Editor’s note: This article is the second in a two-part series examining the results of a Police1 survey on sexual harassment and sexual discrimination in law enforcement. Part 1 presented the quantitative findings from more than 500 respondents. In this follow-up, attorney and former police officer Terrence P. Dwyer explores the written comments submitted by participants, offering insight into how leadership, culture and agency response affect the experiences of women in law enforcement.
Police1’s survey of female officers on sexual harassment and discrimination in law enforcement found that 77% of respondents experienced sexual harassment, yet fewer than one in four incidents were reported. However, numbers only tell us part of a story. Quantitative research methods provide a generalized understanding. I always prefer to hear about actual experiences to obtain a broader understanding of an issue. This is why it was important to include a question at the survey’s end asking if respondents wanted to share their experiences and opinions. As noted in the first article of this series, 184 respondents commented.
The written comments provide the human context behind those statistics, showing how agency culture and leadership response shape the lived experience of female officers.
Many of the comments were extensive. Readers frankly disclosed the issues they faced as female police officers. The survey respondents who commented came from a mix of large and small departments, ranks, length of service and geographical locations. Yet, their stories shared common experiences, frustrations and agency responses.
| RELATED: Police1 survey reveals harassment and discrimination among female officers
One point to make clear is that of those who commented there were several who wrote that their agencies acted seriously and swiftly or that they had transferred from an agency where they encountered issues to another agency where they are comfortable working and have no problems. Comments like this point to what continues to be the major culprit when discussing sexual harassment and gender discrimination — the culture within the agency. What is seen time and again in these cases is a failure of leadership often compounded by the fact that supervisory staff are either spearheading the conduct or condoning it.
In my research of media reported cases and their results, supervisors were a named defendant in over 82% of the cases. An interesting corollary to the media study was that in many cases wherein the leadership failures occurred, other issues like inappropriate use of force, poor community relations, or corruption probes saddled the department’s reputation.
Survey participant comments
One issue raised in the comments concerned the treatment of pregnant officers. Pregnancy, along with breastfeeding while at work, comes under the broader category of gender discrimination. Nonetheless, data specific to these two issues is always helpful. Failure to properly accommodate pregnant or breastfeeding officers is actionable. Federal law, and many state laws, protect female employees from discrimination or adverse work situations due to pregnancy or nursing needs.
Human resources departments at either the municipal or agency level did not fare well in the responses. The comments highlighted something I always encountered in my practice when representing victims — the HR department’s focus is to protect the agency. This is not as acute in the private sector where engaging in sexual harassment or gender discrimination is generally a quick exit from employment with the company.
“HR told me not to make waves because it would ‘hurt morale.’ Their priority was protecting the department, not me.”
A common observation was that law firms conducting HR investigations are often the same firms representing the municipalities, thereby creating a conflict of interest. This is the reality in smaller departments, though readers noted that even in larger agencies municipal management teams handle the investigations and decide the outcome, often to the detriment of the victim officer, whose workplace problems are compounded by resulting retaliatory action. An often-cited example was the use of discipline against a reporting officer, whether as a victim or a witness. The retaliation, according to a few comments, extended beyond the reporting officer to significant others and family members who were employed by the municipality.
“I was placed on administrative leave and ordered to take a fitness-for-duty exam after reporting harassment. Nothing happened to the men.”
Sexual harassment and discrimination based upon sexual orientation was another aspect of the issue in several comments. One respondent expressed the opinion that the policing culture in general is hostile to LGBTQ lifestyles and anyone who defends them. A few others commented that they have encountered harassment and discrimination from other female officers. Some at the command level expressed that it is worse at that level than expected.
The most consistent among the remarks was the toll exacted by these workplace incidents. Many felt re-victimized by the process once they reported the conduct. Some withdrew their complaints due to the stress and emotional burden of enduring an investigation. Physical and mental wellness concerns developed and relationships with co-workers, friends, and family suffered after they made a report. Those who knew what other female officers went through after making a sexual harassment or discrimination report said they decided to either live with the workplace environment they encountered or transfer to another department. Others left policing.
“After my complaint, I developed panic attacks every time I walked into roll call. It changed how I saw the job forever.”
Five key takeaways for police departments
Here are suggested considerations based on survey responses:
- Review existing policies and procedures to ensure they are up to date and compliant with existing federal, state and local laws. This includes ensuring all definitions, prohibited actions and resulting disciplinary action that may result from a violation of policy is clear and well-defined. Key to this is defining important terms like sexual harassment, discrimination, and sexual assault.
- Employee training on workplace harassment must be conducted at all levels. Too often it is focused on patrol officers, detectives/investigators and first line supervisors. Supervisory level training must also include proper response and documentation protocols.
- Department culture is key. Many survey responses highlighted a toxic culture that led them to transfer to a better work climate in an adjoining police department. Assessing agency culture is an element of leadership and correcting problematic behaviors avoids more serious issues down the line.
- Retaliation is often an aggravating factor in these kinds of cases. Complainants and witnesses must be protected from retaliation, and this only occurs when immediate and decisive steps are taken when retaliatory action is identified and substantiated.
- Make the investigation meaningful and real, not a rubberstamp in support of the department. Workplace investigations must be objective and impartial. Toward this goal it is best for smaller agencies to have an outside entity, such as a law firm not affiliated with the department, conduct the investigation, or, for larger departments, personnel trained as workplace complaint investigators who will provide prompt, unbiased, and thorough investigations.
The bottom line
Surveys are valuable for the information they provide and can help to identify problems in the workplace and illustrate areas for improvement. But they cannot completely encapsulate the diverse interactions and experiences that occur in the workplace, especially in a unique environment like policing. Cases are fact dependent, and context also matters. Still though, there is plenty of data to demand from police leaders that they do better.
Culture matters and if an agency’s culture is toxic to a segment of its employees one can wonder how that translates to their interactions with the public. Women bring important contributions to policing. They have done so for decades and will continue to do so. There are those who will quickly minimize or deny data from a survey or the collective qualitative statements of responding officers. Often such reactions are based on opinions about women in policing, and women in general, that are already formed. This is the root of the problem.
“At my new department, leadership addresses problems quickly and fairly. It’s the first time I’ve felt respected in uniform.”
The alternative is for an agency to brace for litigation that can be a major distraction from its primary mission. For individual officers it may be the loss of pay, loss of rank, or termination.
The police departments and leaders who do it right and ensure a healthy work environment for their employees provide commendable examples for others to follow. They have realized the human capital and monetary costs these workplace issues take from their resources — and they’ve chosen prevention over payout.
Thank you to those who participated in the survey and shared your experiences.
Police1 will continue to provide analysis of the survey findings. Bookmark our Women in Law Enforcement content hub to stay informed.
More on harassment and discrimination in policing
- Workplace harassment continues to plague female police officers
- Sexual harassment and gender discrimination in law enforcement: Part 1
- Sexual harassment and gender discrimination in law enforcement: Part 2
