#MeToo Movement's Impact on Workplace Sexual Harassment

Introduction

With the downfall of movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and the fall from grace of several other prominent figures in media, entertainment, business, and government — from Charlie Rose to Matt Lauer to Rep. Patrick Meehan to Les Moonves to Kevin Spacey — a veritable slew of names and stories appeared, propelling the #MeToo movement into existence (Glamour). However, some have questioned whether the #MeToo movement has run into a wall and lost steam just when it looked like it might usher in real change on the heels of so much raised awareness (Tchen).

The central question this paper asks is: Has the #MeToo movement changed the way corporations address sexual harassment in the workplace? The answer is that, yes, in some ways it has — at least in high-profile cases in which companies want to distance themselves from any possible blowback from negative press. On the other hand, the changes have been minimal and have not truly led to the creation of a culture of equality and respect; instead, they have produced a culture of paranoia and suspicion. Moreover, the higher profile the accused, the more likely he is still to receive substantial monetary compensation for agreeing to leave the company or step down.

Corporate Responses to High-Profile Accusations

As Sarah Ralph notes, the #MeToo movement has certainly resulted in a renewed discussion about sexual harassment in the workplace — but beyond discussion, there has been little in the way of concrete policy action or a new direction in how corporations address the issue. It is only when the public catches wind of an accusation that corporations are quick to act against the accused, as in the case of Talking Dead host Chris Hardwick, who was removed from his hosting duties pending an investigation into claims that he had sexually assaulted a woman (Littleton and Otterson).

At Google, the case of Andy Rubin has been a particular thorn in the side of the #MeToo movement, indicating that the more things change, the more they stay the same: "A $90 million payout was given to Andy Rubin, the star creator of the Android mobile software, after he was asked to resign when credible harassment allegations surfaced" (Elsesser). Employees at Google were outraged at the severance package given to Rubin. He was accused of sexual misconduct and of using his position of power at Google to coerce a female employee into having sex with him.

Other high-ranking leaders at Google were also reported for abusing their positions in pursuit of sexual favors. Richard DeVaul asked a job applicant to remove her shirt while at Burning Man. David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer, faced no repercussions for having a sexual relationship with a Google employee in his own department. When the company learned of the relationship, she was transferred to sales while he was promoted. The inequality in the way the company handled the situation troubled many Google employees, which is why many of them chose to participate in a walkout to express their frustration with the corporation's approach to sexual harassment in the era of #MeToo (Elsesser).

Inequality in Executive Accountability

These are, however, isolated instances involving high-profile individuals, which appear to be exceptions to the rule in the majority of cases. Google's CEO noted that "over the past two years, we have terminated 48 people, including 13 senior managers and above, for sexual harassment. None of these people received an exit package. And to clarify: in that time, we have also not provided any exit packages to executives who departed voluntarily in the course of a sexual harassment investigation" (Elsesser). In other words, if the accused has not risen to a very high level of status, that person is probably not going to receive a payout for agreeing to leave the company in order to prevent scandal from staining the corporate image and brand.

But is that really an effective way to address sexual harassment? The answer is no. Offenders should not be given a slap on the wrist with one hand and a generous compensation package with the other; rather, they should be terminated like anyone else for their behavior. It appears that there is one set of rules for lower-level individuals who violate company policy and another set of rules for individuals who do so while sitting in a high-level position within the company.

Indeed, some companies have made strides in ousting top-level executives accused of abusing their positions. Roger Ailes, for instance, was ousted as CEO of Fox News after it came to light that he had been sexually harassing women in the workplace. But even he walked away with a $40 million payout (Haberman). The reality is that those who have attained top-level positions are not likely to leave quietly. Even when fired, they are still going to seek — and likely obtain — severance packages.

Conclusion

The #MeToo movement has changed the way corporations address sexual harassment in the workplace — but primarily for lower-level employees, for whom there is typically now a zero-tolerance policy in place. For higher-level officers and executives — many of whom have been publicly called out during #MeToo — the rules remain different, and this inconsistency aggravates the situation and frustrates those who want the movement to produce genuine change. Progress has occurred, but only in limited ways. The larger, more consequential changes still remain to be seen: they are the changes that need to be made all the way at the top.