Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD) I beg to move, That the Bill be now read
a Second time. I was very excited to be placed 15th out of 20 in
the private Members’ Bills ballot earlier this year. My number was
461 because in 2017 I was the 461st woman ever to be elected to
Parliament. I owed it to my winning number to introduce a Bill that
would improve women’s equalities, rights and protections. The Bill
will protect not only women but all employees from sexual
harassment in...Request free trial
(Bath) (LD)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
I was very excited to be placed 15th out of 20 in the private
Members’ Bills ballot earlier this year. My number was 461
because in 2017 I was the 461st woman ever to be elected to
Parliament. I owed it to my winning number to introduce a Bill
that would improve women’s equalities, rights and protections.
The Bill will protect not only women but all employees from
sexual harassment in the workplace, but the great majority of
people affected by the new legislation will be women.
I thank the Fawcett Society and the Government Equalities Office
for their tireless work on drafting the Bill and for many prior
years of campaigning. My thanks also go to the Women and
Equalities Committee, whose inquiry into workplace harassment led
to a 2018 report that was influential in driving the proposed
changes in the law.
For too long, women and girls have been unsafe in the workplace.
An Opinium survey suggests that 20% of the UK population have
experienced some form of sexual harassment in the workplace. That
is more than 10 million people—a shocking number. It is therefore
right and imperative that the law changes to protect people in
work. In these testing times, such legislation is more important
than ever.
Harassment is both morally unacceptable and bad for the economy.
Evidence suggests that disrespectful and abusive work practices
lead to lower performance and productivity and increased staff
turnover. Even for those who are not compelled by the moral
reasoning behind increased protection from workplace harassment,
it is hard to ignore the economic arguments.
The 2018 Presidents Club scandal highlighted the extent to which
people are currently unprotected by the law. In that instance,
young female hostesses were allegedly sexually harassed by
businessmen at a notorious men-only dinner, being instructed to
wear “black, sexy shoes” and black underwear. Those women, who
faced violations of their dignity, would not have had recourse to
the law as it stands. Sexual harassment by third parties is a
major problem in the UK. A 2017 survey suggested that 18% of
those who had experienced workplace sexual harassment said that
the perpetrators were clients or customers. Some 1.5 million
people have been harassed by a third party, meaning that clients
or customers were allowed to harass 1.5 million workers.
Workplace sexual harassment is widespread and widely
under-reported. A TUC survey suggested that 79% of women do not
report their experience of sexual harassment, for many reasons
including fear of repercussions, lack of awareness regarding
their rights and fear of not being taken seriously. Those
concerns are heightened for people of colour, people in the LGBT+
community and people with disabilities, who already face greater
discrimination in the workplace. It is understandable why people
do not come forward. For one, it is not just third parties who
harass people, with 20% of surveyed women suggesting that their
direct manager or someone else with direct authority over them
was the perpetrator. It therefore goes without saying that any
reporting could have direct career implications for those
involved.
Whether sexual harassment is by a third party or not, employers
have not done enough to prevent and punish it. The Equality and
Human Rights Commission found that in nearly half of cases
reported, the employer took no action, minimised the incident or
placed the responsibility on the employee to avoid the harasser.
It seems that the risks of reporting sexual harassment can
outweigh the merits. That is disgraceful in modern Britain. The
problem is that the current laws on sexual harassment mean that
employers often adopt individual responses to institutional
problems. That creates space for employers to minimise what is
going on and leads to confusion about how to respond
appropriately. Statistics show that only 45% of managers felt
supported by their organisation when reports were made to them.
Ultimately, the current laws leave people who have encountered
traumatic experiences unsupported. We can and must do better.
The Government agree that more needs to be done to tackle sexual
harassment in the workplace. In their 2021 response to a
consultation on workplace sexual harassment, the Government
committed to introduce a new preventative duty for employers, to
provide more explicit protections from harassment by third
parties, and to support the EHRC to develop a new statutory code
of practice on workplace harassments. For things to improve, we
need a shift in focus from redress to prevention. Currently the
question of whether employers have taken adequate steps to
prevent sexual harassment arises only as a defence if an incident
of sexual harassment has already occurred. That means that
employers are not required to take actions that prevent sexual
harassment. Indeed, the EHRC found in 2018 that only a minority
of employers had effective processes in place to prevent and
address sexual harassment.
The Bill would provide the shift in focus that is so desperately
needed. Clause 2 would ensure that employers prioritise
prevention by imposing a new duty on them to take “all reasonable
steps” to prevent their employees from experiencing workplace
sexual harassment. That will not require employers to do anything
substantially more than what they currently must do to avoid
legal liability for acts of harassment carried out by their
employees, but it would mean that employers could potentially be
further held to account if they have failed to take those
actions, first by an uplift in the compensation awarded at an
employment tribunal, and secondly through the EHRC’s strategic
enforcement. That will, I hope, push employers to prioritise
prevention of sexual harassment, including through improving
workplace practices and culture.
The new duty would operate through dual enforcement. The EHRC may
take enforcement action for a breach or suspected breach of the
duty under its strategic enforcement policy. This means that
women would be able to inform the Equality and Human Rights
Commission of any concerns without necessarily having to take
forward legal action against their employer. In addition, the
employer’s duty will be enforceable by the employment tribunal in
individual cases. Where the employment tribunal has found in
favour of an individual claim of sexual harassment and has
ordered compensation to be paid, the tribunal will examine
whether and to what extent the duty has been breached.
Where a breach is found, tribunal judges will have the power to
order an uplift of up to 25% of the compensation awarded. The
Bill will also introduce explicit protections against third-party
harassment in the workplace. Clause 1 would make employers liable
for the harassment of their staff by third parties, such as
customers and clients, where they have failed to take all
responsible steps to prevent such harassment from happening.
These protections will apply to all acts of third-party
harassment in the workplace, including racial as well as sexual
harassment.
Once again, there will be a system of dual enforcement.
Individuals will be able to bring claims to an employment
tribunal in the usual way for work-related cases under the
Equality Act 2010. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will
have strategic enforcement powers. Compensation will be assessed
in the usual way for Equality Act claims, with the same uplift
outlined earlier available in cases where a breach of duty has
also been established following a successful third-party sexual
harassment case.
A claim for third-party harassment could be brought after a
single incident of harassment. This replaces the previous “three
strikes” formulation, whereby employers needed to know of two
previous incidents of third-party harassment before they could be
considered liable, but employers will be able to rely on the “all
reasonable steps” defence in the usual way. To ensure that
employers are as informed as possible about the proposed changes,
which will come into force 12 months after Royal Assent, the
Government Equalities Office will support the Equality and Human
Rights Commission in creating a statutory code of practice on
sexual harassment and harassment in the workplace. This will be
based on the technical guidance that the Equality and Human
Rights Commission published in 2020 and will be introduced as the
new legislation comes into force.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission will have a duty to
consult on this code of practice in advance. In the meantime, the
Government Equalities Office has produced guidance for employers
on how to prevent sexual harassment, which I understand it is
looking to publish in due course.
Let me finish by turning away from the technical details of the
Bill, and return to the wider set of circumstances that makes it
important for us to pass this legislation. An unacceptable number
of nurses, paramedics, bar staff, people who were key workers
during the pandemic and everyone in between are being subject to
a form of harassment that causes a variety of harms, including
psychological, physical and economic harm. Employers should be
required both morally and legally to take all reasonable steps to
stop sexual harassment from occurring. The fact that the law of
this country does not compel them to do so is a concern.
For too long the onus for challenging sexual harassment has been
on individuals. Our current laws mean that employers do not know
how to respond to cases appropriately, which leaves people who
have encountered traumatic experiences unsupported. Introducing a
standalone preventive duty for employers will shift the
responsibility from individuals to the institution. It will
prevent harassment and protect victims, and it will drive a
change in the culture around victim blaming. I urge that this
House supports my Bill, enshrining in law historic measures to
protect employees from harassment in the workplace.
I thank everybody across the House who has given support to this
Bill and already committed to serving on the Committee that will
ensure that the Bill progresses through the House.
2.04pm
(Harrow East) (Con)
I rise to support the Bill in the name of the hon. Member for
Bath (). The reality is that we as
MPs do not work regular hours; we work incredibly long hours, as
we all know. Most people are working between 37.5 hours and 40
hours on average a week and it is absolutely right that they
should feel safe in the workplace in which they are working. I
welcomed the Equality Act 2010 and the employer liability it
implemented, but unfortunately cases are still rising and the Act
now needs to go further to protect employees. Where employees are
given appropriate support when sexual harassment takes place, it
is extremely welcome, but that is far too infrequent. We need to
encourage it.
I therefore encourage the removal of the three-strike rule. We
all make mistakes at times, and owning up and apologising is a
very good way of ameliorating those mistakes. When people commit
sexual harassment, however, that is not a mistake; that is
predatory. We should call it out for what it is and we must not
allow it to continue. The fact that at the moment employees may
have to suffer three strikes before action is taken is completely
unacceptable—a single time is once too many. It shocked me to
hear that 79% of women do not report sexual harassment in the
workplace because they fear repercussions, losing their job or
losing their livelihood. We must make that change, and I welcome
the fact that this Bill will enable that to happen.
We should also remember, however, that it is not only women who
suffer sexual harassment in the workplace; men also suffer, so we
must ensure that those cases are covered. In most cases, men are
very embarrassed to report sexual harassment. We have that
classic British stiff upper lip, which leads to rising concerns
for men’s mental health and the rise in suicides that can
follow.
It is important that employers take measures to prevent sexual
harassment from taking place, and the clause providing for such
measures in the Bill is very welcome. If an employer breaks their
duty, they should pay for it, because it is their responsibility
to ensure everyone is safe and protected. I trust that once the
Bill passes this House and the other place we will see the number
of cases falling rapidly, so that everyone can feel safe in the
workplace. No one should have to fear having to come to work and
suffer harassment. I support the Bill.
2.06pm
(Bradford East) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for Bath () for bringing this important
Bill to the House. She spoke very well to make the case for the
great need for a change in the legislation.
I will be brief, because I am keen for this Bill to progress to
the next stage. Last year, the Fawcett Society released harrowing
research into sexual harassment in the workplace showing that,
despite the bravery of the #MeToo movement in coming forward to
challenge abuses of power by employers and others in the
workplace, harassment, particularly sexual harassment, remains a
deeply concerning problem that should worry us all. Two in five
women report that they have faced harassment in the
workplace.
What is more, a report from the Government Equalities Office has
indicated that 80% of women who have faced harassment in the
workplace do not go on to report it. I am sure all of us on both
sides of the House are committed to stamping out that abhorrent
behaviour and abuse, and the Opposition stand committed to this
Bill. After all, by making employers liable for harassment
committed by clients and customers, the Bill reintroduces the
provisions that the last Labour Government introduced under the
Equality Act 2010, but that the Tory-led coalition Government
ditched in 2013, claiming that the protections imposed an
unnecessary burden on business.
Let me be clear: protecting people from harassment, especially in
the workplace, is never a burden; it is a responsibility. Nine
years since the protections were first removed, it is welcome
that the Government have finally realised the error of their
decision. However, we should not have had to wait so long for
them to do so, especially given that, like so many of this
Government’s initiatives, the consultation on strengthening
protections against harassment in the workplace was launched back
in 2019.
Labour supports the Bill, but I repeat that the Government should
never have repealed those important protections for working
people. We should be dramatically extending the protection
already available, rather than having to reintroduce it.
2.10pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport ()
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bath () on promoting this important
Bill, as well as all those who have spoken in this brief, but I
would argue important, debate. The significance of the issues
addressed by the Bill cannot be overstated. The 2010 survey from
the Government Equalities Office found that nearly three quarters
of people had been affected by sexual harassment in their
lifetime, while two in five had experienced it within the last 12
months. In the world of work those rates remain unacceptably
high, with 29% of people having experienced harassment in some
form in the past 12 months. That is nearly one in every three
people. It is therefore rather auspicious that this debate has
fallen in the week coinciding with the fifth anniversary of the
#MeToo movement going viral.
On 15 October 2017, the words #MeToo were shared on Twitter by 12
million people around the world, including me, and the Government
believe that is important and have taken significant steps to
combat sexual workplace harassment in the past five years. We
have had the implementation of the strategy to tackle violence
against women and girls, and the UK has ratified two important
international treaties—the Istanbul convention on preventing and
combating violence against women and domestic violence, and the
International Labour Organisation’s violence and harassment
convention, which was the first international treaty to recognise
everyone’s right to a workplace free from violence and
harassment. The UK will continue to work to lead the world in
that area.
It is important to recognise that, as we have heard, workplace
harassment can affect anyone, regardless of industry, profession,
age, race, sex, or sexuality. Anyone can be a victim, with men
reporting almost similar levels of harassment, as highlighted in
the debate. The Government are therefore pleased to share and
support the Bill, and while the Equality Act 2010 already
contains a robust legal framework against workplace harassment,
the measures in the Bill provide an important strengthening of
those protections and a renewed focus on prevention, which we
hope will lead to a reduction in workplace harassment across the
country.
We have listened carefully, and I am extremely keen to see the
Bill progress. My hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East () was correct to highlight that it is not just women
who are affected, and we need to protect employees from
predators. I thank the hon. Member for Bath for promoting this
Bill, which is an important step change in the protections
available against workplace harassment. As the debate on the
future workplace proceeds post pandemic, the Government are
committed to ensuring that everyone feels safe and supported to
thrive. We strongly support the Bill.
2.12pm
I thank everybody for their support for the Bill. As has been
said, this issue does not affect only women; it affects anybody
who is in work and should be protected from harassment. It should
particularly introduce a culture change so that harassment in the
workplace is a thing of the past. I thank hon. Members across the
House, and look forward to the progress of the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time; to stand committed to a
Public Bill Committee (Standing Order No. 63).
|