Judge turns back Jack Harris? sexual harassment appeal but halves $20,000 award to two women who say he went about his office without trousers in 1999 and 2000.

Calling such ?unwelcome sexual behaviour? in the workplace to be an ?abuse of both economic and sexual power? Pusine Justice Norma Wade-Miller, said in her ruling the Prison Fellowship chairman?s actions were ?not conducive to an amiable work environment?.

Mrs. Justice Wade-Miller said a Human Rights Commission decision on May 19, 2005 to award $20,000 each to Lynne Thorne and Jaharana Rice was too generous and halved the sum to $10,000 each.

?When sexual harassment occurs in the workplace, it is an abuse of both economic and sexual power,? Mrs. Justice Wade-Miller explained. ?Sexual harassment is a demeaning practice, one that constitutes a profound affront to the dignity of the employees forced to endure it.

?By forcing an employee to contend with unwelcome sexual actions or explicit sexual demands, sexual harassment attacks the dignity and self respect of the victim both as an employee and as a human being,? the judge said.

?Surely Mr. Harris ought to have known that that his conduct toward and in the presence of Mrs. Rice would make her uncomfortable and undermine her dignity.

In February, Mr. Harris? lawyer Andrew Martin appealed the Board?s decision, claiming the women were not ?psychologically? harmed and the Board had no grounds to grant such large awards.

Lawyers Delroy Duncan and Allan Doughty argued their clients saw the outline of Harris? genitalia in his undershorts, saw ?genitalia moving from side to side?, and on a number of occasions he walked up to the office and said: ?Look! I haven?t got any trousers on.?

This was the first case of its kind in Bermuda and the judge said there was a wide divergence of opinion as to what constituted sexual harassment. Future sexual harassment cases in Bermuda should follow Canadian sexual harassment cases rather than UK law, she ruled.

She also said employers may be held liable if they fail to deal with the sexual harassment of employees within their workplaces.

In this case Mr. Harris had ?sexually annoyed? Mrs. Thorne and Mrs. Rice as his actions both demeaned them and created offensive work environments for them, the judge said.

?Harris? conduct was without doubt of a sexual nature,? she said. ?This was not conducive to an amiable work environment.

?Mrs. Thorne found the conduct so ?embarrassing? and ?demoralising? and she and Jan had no choice but to tell Mr. Harris at a meeting that his conduct was unprofessional.?

The judge also quoted Mrs. Thorne to say that Harris ? who is also Prison Fellowship Chairman ? made himself scantily clad in front of the women to ?put himself out? ? meaning he was hoping for a sexual response ? but if someone actually called him on it he would say he was only joking. However, Mrs. Justice Wade-Miller said Mr. Harris was forced to pay too much in awards to his former Creative Consultants employees and while his conduct was offensive, it did not merit $20,000 awards.

She said compensation was intended to put the victim in the same position he or she would have been in had the harassment not occurred. ?There is no fixed scale of awards for injury to feelings but the award should not be so low as would diminish respect for the law nor should it be too high,? she said. ?Since there is no benchmark in Bermuda the award should bear some broad general similarity to range of awards in personal injury cases.?

The judge also said victims of serious sexual assaults in Bermuda were awarded from $15,000 to $30,000 by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.