The Tehelka controversy has exposed a larger truth, the indifference in workplaces towards issues to do with gender and sexual abuse. The media may have different working hours, but it operates like any corporate office, with its mix of males and females who interact during the day, travel together on assignments, and form cliques or friendships. A majority do not meet after office hours. From my experience, and contrary to the hysterical outpourings on our news channels, sexual harassment in the workplace is a reality, but it is relatively rare in today?s world, where greater awareness, more confident women in greater numbers and judicial activism has restricted such activity. Certainly, the concept of ?rape? as it is traditionally defined, is almost unheard of. There are office romances, but that is not to be confused with rape, as Tarun Tejpal is being charged with, or the issue that threatens the reputation of former Supreme Court judge, Justice Ganguly.

He has been accused of ?inappropriate sexual activities? in an incident, which involved a female intern, and that is the crux of the issue. More men are in high-level positions in the corporate world, media, financial institutions, governments, the judiciary, than women, so any inappropriate behaviour will invariably involve male bosses and female employees and the threat of losing a job, which is one reason why many such acts go unreported or unpunished. In India?s corporate world, the ?Internal Complaints Committee? that every office is meant to have under the Vishaka guidelines, rarely exists, and for reasons that are quite complex. Dealing with office liaisons is a tricky issue. How do you define a relationship? If a senior male employee and a female colleague go to the movies, is that defined as sexual activity? If a manager and a female employee are friendly (in a non-sexual way) and she gets a promotion over other female contenders, how can you be sure that the reason was because she?s more competent?

As a general rule, businesses should stay out of their employees? private lives, but when those lives spill into the office, the office has to protect itself against violation of sexual harassment laws that are open to wide interpretations. There are gender stereotypes, one being that women are empathetic and good communicators, but also emotionally vulnerable, while men are negotiators and decision-makers. This impacts on any dialogue around gender. It is also to do with office ?culture?, where again, men set the agenda and the boundaries. Culture can become a dangerous lever that encourages inequality and establishes rigid assumptions about class and gender. This ?culture? in some workplaces, allows for ?sexual banter? that might be tolerated among friends, but is decidedly out-of-place in a professional environment. Workplace sexual harassment is one of the most difficult and insidious issues to tackle because victims are so often in a position of vulnerability. There?s another issue to do with duplication. Vishaka has its guidelines, but it does come into conflict with another corporate trend?to have CEOs, chief ethics officers. In the US, chief ethics officers became visible in 1991, when Federal Sentencing Guidelines for corporations went into effect. The guidelines stated that companies with effective compliance and ethics programmes could receive preferential treatment during prosecutions for white-collar crimes. Membership in the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics, a trade group for ethics and compliance officers, has increased more than 70% in the last three years.

Ethics officers are still a rarity in India. Some Tata group companies are among the few, which have ethics officers in India. Tata Sons, the holding company of the group, in February appointed Mukund Rajan as chief spokesperson, brand custodian and chief ethics officer for the group. ?Given the intrinsic linkage of the (Tata) brand with the value system which determines the group?s high standards of ethical conduct, the brand custodian has been entrusted with the role of the chief ethics officer of Tata Sons,? the company said when making the appointment. The problem elsewhere is that it could come down to the ethics of minutiae. In one case in Bangalore, employees were found to be getting the complimentary food served in the company canteen, packed to take home. Other facilities or programmes meant for employees can often include their families, even though it is not permitted. In India, there is another problem; cross-cultural differences result in a lack of universal understanding of ethics. Conferences and meetings dominated by men often include dirty jokes and inappropriate wisecracks, but in some firms, it becomes the norm. Here?s the rub. Some female employees join in to be ?one of the gang?, while others are offended. Basically, in India what is ethical or not gets entangled in so-called office culture. Some issues to do with sexual discrimination or sexual harassment need to be addressed by the Vishaka-inspired Compliance Committee, while others to do with ethical behaviour lies in the realm of ethics officers. One answer is to have two ethics committees, one for infringements outside gender-related issues, and another, which will involve the Internal Complaints committee. So far, not many Indian firms have been interested in cementing a process to deal with violations of ethics or sexual impropriety. Tehelka may prove to be the tehelka that forces India Inc to take ethics, morality and gender issues more seriously.

The writer is Group Editor, Special Projects & Features, The Indian Express