly understand their unique experiences. To address this gap, the TUC conducted a study of more than 1,000 LGBT workers to understand their experiences of sexual harassment at work and its impact on their physical and mental health. This study revealed shockingly high levels of sexual harassment and sexual assault at work across all different types of harassing behaviors for LGBT workers (TUC, 2019).
Most concerning is the finding that 68%, or nearly 7 in 10, of respondents had experienced at least one form of sexual harassment at work (TUC, 2019). In addition to this, more than two in five LGBT individuals (42%) report experiencing unwelcome comments or questions about their sex life, and 27% report unwelcome verbal sexual advances (TUC, 2019). Although this report found unacceptably high levels of sexual harassment for both LGBT men and women, research supports the notion that women are more likely than men to experience sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). In addition to this observed difference, Black and minority ethnic (BME), disabled, and LGBT women are disproportionately affected by sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). Even when compared to GBT men, LGBT women report significantly higher levels of sexual harassment across a range of behaviors, including unwelcome sexual messages, sexual advances, and sexual assault (TUC, 2019).
LGBQ+ workers face a unique concern in that sexual orientation is largely considered an “invisible identity” that only becomes visible when these individuals communicate it via the “coming out” process (Ragins, Reference Ragins2004). LGBTQ+ employees must weigh the choice to disclose their sexual orientation or gender identity at work and face an ongoing and often challenging process of negotiating their identity in the workplace (Ragins, Reference Ragins2004). Findings from the TUC survey report that two-thirds (66%) of respondents did not report the harassment to their employers, and 25% of these respondents said it was because they feared being “outed” at work (TUC, 2019). These fears are well-founded, given research showing that individuals who choose to disclose their orientation or undergo a gender transition are more susceptible to discrimination on the job (Brewster et al., Reference Brewster, Velez, Mennicke and Tebbe2014; Croteau, Reference Croteau1996). Stereotypes surrounding LGBTQ+ identities as intrinsically focused on sexual activity appear to be linked to incidents of sexual harassment (TUC, 2019). The sexualization of LGBTQ+ individuals serves as an unwelcome invitation to make sexualized comments or ask inappropriate questions about an LGBTQ+ person’s sex life, especially if these individuals are “out” (TUC, 2019).
In line with findings indicating that gay men are often unwilling to report sexual orientation harassment (Mims & Kleiner, Reference Mims and Kleiner1998), the TUC survey found that gay men were less likely than other groups to report their experiences of sexual harassment to their employer. In fact, 72% of gay men did not report the sexual harassment to their employer compared to 67% of lesbians/gay women and 62% of bisexuals (TUC, 2019). Given that gender, sexual orientation, ability, and race do not operate as mutually exclusive identities, it may be difficult for individuals to identify their experiences of sexual harassment as separate from other forms of discrimination. Increasing the representation of LGBTQ+ experiences within the public discourse and organizational practices surrounding sexual harassment offers one way to help break down these barriers to identifying and reporting sexual harassment.
Protecting gender and sexual minorities under Title VII
Presently, the United States lacks federal protections for gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination, and state protections are only available in 21 and 22 states, respectively (Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2020). While at its inception, the Civil Rights Act may have only been applied to specific cases, it has been upheld in cases of discrimination based on both gender identity and sexual orientation. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act pertains specifically to employment issues and mandates that employers cannot discriminate based on color, national origin, race, religion, or sex. Under Title VII, it is unlawful to harass a person because of their sex, and sexual harassment falls under this protection.
Although there remains disagreement surrounding the groups protected under Title VII, Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989) set an early precedent for this protection by deciding that discrimination from failure to meet sex-related stereotypes is protected by the Civil Rights Acts. Though the guidance has since been reversed, the EEOC under the Obama administration determined that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination and therefore prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The EEOC supported these claims in the case of Baldwin v. Foxx (2015). Further, EEOC v. Scott Medical Health Center, P.C. (2016) clarified that sexual orientation cannot be considered without regard to a person’s biological sex and is a form of sex discrimination.
Two cases surrounding gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination have made their way to the Supreme Court and have the potential to affect millions of LGBTQ+ workers. The case of EEOC v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. (2019) seeks to rule on whether or not transgender people are protected by federal sex discrimination laws, and in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (2019) will rule on whether these protections apply to sexual orientation. If the court decides that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to LGBTQ+ employees, these employees could gain basic protections to which other groups have access. Currently, these appeals are pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Improving training and organizational practices
The careful development of training content is paramount to creating effective training programs (Salas et al., Reference Salas, Tannenbaum, Kraiger and Smith-Jentsch2012). Regarding the content of sexual harassment training, the focal article notes that both sexual harassment and unlawful racial discrimination training have overwhelmingly focused on the trainee as the source of the undesirable behavior that needs to be remedied. Alternative models of training can focus on targeting those who have been harassed, training employees to intervene in instances of harassment as bystanders, and developing interventions targeted at increasing self-advocacy, community, and self-efficacy. Although leaders often have the power to identify changes for policy or procedure implementation, individuals at higher risk for victimization (i.e., LGBTQ+ workers) may be a strategic target population for training (Eatough et al., Reference Eatough, Waters and Kellerman2019).
Given the unique challenges facing LGBTQ+ workers, such individuals can benefit from training in the identification of harassment and in overcoming the stigma associated with reporting (Eatough et al., Reference Eatough, Waters and Kellerman2019). A first step to achieving this aim is increasing the representation of LGBTQ+ experiences within the public discourse and organizational policies surrounding sexual harassment. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) recommends having clear definitions of what constitutes harassment, examples of prohibited conduct, an explanation of how victims and viewers of harassment should report harassment, and clear HR processes and disciplinary measures for handling complaints. Importantly, to reduce fear of retaliation and being “outed” in the workplace, all complaints should be treated as confidential.
Organizations should strive to ensure that all policies, especially those on harassment and sexual harassment, use LGBTQ+-inclusive language, examples, and case studies (TUC, 2019). Using LGBTQ+-inclusive language and examples can help these individuals better identify their experiences of sexual harassment as separate from other forms of discrimination. Given the role of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists in ensuring the legal defensibility of organizational practices, along with the moral obligation to uplift employees of all identities, I-O psychologists can aid organizations in designing training programs that recognize this “hidden epidemic” for LGBTQ+ workers.