Sexual Harassment

Home Blog page

By : ndvlaw | Category : Philippine Legal Advice | No Comments
16th Apr 2013
Republic Act No. 7877, or the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 (RA 7877), is the
governing law for work, education or training-related sexual harassment. RA 7877
states that work, education or training-related sexual harassment is committed by an
employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having authority, influence or
moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment,
demands, requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of
whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted by the object
of said act.
It must be emphasized that the demand of a sexual favor need not be explicit or stated.
Although it is true that RA 7877 calls for a demand, request or requirement of a
sexual favor, it is not necessary that the demand, request, or requirement of a sexual
favor be articulated in a categorical oral or written statement. In one case, the
Supreme Court considered the offenders act of mashing the breast of his student
sufficient to constitute sexual harassment.
Specifically, in a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment is
committed when:
(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, reemployment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said
individual favorable compensation, terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or
the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the
employee which in any way would discriminate, deprive or diminish employment
opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said employee;
(2) The above acts would impair the employees rights or privileges under existing
labor laws; or
(3) The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment
for the employee.

On the other hand, in an education or training environment, sexual harassment is

committed:
(1) Against one who is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender;
(2) Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to
the offender;
(3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or the
granting of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance or other
benefits, privileges, or consideration; or
(4) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive
environment for the student, trainee or apprentice.
In Narvasa vs. Sanchez, a senior bookkeeper filed a case for sexual harassment
against the municipal assessor. In the said case, the respondent handed notes to the
victim Gay, I like you., as well as text messages saying Ka date ko si Mary Gay
ang tamis ng halik mo. , Pauwi ka na ba sexy?, I slept and dreamt nice things
about you., Have a date with me., among others. He would also whisper to the
victim Oy flawless, pumanaw ka met ditan while twice pinching her upper left arm
near the shoulder in a slow manner. Furthermore, during a field trip, the respondent
tried to kiss the victim. In such case, the Supreme Court held the respondent guilty of
sexual harassment.
In Domingo vs. Rayala, a case involving a stenographer as the victim and the NLRC
Chairman as the perpetrator, the Supreme Court enunciated that sexual harassment is
an imposition of misplaced superiority which is enough to dampen an employees
spirit and her capacity for advancement. It affects her sense of judgment; it changes
her life. Thus, in holding and squeezing the victims shoulders, running his fingers
across her neck and tickling her ear, having inappropriate conversations with her,
giving her money allegedly for school expenses with a promise of future privileges,
and making statements with unmistakable sexual overtones all resound with
deafening clarity the unspoken request for a sexual favor.
However, in sexual harassment cases, the acts complained of must be in consonance
with human experience. In Digitel vs. Soriano, the Director for Market and
Communications sued her superiors, which were the Senior Vice-President and Senior
Executive Vice- President. The woman filed a complaint for sexual harassment 11
months after she tendered her resignation. The woman claimed that during a company
party, while they were seated in the sofa, one of the perpetrators crept his hand under a
throw pillow and poked her vagina several times. She justified her failure to flee by

claiming that she was hemmed in by the arm of the sofa. Furthermore, she claimed
that thereafter, when she was dancing with one of the perpetrators, the latter groped
her breasts and buttocks.
In this case, the Supreme Court did not give credence to the allegations of the woman
and dismissed the charges of sexual harassment. The Supreme Court ratiocinated that
if indeed the perpetrators performed the condemnable act, why didnt the woman slap
the perpetrators and left the event. The Supreme Court further held that any woman in
her right mind, whose vagina had earlier been poked several times without her
consent and against her will, would, after liberating herself from the clutches of the
person who offended her, raise hell.
RA 7877 mandates that the employer or the head of the work-related, educational or
training environment or institution must provide the procedures for the resolution,
settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. The employer must create a
committee on decorum and investigation of cases on sexual harassment. In the case of
a work-related environment, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1)
representative each from the management, the union, if any, the employees from the
supervisory rank, and from the rank and file employees.
In the case of the educational or training institution, the committee shall be composed
of at least one (1) representative from the administration, the trainors, instructors,
professors or coaches and students or trainees, as the case may be.
Commission of sexual harassment is a criminal offense. A person found guilty of
sexual harassment shall be penalized by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month
nor more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000)
nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or both. Any person who directs or
induces another to commit any act of sexual harassment, or who cooperates in the
commission thereof by another without which it would not have been committed,
shall also be held liable under for sexual harassment.
Damages resulting from sexual harassment may be separately and independently
instituted. In fact, the employer or head of office, educational or training institution
shall be solidarily liable for damages arising from the acts of sexual harassment
committed in the employment, education or training environment if the employer or
head of office, educational or training institution is informed of such acts by the
offended party and no immediate action is taken.

Law on Sexual Harassment in the Philippines

What is Sexual Harassment?
Sexual harassment is committed by an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer,
teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral
ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment, demands, requests or otherwise
requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for
submission is acceptable by the object of said Act. (Sexual Harassment Act, RA 7877)
In a work-related environment, sexual harassment is committed when:
a) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of an individual;
b) Granting an individual favorable compensation, terms, conditions, promotions or privileges, or
c) The refusal to grant sexual favor results in the limiting, segregating or classifying the employee which in
any way would discriminate, deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect
said employee. (The Seven Secrets of Success in Employee Discipline and Dismissal, by Atty. Josephus
B. Jimenez, p.621.).
The duty of the employer of head of the work-related, educational or training environment with respect to
the issue of sexual harassment are as follows:
a) To prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment;
b) To provide procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment.
c) Promulgate appropriate rules and regulations in consultation with and jointly approved by the
employees or students or trainees, prescribing the procedure for the investigation of sexual harassment
cases and the administrative sanctions therefor. Such rules and regulations shall include guidelines and
proper decorum in the workplace and educational or training institutions.
d) Create a committee on decorum and investigation of cases on sexual harassment. The committee shall
be composed of at least one (1) representative each from the management, the union (if any), the
employees from the supervisory rank, and from the rank and file employees. In case of educational
institutions, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1) representative from the administration,
the trainors, teachers, instructors, professors, coaches and students or trainees, as the case may be. The
employer or educational institution shall disseminate or post a copy of the Sexual Harassment Act for the
information of all concerned in the work premises.
Administrative sanctions shall not be a bar to prosecution in the proper courts for unlawful acts of sexual
harassment. Any action arising from the violation of the provisions of the Sexual Harassment Act shall
prescribe in three (3) years.
Let it be known that the concept of sexual harassment in the workplace is not about a man taking
advantage of a woman by reason of sexual desire; it is about power being exercised by a superior officer
over his subordinates. The power emanates from the fact that the superior can remove the subordinate
from his workplace if the latter would refuse his amorous advances. [YOLANDA FLORALDE, NIDA

VELASCO and NORMELITA ALAMBRA vs. COURT OF APPEALS, G.R. No. 123048. August 8, 2000].
Therefore, sexual harassment can be committed by a woman against her male subordinates, or a male
against his male subordinates, if power is being exercised and the power emanates from the fact that the
superior can remove the subordinate from the workplace if the latter refuses the superiors amorous
advances.
The following have already been ruled by the Supreme Court as acts constituting Sexual Harassment:
a) Touching the hands and shoulder, and caressing the nape of his subordinate employee (Carlos Libres
vs. NLRC, May 28, 1999, G.R. No. 123737)
b) A presiding Judge, using his position by demanding and soliciting sexual demands from his subordinate
to enter his room daily for a kiss as a condition for the signing of the subordinates permanent
appointment as a bookbinder in his Court. (Rogelio M. Esteban vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 14664649, March 11, 2005).