FASHION LAW
Reverse #MeToo – trending soon in fashion?
T
he #MeToo movement has on the face of it changed the landscape for the better. But what about the reverse situation where the accused (usually men) are falsely accused?
Reverse #MeToo claims have already been made. This is unsurprising as alleged perpetrators often seem to be treated in the same way as if they had been shown to be actual perpetrators. More importantly for businesses, such action may amount to sexual discrimination against the (usually) male employee.
Allegations of sexual harassment (most recently concerning Sir Philip
Green) are nothing new so far as the fashion industry is concerned. American Apparel, Abercrombie, and top fashion photographers such as Terry Richardson and Mario Testino have all been the subject of allegations in recent years.
But failure to deal properly with the accused can result in reverse #MeToo claims where the accused (men) feel that they have been scapegoated with dismissals being a knee jerk reaction as a result of the #MeToo movement and the perceived need for fashion businesses to signal virtue. Indeed, we have seen a number of businesses rush to dismiss male employees for alleged gross misconduct when the conduct may not be sufficiently serious to justify gross misconduct, or may not be proven at all!
Reverse #MeToo claims do not represent a diminution in the importance
of the #MeToo movement. Prior to #MeToo, many victims felt unable to raise concerns for fear of placing their careers at risk and not being believed, particularly if their allegations were against powerful male perpetrators within the industry. Any victims who raised historical allegations of sexual harassment have typically been paid off and gagged under non-disclosure agreements, a standard approach in all industries. But it is an approach that results in the situation being poorly managed with perpetrators remaining employed and allegations being swept under the carpet. Indeed, Guess, Nike and Feminist Apparel have been criticised for the way in which they have treated their female employees.
But serious reputational damage can result for any individual, perhaps
the more so for high profile individuals, caught up in often febrile atmosphere of allegation and counter-allegation, claim and counterclaim, the he said/she said that often results.
Guilty until proven innocent, with no desire to seek out the truth, is often
the default option, and mishandled investigations are rife. Families and individuals can be permanently damaged. The sad recent case of Carl Sargeant is but one example.
A balance needs to be struck between publicly naming and shaming
perpetrators and carrying out a fair and impartial investigation before conclusions are reached and reputations are damaged irreversibly.
What does the law say? Sexual harassment is unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of violating the victim’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the victim. It can be a single act of harassment or a series of acts.
If employers receive an allegation of sexual harassment, a robust and fair
investigation must be carried out without delay and any outcome should be objectively justified and supported by evidence.
Who is liable? Employers are vicariously liable for anything done by its employees in the course of their employment, unless they look all reasonable steps to prevent the harassment.
Parissa Torabi is an associate in Fox Williams LLP and is an employment law adviser. (
www.fashionlaw.co.uk;
www.hrlaw.co.uk)
14 • MODA SUPPLEMENT • FEBRUARY 2019
By Parissa Torabi
Employees can be personally liable so a perpetrator or decision maker (HR manager, director, or in-house lawyer) could be joined in as a separate party to any Employment Tribunal claim and be jointly liable with their employer for any compensation.
Potential compensation Employees who bring a successful Employment Tribunal claim could be awarded between £900 to £42,900 for injury to feelings depending on the severity of the harassment, and compensation for future loss of earnings which is unlimited.
These types of claims are not only expensive to defend but also can be
high value if the employee is successful. And that is before reputational damage is taken into account!
What can brands do to protect themselves? 1.Warn employees of the consequences of harassment and provide appropriate training on harassment in the workplace.
2. Ensure policies and procedures on dignity at work and equality and diversity are up to date and followed.
3. Encourage employees to report any issues to management.
4. If you receive a complaint take it seriously. Involve HR immediately. Maintain confidentiality. Carry out a fair, robust and impartial investigation and do not pre-judge the outcome. Seek legal advice where necessary, in order to make sure the situation is managed appropriately.
5. Make sure you can justify the outcome of any investigation objectively and have documentary evidence supporting your decision.
The #MeToo movement has certainly shifted the balance of power and
whilst this is, of course, a positive development, employers and senior stakeholders do have to be mindful of the legal issues and risks involved – or face the reverse consequences.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136
