Sexual Harassment

Employment; Women; Anti-Sexual Harassment Act (2009)

No. XIII. a. Atty. Renan, a CPA-lawyer and Managing Partner of an accounting firm, conducted the
orientation seminar fornewly-hired employees of the firm, among them, Miss Maganda. After the
seminar, Renan requested Maganda to stay, purportedly to discuss some work assignment. Left alone in
the training room, Renan asked Maganda to go out with him for dinner and ballroom dancing.
Thereafter, he persuaded her to accompany him to the mountain highway in Antipolo for sight-seeing.
During all these, Renan told Maganda that most, if not all, of the lady supervisors in the firm are where
they are now, in very productive and lucrative posts, because of his favorable endorsement.Did Renan
commit acts of sexual harassment in a work- related or employment environment? Reasons. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Atty. Renan is guilty of sexual harassment. This conclusion is predicated upon the following
contradiction:
(1) Atty. Renan has authority, influence or moral ascendancy over Miss Maganda;
(2) While the law calls for a demand, request or requirement of a sexual, it is not necessary that the
demand, request or requirement of a sexual favor be articulated in a categorical oral or written
statement. It may be discerned,with equal certitude form acts of the offender. (Domingo vs. Rayala, 546
SCRA 90 [2008]);
(3) The acts of Atty. Renan towards Miss Maganda resound with defeaning clarity the unspoken request
for a sexual favor, regardless of whether it is accepted or not by Miss Maganda.
(4) In sexual harassment, it is not essential that the demand, request or requirement be made as a
condition for continued employment or promotion to a higher position. It is enough that Atty. Renan‘s
act result in creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for Miss Maganda.