This refers to Shyamal Majumdar's column "Guilty even without proof" (Human Factor, March 15). In the Indian context, irrespective of what human resource experts say, various surveys conducted from time to time and anecdotal evidence suggest that sexual harassment of women at workplace is common, and very few cases are actually complained against. If a provision is made in the proposed Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2012 for punishing the unjustified complaint, it may be used by the management to threaten the employee with dire consequences, and may persuade the management to find fault with the complainant, given the fact that the committee to investigate the grievance consists of the company's own employees. On the other hand, the writer rightly observes that there should be a remedy for malicious or false complaints. In order to maintain a delicate balance between the two, a possible alternative is that the proposed Bill provides that the aggrieved employee is given the choice to nominate a person of her trust on the investigation committee with the right to dissent. If the nominee records a dissenting note, the employee may appeal to the higher authority for a final decision. If the authority agrees with the committee despite the dissenting note or if, in the previous situation, the nominee agrees with the other members of the committee to conclude that the complaint was ill-founded, the complainant may be visited with appropriate punishment.
Y G Chouksey Pune
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
