Quid Pro Quo Harassment

Quid pro quo harassment presents an evidentiary problem that other forms do not. The conditional element is almost never stated in a way that could be quoted back.

What exists instead is a sequence. An approach or a request. A refusal, often polite and indirect. Then a change in how the person is treated, which has its own perfectly ordinary explanation available.

That is why the timeline matters more than any single conversation. What altered after the refusal, and when. Shifts, allocation, review ratings, access to work, invitations to meetings, tone in writing.

For an employer receiving this kind of complaint, the useful question is not what was said. It is what changed, and whether the person who made the decision can explain it by reference to something other than the refusal.

The Australian Human Rights Commission covers the duties. This is general information rather than legal advice, and obligations vary by state and territory.

See Sentrient’s sexual harassment course for managers and EEO training course.