On May 28th we did a post entitled “Does One N-Word, One Sexual Assault, Plus Four Other Harassing Incidents In “Eleven Days At Most” Create a Hostile Work Environment?”   We discussed a number of court cases which we found difficult to reconcile, each of which seemingly revolved around the quantum of incidents necessary to establish a hostile work environment.

One reader commented sagely that the legal standard should not be dispositive on this issue – that legality was a necessary but not sufficient consideration when it comes to answering this question.

17478324_s

“What’s right?,” and “what kind of culture do we want to have,” and “what does my moral compass as a leader tell me?” are just as important, says Nathan Deily, a senior HR manager at Microsoft in Redmond, WA.  His full comment is below, and excellent advice.

“It seems to me that focusing on what [the] standard should be by looking at case law and statutes is a necessary but not sufficient step in the overall thought process. Being aware of and compliant with the law is fine, but that is not the simple standard to which a company or organization should hold itself – just because things are “not illegal” or it’s not clear exactly where conduct crosses the line as defined by the current state of case law – does not mean that they are consistent with a company’s values, culture or the simple standards of common decency, decorum and professionalism.

In other words – ask “what’s right?”, “what kind of culture do we want to have” and “what does my moral compass as a leader tell me?” and apply that along with a strong working knowledge of the law to make a good decision.

When an employee’s behavior crosses the line, the company can and should take action, not merely because some line is crossed based on a complex calculus of check marks within a defined period of time, but because the conduct itself is unacceptable and warrants a strong response.”