Sexual favouritism at work

A social bane that hamper individual progress:

by Indeewara Thilakarathne

With the resignation of World Bank Chairman Paul Wolfowitz over granting unprecedented salary increase to his girlfriend Shaha Riza, sexual favouritism at work surfaced again as one of the main social issues which has effectively hampered individual progress in terms of denial of the majority of their fundamental rights while favouring an individual or a select group of persons.

Although there are no substantial data to prove the extent to which the sexual favouritism pervades in Sri Lankan educational institutions, the term 'sexual favouritism' has been in the lexicon of administrators, higher officials and members of the academia who are expected to maintain a higher degree of moral authority, not only in their official capacity as academics but also as distinguished members of society.

However, the issue, has, by and largely, been confined to the respective educational institutes including universities and the student population is a bit reluctant to come out with the truth fearing that the exposure would not only adversely affect their future but also tarnish the academic reputation of the institutions.

According to Prof. S. T. Hettige, Head of Department of Sociology the sexual favouritism is a form of a corruption that a person of authority either exploiting a situation or a position to demand sexual pleasure, especially from female subordinates in return for certain favours. These favours come in the form of rewards; a salary increase, a class for a degree. In some instances, if the person does not succumb to pressure, he or she may be subjected to harassment and to face dire consequences.

In both scenarios, the practice is a gross violation of law of the land and also moral issue. There are legal suits instituted against sexual favouritism at work where the verdict was delivered in favour of the victims. Soliciting sexual favours from vulnerable persons is a process of trapping that person out in a situation where that person is unable to extricate him or herself from that situation.

As the cost of resistance can be quite high, often the victim yields into pressure. The consequences for resistance may be denial of due promotion, confirmation if the employee is on probation, a class in the case of a degree.

It is quite widespread within Sri Lankan university system as there are reports from all most all universities of instances where female students were sexually exploited by university academics. It is difficult to console as it involves in a kind of a very personal relationship and partners do not come out easily.

Even the victims do not divulge the so-did-affairs. These things are happening behind the closed doors and what comes out probably is a tip of an ice burg. In most of the cases, the victims are silent sufferers and the other factor is the absence of a proper system within the educational institutions to address the issue.

For instance, First and foremost is to recognize sexual favouritism as an important issue and second is to make people aware that this practice is not either tolerable or acceptable and that this can lead to an inquiry and subsequent punishment. The other step that should be taken is to adapt a code of ethics among the academics.

The Code of Ethics can be discussed among the academics and it should be the responsibility of the fellow academics to exert pressure on offenders. However, that is not normally done within our academic institutes. Prof. Hettige emphasized on the need to put an effective system in place to tackle the issue.

The practice of sexual favouritism causes an anomalous situation where some are favoured against the others. If the academics who are supposed to be objective, become partisan as a result of sexual favouritism, credibility of those educational institutions will seriously suffer, sometimes compromising the standards of the degrees and certification conferred by the institutions.

There are notable cases of favouritism which have effectively tarnished the academic reputation of certain academic institutions, particularly certain Department of Studies. In one such case, a candidate was given a first class (hounrs), after many years and against the unanimous opposition of the senate of academics.

It was subsequently revealed that the academic who was in charge of that Department happened to be a close friend of candidate's father. Following the granting of the first class, that person was appointed as a Temporary Lecturer attached to the same Department.

However, the favoured person had to leave the academia with the change of the Head of the Department and as the students evaluation of that particular lecturer was not up to the satisfactory level.

Although small scale studies have been conducted on sexual favouritism, there is no body of evidence or scientific analysis conducted on the issue, to ascertain the extent to which this has been spread and the implications on the institution in a wider context.

However, most of the academics are of the opinion that sexual favouritism is pervasive in the academic institutions and those students, members of the academia turn a nelsonian eye on the issue fearing that the exposure would be counter productive.

The general perception of the students was that although sexual favouritism is rampant in certain Departments and certain lecturers have been publicly acknowledged as offenders, the victims are, by and large, silent sufferers and the rest of the students take a lassie fair attitude in the absence of a proper system to address the issue and due to the universal fear of tarnishing the educational institutions.

Sexual favouritism so rampant not only in educational institutions but also Government and Private sector establishments; the favoured range from girl-friends, ex-girlfriends, concubines and even those who won admiration of the so-called bosses.

[email protected]