Accountability

Bill 132: Expanding accountability?

by
Puzzle pieces: safety and committee
kenary820/Shutterstock

On September 8, 2016, Bill 132 An Act to amend various statutes with respect to sexual violence, sexual harassment, domestic violence and related matters, came into force in Ontario. This act provides an amendment to the province’s Occupational Health and Safety Act with respect to an increased scope of requirements for employers and workplaces handling sexual harassment complaints.

 

As is always the case when a legislative change comes into force, the HR professional can and should access numerous online resources that provide guidance for interpretation and implementation of new requirements.

Click here to read the full text of Bill 132.

Click here to read an overview of Bill 132 by Occupational Safety Group Inc.

Click here to read a legal interpretation of Bill 132 prepared by Jessica Young with Stringer LLP.

There is no doubt that this legislative change will be received with mixed reactions. On one hand, most employers will be able to incorporate and shape their existing workplace policies on sexual violence and sexual harassment to ensure compliance with the new requirements.

On the other hand, there will be resistance from employers who do not perceive a justification to increase their employment-related legal obligations, no matter how important this legislative change may be. As such, this amendment will provide many opportunities for further exploration and discussion as it is tested through implementation.

An initial point of interest is the new requirement for employers to consult with the Joint Health and Safety Committee on the development and maintenance of a written harassment policy and supporting procedures. This is a significant change. It appears to be based on the spirit of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which makes health and safety a joint responsibility of both the employer and the worker.

In a truly collaborative environment, individuals should become more engaged and involved in ensuring the personal safety of their workplace colleagues, especially in relation to matters of sexual violence and sexual harassment. No matter how difficult such a joint process may be, it should create an increase in shared awareness, accountability and active involvement in making a positive organizational change.

Discussion Questions:

  1. How can the Joint Health and Safety Committee in any organization increase shared accountability for workplace safety with regard to sexual harassment in the workplace?
  2. Why do you think Bill 132 came into force in Ontario?
  3. What do you think are the most important elements of Bill 132?
  4. As an HR practitioner, what can you do to promote a workplace that is free from sexual harassment and workplace violence?

Perilous Productivity

by
productivity chart sign on blackboard
woaiss/Shutterstock

In our strategic HR planning discussions, we focus heavily on the cost-benefit relationships of Human Resources operations to the organization. Using the human capital approach, the value that employees as a commodity bring into any organization is linked directly to the output that is produced for the organization. We assess employee value by ensuring that human productivity is constantly measured, evaluated and monitored as part of a best practice approach to human resources management.

It all makes sense from a pure HR planning perspective. When we move from theoretical planning to actual implementation, however, the human element of the human resources equation pops up again to remind us that we are always dealing with people, not just products.

In a recent research article the authors explore the negative impact of the incessant need modern organizations have to monitor employee productivity.

Click here to read the article.

As noted in this article, it seems that the Human Resources function has been trapped into measuring and promoting policies that contribute to increased employee anxiety. Increased employee anxiety leads to lower productivity and more employee dis-engagement. Are we, as HR professionals, responsible for contributing to the ‘mirage’ of successful productivity by avoiding the real implications of constant workplace pressure on our fellow human beings? In an effort to measure what people do, are we also contributing to the mechanism of who gets blamed when the results of what is measured go wrong?

Human Resources champions have fought long and hard for a seat at the corporate table. We argue that Human Resources has the strategic edge to brings the business numbers and the people numbers together so that decision-making produces organizational benefit. While our Human Resources champions do not want to give up that seat or that fight, we must be reminded of why we wanted to contribute to organizational success in the first place.

We represent the Humans in any organization. Human Resources must champion human achievement and organizational success, but not at the cost of worsening the human condition in the workplace.

Discussion Questions:

  1. What types of employee productivity measures do you think contribute to increased employee anxiety?
  2. Why would organizations (like the example of Volkswagen mentioned in the article) knowingly engage in the ‘misrepresentation’ of productivity data?
  3. In your opinion, does an ‘accountability culture’ breed a trust environment in the workplace? Why or why not?