POSH law rights in corporate office.

The POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) Act, 2013, grants employees in a corporate office, specifically women, the right to a workplace free from sexual harassment. The law also establishes a clear process for reporting and addressing complaints, ensuring a safe and dignified work environment.

Here are the key rights under POSH law in a corporate office:

Right to a Safe Workplace

Every woman has the right to a workplace that is free from sexual harassment. The law defines sexual harassment broadly, including unwelcome acts like physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favors, making sexually colored remarks, showing pornography, or any other unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature. This also covers scenarios where such conduct creates a hostile or intimidating work environment.

Right to an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC)

Organizations with 10 or more employees are legally required to establish an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to handle sexual harassment complaints. As an employee, you have the right to file a complaint with this committee. The ICC must be constituted with a majority of women, and it must include an external member from an NGO or a person with legal expertise, to ensure impartiality. The ICC has the powers of a civil court, including the ability to summon witnesses and documents.

Right to Confidentiality

The POSH Act mandates that all complaints and inquiry proceedings must be kept strictly confidential. This is a crucial right that protects the privacy of the complainant, the respondent, and any witnesses involved. It's intended to prevent social stigma and protect individuals from retaliation.

Right to a Time-Bound Inquiry

Once a complaint is filed, the ICC must complete its inquiry within a specified timeframe, generally 90 days. The employer is then required to act on the committee's recommendations within 60 days of receiving the report. This ensures that complaints are not left unresolved for long periods.

Right to Interim Relief

During the inquiry, the ICC can recommend interim relief measures to the employer, at the request of the aggrieved woman. This may include transferring the complainant or the respondent to a different workplace, granting leave to the complainant, or changing the reporting structure to avoid contact between the parties.

Right to Protection from Retaliation

The law explicitly protects a complainant, a witness, or any ICC member from retaliation or victimization for their participation in the complaint and inquiry process. Any form of harassment, intimidation, or adverse action against them for raising a complaint is prohibited.

Right to Compensation

If the allegations are proven, the ICC can recommend that the employer deduct a suitable amount from the salary of the offender to be paid as compensation to the aggrieved woman. The law provides for a formula to determine this compensation, taking into account factors like the emotional distress caused, the loss of career opportunities, and the income of the respondent.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Because the PoSH Committee released the respondents following an investigation under the PoSH Act, the FIR against them was dropped.

Image
Posh Act 2013 A recent FIR brought against two MNC employees that had already been cleared of all allegations by the PoSH Committee was dismissed by the Delhi High Court. An intern had allegedly been sexually harassed by the two workers. The PoSH Committee cleared the responders, nonetheless, after finishing the investigation. The legal issue that the Court was trying to resolve is a key part of this ruling: Can the FIR against the accused still stand if the PoSH Committee clears them of all charges? The Court noted that: The Committee was established as soon as the FIR was filed and the inquiry proceedings were held, 2. The Complainant informed the PoSH Committee shortly after that she did not wish to pursue her complaint, and 3, despite the Complainant failing to appear for cross-examination, the Committee continued the proceedings. 4. The PoSH Act, 2013, provisions were properly followed throughout the inquiry process, and  5. The committee issued the Final Report based on the m...
Read more

Vishaka & Others v. State of Rajasthan: The Case that Paved the Way for Addressing Sexual Harassment at Workplaces

In a monumental step towards safeguarding the rights and dignity of women in the workplace, the Supreme Court of India delivered a groundbreaking judgment in the case of Vishaka & Others v. State of Rajasthan in 1997. This landmark decision not only brought the issue of sexual harassment at the workplace into the spotlight but also laid down a comprehensive set of guidelines, known as the Vishaka Guidelines, that would serve as the foundation for future legislation addressing this critical issue. The Genesis: Seeking Justice for Bhanwari Devi The case originated from the brutal gang-rape of Bhanwari Devi, a social worker employed in Rajasthan's Bhateri village. Devi's courageous efforts to prevent a child marriage within the community led to her being brutally assaulted and raped by influential members of the village. This horrific incident sparked a nationwide outcry and prompted several women's rights organizations, led by Vishaka and others, to file a Public Interes...
Read more

Kerala High Court Clarifies Written Complaint Requirement Under POSH Act in Abraham Mathai v. State of Kerala

In an important ruling aimed at safeguarding procedural fairness under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 ( POSH Act ), the Kerala High Court, in the case of Abraham Mathai v. State of Kerala & Ors., has categorically held that a written complaint from the aggrieved woman is a mandatory prerequisite for initiating any inquiry by the Internal Committee (IC). The judgment sets clear boundaries on the initiation of proceedings, preventing misuse and ensuring due process. The case arose when an individual challenged the initiation of a POSH inquiry that was based on an oral complain t and anonymous allegations rather than a formal written complaint as stipulated under Section 9 of the Act. The petitioner contended that the Internal Committee had overstepped its jurisdiction by entertaining allegations that were not formally registered in writing, thereby violating the basic procedural safeguards built into the statute. The Ker...
Read more