Don’t Go Without Solid Policies in Your Organisation
Part II: Harassment and Abuse Policies

By Devan Moonsamy CEO of The ICHAF Training Institute

As discussed in the first part of this series, a sound policy structure is an insurance blanket against many common problems that crop up in the workplace. Policy is a cornerstone of responsible management because it protects all concerned parties. What must be emphasised as much as the need for a policy is that staff know its provisions and abide by them.

Training and work-shopping a policy are thus necessary, and the right corporate trainer can do exactly that, but in an innovative way that ensures staff are well engaged in the policy training session and not bored and inattentive.

My many years of engagement with managers and staff in diverse South African contexts has helped me see that all parties want to feel secure at work, and they usually dislike ambiguity. They want to know what is expected of them and those around them.

In fact, an effective way to relieve stress and conflict among your staff is to make sure they know exactly where they stand. Policy provisions combined with education on such provisions is a winning formula in this regard.

So what policies should be drafted? We discussed BEE and gender equity policies in the first part of this article series. Here we will look at harassment and abuse policies, which can safeguard against many PR and labour-related problems.

Harassment and Abuse Policy
Companies and officials have a responsibility to protect those who are seen as vulnerable or as targets by abusers and harassers. ‘Harassment and abuse’ do sound scary, and this often means people just avoid the issues and hope it never happens. What should be much scarier is that the issues are being ignored, because this means that problems will happen. They most certainly are happening because few seem to have the skills, empathy and authority to really tackle harassment and abuse in the workplace in a meaningful way.

However, it is not that hard to draft a policy about harassment and abuse, and we will give you some great pointers here. When looking to draft any policy, a good starting point is our country’s legislation, which tells us a lot about what everyone’s rights and responsibilities are on all manner of issues. If in doubt, start with the Constitution’s provisions on human rights. Harassment and abuse are infringements against these rights.

Policy provisions should expressly forbid racism, sexual harassment, harassment of LGBTQI people, and xenophobia. The policy must protect employees against offensive speech – especially hate speech – and gestures and acts by having a reporting line and real consequences for offenders. Stipulations should be given for the offence to be acknowledged, the victim supported and protected from further harassment, and the offender to be held to account according to the seriousness of the offence.

To educate employees, they need to understand what harassment is. The difference between a thoughtless or poorly worded remark and harassment is fear. When a comment or action makes a person feel threatened, it is harassment. On the other hand, abuse is more easily recognised, but employees should know that it is to mistreat someone with disregard for their human rights. Put these definitions and explanations in the policy document so there is no ambiguity.
Power and authority can be abused in combination with abusing an employee, making such behaviour more serious than people realise. People may take a theft case more seriously than sexual harassment, forgetting that there are at least two victims in the latter case, and only one in the former. Sexual harassment endangers a company’s reputation as well as the victim of the abuse, and it should be taken much more seriously than it usually is.

A wolf whistle may seem harmless, for example, but for a young woman it can be very unsettling. This is because she is aware of what is really on the harasser’s mind. In a young woman, such fear will affect how happy and secure she is at work. Your workplace policy must protect her. Don’t just think about the company’s reputation, think about keeping your staff safe and happy so that they can give their best at work.

Employees should preferably be educated on what harassment is and why it is a problem before there is any chance for harassment to happen. There should be no uncertainty as to what is expected of men and women in the workplace.

Three other key factors related to harassment and abuse should also be discussed in policy and with staff: vulnerability, opportunity and consent. Some are more likely targets than others in terms of abuse. It is wise to prevent opportunities for harassment of vulnerable individuals by ensuring there is good supervision and security in place.

The concept of consent should be explained so that there is no uncertainty. Consent for any sexual act must be explicitly given. However, it is wise for management to prohibit sex, sexual acts and propositions for sex at work. This does not mean that there is no place for romance, but sex acts and propositions should not be happening during working hours and on company premises. Age of consent (16 years, but exceptions apply which make it unwise until the person is 18) can also be explained to employees and discussed in the policy.

Further issues to cover in your harassment policy include clear boundaries for behaviour, speech and equity; the various types of relationships that can arise in the workplace, and the professional expectations for these, specifically in relation to sexism; safety procedures; reporting lines and communication procedures; and legal recourse and punishment of offenders.

Staff who know all the basics will be much better equipped to handle and prevent abuse and harassment, as well as being forewarned as to what will happen if they perpetrate acts of abuse or harassment. It is easier to hold an employee to account on key performance indicators (KPIs), as many readers will well know, when they are clearly set out on paper, and the employee was made fully aware of them. Likewise, when staff members know the company’s stance on abuse and harassment, as clearly contained in policy, they will be more likely to respect conduct parameters.

ICHAF is a training provider with years of experience in training up conscientised, empowered employees who serve as proud and reliable brand ambassadors. Not only do we train staff on the critical skills needed for their job tasks, we also work on soft skills including diversity management, conflict management, ethics, and leadership, to name a few. We are ideally placed to conduct workshops and educate your staff on abuse and harassment in the workplace to the benefit of all involved. Let us show your staff the way to boost their career and the company’s image through best practice policies.

For more information about training your staff:
Website - http://www.ichaftraining.co.za/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/TheICHAFTrainingInstitute/?ref=br_rs
Twitter - https://twitter.com/TheIchaf

-- ENDS --

For further comment from Devan Moonsamy you can email him on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or contact him on 083 303 9159 

Complex Complexions: What’s black, light and has yellow bones? By Devan Moonsamy, CEO of The ICHAF Training Institute

On an otherwise lovely holiday in Southeast Asia, I experienced something I am not entirely unused to – racism. But, being on holiday, and shopping in the beautiful surroundings of Thailand, it caught me by surprise. I was in Asia and as a person of Indian (Asian) descent. Why did I experience racism? The simple answer is that I am dark skinned.

I know this because shop owners and staff would go to my fair-skinned travel companion and ask him if he needed help. But I seemed invisible to them. Our tour guide confirmed my suspicion that it is because I am dark skinned, which to them is the same as me being poor.

While it is true that India remains a low-income country, there is a large economic disparity. The poor are very poor; the rich are very rich. If I were from India, it does not automatically mean I am poor, especially considering that I would have been able to afford the four-hour flight from, say, New Delhi to Bangkok. I should have stood out as a tourist. Yet my presence at a shop in Thailand was taken as pretty much irrelevant. If I was lighter skinned, not necessarily white, just a bit lighter, might I have received a little better treatment?

It is incidents like this that can make skin a very sore point for people of colour (black, mixed race, Indian, etc.). You do feel like you are being told you are ‘less’ – less important, less valuable, even as a customer, less attractive. And this hurts people of colour so much. It can start to make one feel an urgency to change oneself rather than resisting the influence of such unjustifiable racism.

What this further goes to illustrate is just how rampant racism is worldwide. We sometimes think we as South Africans are unique in our racism problems. But we need to be aware that such problems are by no means singular to any one nation. From London to Lusaka to Los Angeles, racism continues to fester.

It makes breaking news often, but we also know that racism is subtle, and subtle racism starts in the home and other ‘single-colour’ social environments. It festers there until it spills over into the community, creating terrible feuds and divisions that last generations.

Some of the problems we face and which people are voicing concern over are that lighter-skinned people of colour are treated better in schools, including township schools, and in work environments. ‘Whiteness’, or being somewhat closer to, or associated with it, is seen as prestigious.

The label ‘yellow bone’ refers to black people who are relatively light-skinned, and it might be used to show approval or praise. However, it is illustrative of the treacherous and bewildering nature of racism. Natasha Msonza explains that yellow bone is also a ‘derogatory and callous phrase… used in reference to light-complexioned women when they are compared to “black cherries” or dark-skinned women, as they are disparagingly referred to themselves.’ How perplexing and hypocritical the skin colour issue is!

Young men of colour often have a desire to find a light-complexion lady to date, seeing this as an image or ego boost, and a more valuable ‘conquest’ in terms of romantic relationships. ‘Look, I have a white girlfriend, so I must be special,’ seems to be the attitude of some. On the other hand, some might comment, ‘She’s cute… for a darkie…’

Even in the family structure, we see lighter-skinned relatives having a measure of status higher than darker-skinned family. Sometimes it is expressed as a joke. An Indian person might say, ‘I don’t spend too much time in the sun, or I will go dark blue…’ This still shows that there is a concern over the possibility of ‘going darker’. Some black people believe that if one’s complexion darkens it is a sign of ill health, stress, or even bewitchment. It may be a sign of illness in some cases, but we should never jump to conclusions or make comments which can be very hurtful.

The booming business of skin-lightening creams is another piece of evidence which we should be troubled by. Some use treatments to even out their skin colour, which is understandable. But I am opposed to wholesale skin lightening. It is not a solution. It definitely is a problem, especially among celebrities whose habit of trying to go white has a negative effect on darker-skinned people. It is seen among South African and American celebrities of colour, as well as Indian Bollywood stars.

Western notions of beauty have had an ugly effect in countries like India, and Bollywood is also to blame for keeping certain trends alive in the postcolonial context. Fair and Lovely is a popular skin ‘care’ range in India. Their ‘Best formula ever’ is claimed to be an ‘Expert fairness solution.’ Does the terrible irony here not bother consumers? Sadly not... One study found that nine in ten Indian girls believe skin lightening is a priority. There are even harmful deodorants promising lighter underarms, as well as so-called supplements and IV drips to lighten one’s skin.

Recently, Ghanaian authorities have expressed serious concern over pregnant women using dangerous, illegal drugs to lighten their unborn baby’s skin! There’s a very big difference between going to such extremes compared to playing with different hairstyles, hair colours, wigs, nail polish, clothing etc., because it’s creative and fun for you as the individual. But don’t do something to harm or change yourself because of unfounded notions of whiteness vs colour.

Looking at this in a purely cosmetic light, celebrities’ before and after photos are not a great advert for the practice of skin lightening either. Some celebrities look sickly and artificial after bleaching themselves. Fortunately, it is reversible. Healthy melanin production continues despite skin pigment being stripped away, and the individual can allow their skin to return to normal by stopping the use of skin-lightening products.

It seems skin lightening may ultimately stem from damaging notions of white superiority which have infected us all to an extent. Even as we reject these notions and strive to shed them, vestiges of them remain in our society which must be resisted. The black youth, particularly girls, are vulnerable to what translates from bleached celebrity as ‘beauty’ and ‘prestige’ into negative views of themselves. In other words, the desire to be lighter makes some women and girls think they are less beautiful and that they must change themselves. Darker-skinned people are just as beautiful and worthy of committed relationships and good treatment. We must honour them with exactly what they deserve and no less. For African people to thrive, they must have a positive image of themselves as individuals and as a group.

From another angle, we can see how the situation becomes increasingly complex when we consider, for example, that people readily assume Michael Jackson lightened his skin to be more popular and that he encouraged the trend. However, it has been confirmed he had the condition vitiligo that causes patches of skin to lose all their pigment. Darkening vitiligo-affected skin is very difficult, probably not possible when Jackson developed the condition over three decades ago. Jackson used heavy makeup and possibly skin lightening to even his skin tone.

Michael Jackson did this for appearance's sake, but one can easily imagine that he, being firmly opposed to all forms of racism, would much rather have remained dark skinned than have to battle vitiligo and the world’s harsh criticism of trying to ‘go white’. Jackson suffered psychological distress as a result of the condition, and it is thus critical that we consider how skin colour and our emotional well-being are related.

We also see many white people religiously using bronzers, spray-tans and sunbeds in a quest to be darker. One white woman has gone all out and changed herself to look like she has a 100% African heritage (as well as the ‘biggest boobs in Europe’). She says she has a black identity. Some black people have not reacted well to this claim and to her extensive physical transformation, while others say they understand her desire to be black. Still others point out that she has had a huge amount of ‘work’ done over the years, which indicates a poor self-image. People who go to such lengths may never be happy with their body no matter how much they change it.

What these contrasting skin colour debates show us is that we must firmly resist beliefs that any one skin colour is better because it damages our social structures and our self-image. With a poor self-image, it’s hard to give your best and to care for yourself the way you deserve to. We might take risks, such as using harmful chemicals, to force ourselves into a certain artificial mold.

In some cases, the anxieties over skin colour are so great that they extend to the unborn child, with mothers placing the baby’s health at risk for the chance that they might turn out lighter. How much further are people prepared to go just to change shades? I hope this alarming trend dies out soon and goes no further. It is becoming increasingly dangerous and unjustifiable, and we need to see government working to protect our citizens in this regard.

In the end, it only hurts us by reaffirming that we aren’t good enough as people of colour, or for whatever other physical characteristics we may have. It also sends a message to others that we don’t accept them either if they are dark skinned unless they change themselves too. We must love the skin we are in and cherish our diversity or risk damaging ourselves and others.

Self-acceptance is critical here as well as a refusal to change oneself because of others’ imbalanced views about how one should look. As long as you look for validation in others, you will be giving them power that rightly belongs to you. Don’t ever lose your personal power and agency for the sake of meeting the expectations of those who can’t see the beauty in all people. When you start changing yourself for others in an extreme way, you can deny yourself enduring happiness and good health.

For more information about Diversity and Diversity training within your organisation please do not hesitate to visit:
Website - http://www.ichaftraining.co.za/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/TheICHAFTrainingInstitute/?ref=br_rs
Twitter - https://twitter.com/TheIchaf

-- ENDS -- 

For further comment from Devan Moonsamy you can email him on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or contact him on 083 303 9159

By Michelle Moss, director at Signium Africa (Previously Talent Africa) www.talent-africa.co.za

The corporate world embraces diversity and inclusion. Countless mission statements say so. Building a diverse organisation is supposedly a strategic imperative. But the question remains: Are businesses making it happen or missing the mark?

One test is talent acquisition. If diversity is so important, you would expect it to be reflected in the selection of senior executives and skilled professionals.In the real world, a mixed picture emerges.Awareness of the advantages of diversity and inclusion is certainly growing.

The ‘2017 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends’ report says 69% of executives say diversity and inclusion are important, up from 59% in the previous survey.Furthermore, the number of executives who cited inclusion as top priority rose 32%.Diversity strategy has the CEO’s attention.CEOs are the primary sponsors of diversity initiatives, according to 38% of executives canvassed in this international survey.Finding the right skills, irrespective of gender or race, is crucial. It ranks third among the major concerns of business leaders, says the Deloitte report. It is ‘very important’ or ‘important’ to 83% of executives.Increasing pressure to comply with organisational hiring policies and quotas also drives growing focus on diversity and inclusion.There is an implicit prohibition of ‘cloning’ (hiring someone just like you) as it perpetuates the status quo and is bad for the business.

Failure to move forward could even kill the business, yet the practice remains prevalent.‘Cloning’ may not involve the same race, gender and religion, but the same skills, management approach, interests, likes and dislikes as the hiring manager and team.The pretext is often that the selection gives the best ‘culture fit’ and therefore seems perfectly acceptable.However, ‘cloning’ is toxic as it fosters group-think. Consensus and like-mindedness strangle collaboration, creativity, innovation and risk-taking.Industries and technologies change. Customer’s needs change. Therefore, a team’s ability to generate new ideas and embrace change is critical.

Here, experience shows it is easier to teach a multi-skilled team how to resolve conflict among themselves than it is to teach a homogenous group how to generate alternative solutions.We can espouse diversity in theory, but nullify it in practice simply by sticking with time-honoured recruitment practice that might be skewed toward recruitment in our own image.

This explains growing doubts about traditional interviewing.It seems our brains are hot-wired to make rapid assumptions (an asset when ancient man had to instantly assess danger). Research shows we take just 15 seconds in a rush to judgment. Essentially, we look for things that make us comfortable.Quickie judgments like this can flaw traditional interviews.Obtaining a diverse skills set may be vital. But how, if old-style interviews might not be up to the job?A mix of tools is increasingly adopted, including psychometric tests (often questionnaire-based), simulation exercises (to replicate challenging scenarios and scrutinise behaviour) and semi-structured or competency-based interviews.Is there any evidence South African business is racing to adopt these more objective assessment tools in its quest for greater representivity?Yes and no.Some employers are moving in this direction.

Others rely greatly (sometimes solely) on traditional interviews. Often, objective assessment techniques identify a high potential candidate who challenges traditional thinking, identifies novel opportunities and embraces risk, but is passed over by a hiring team who favour slow, cautious and conservative thinking.Again, the culture-fit rationale is trotted out.It seems everyone wants diversity, but ‘cloning’ is comfortable, ‘cloning’ is acceptable … but for how long?