Author: Nicky Hardwick
In this month’s edition, we examine a case where an allegation of sexual harassment was not what it initially seemed.
A female team lead reported her male subordinate for making sexually inappropriate comments over several months. But what emerged from the investigation was far more complex, and a powerful reminder that in workplace misconduct, context and conduct from both parties matter.
The situation
A female supervisor lodged a formal grievance of sexual harassment against her subordinate, citing a series of sexually explicit comments and stories that had made her feel uncomfortable and unsafe.
The male employee did not deny the content of what had been said, but instead insisted he had no idea she wasn’t a willing participant. He believed they were having friendly, if off-colour, conversations, because she had encouraged it.
As the case unfolded, a different picture began to emerge.
How it started
The conversations began innocently, weekend catch-ups, personal stories, light teasing. The subordinate had a lively social life, and the manager would often ask about it, sometimes prompting with questions like, “Did you meet any girls?” or “Come on, give me details.”
Over time, these conversations became more graphic, but according to both parties, never crossed into explicit sexual detail, just stories that heavily implied what had taken place. Still, the tone was undeniably flirtatious and personal.
The male employee gave detailed, honest testimony. He admitted that in hindsight, the conversations were inappropriate, but stressed that they were mutual and invited. The female manager at first denied initiating or encouraging these chats, but later acknowledged that she had. She had frequently stood at his office door engaging in these conversations, and hadn’t known how to end them once they began to feel uncomfortable.
The trigger: A shared office
The grievance was only raised after the manager was informed that she and the subordinate would soon share an office. This, it seems, was the catalyst for her discomfort becoming formalised. The turning point was not a sudden act, but the change in proximity that made her re-evaluate what had been happening.
The outcome
The chairperson ruled that:
- The male employee had not intended to harass or intimidate his manager
- The conversations were mutual and initiated by both parties
- No formal finding of misconduct could be made against him
The manager acknowledged that she had allowed the dynamic to evolve and had failed to set appropriate boundaries once she became uncomfortable. The case ended with no disciplinary action, but strong recommendations for policy reinforcement, culture discussions and management training.
Key takeaways for employers
- Investigate thoroughly, don’t assume guilt
Allegations of harassment must be taken seriously, but that doesn’t mean accepting the surface narrative. A fair investigation is critical.
- Set clear behavioural norms
It is not enough to say “be professional”. Workplaces must define what is and isn’t appropriate, especially when it comes to personal sharing and joking.
- Familiarity breeds risk
Close working relationships can create grey areas, especially when there is a power imbalance. Managers must lead by example.
- Help staff exit uncomfortable situations
Sometimes people don’t know how to draw the line once it has been blurred. Equip staff with tools to stop conversations without escalation.
- Context matters
Inappropriate conduct is not just about what was said, but how it came about, how long it lasted and what each party understood at the time.
How we can help
We assist employers with:
- Independent workplace investigations
- Drafting and training on sexual harassment policies
- Conflict resolution and communication protocols
- Management coaching on appropriate boundaries
If you need support navigating complex interpersonal matters in your team, contact us at [email protected].
COMING NEXT in “On the Case”
A string of slips: When one financial error becomes the final straw
A senior finance officer with years of experience argued she didn’t mean to make the mistake that nearly cost her organisation over R180,000 in misallocated VAT – but it wasn’t her first slip. We examine when errors move from excusable to intolerable, and what employers can do when performance issues start adding up.