Director Angelina Sirignano is facing a serious dilemma as she chooses between putting up
with Cahill’s behavior of overt exhibition of fondness towards the library’s female staff and
possibly lose his monetary support or do nothing and wait for her staff members to file a sexual
harassment suit against the library. I agree with both analyses suggesting that Sirignano confront
Cahill to put a stop to his offensive behavior. A good confrontation can reduce the risk of
retaliation from Cahill, provide a powerful incentive for Cahill to rethink his behavior, and make
legal action unnecessary.
Sirignano should not prolong confronting Cahill any longer than it takes to get a board
member to witness the confrontation in a closed meeting. When confronting him, she needs to
target his behavior clearly, but not him personally. There should be no threats, name calling, or
insulting statements about his character. She should start the meeting by saying assertively, “Jim,
you may not know this but your physical contact with the staff is in violation of our sexual
harassment policy. I have observed this behavior and am in a position that requires me to have you
stop the behavior.” Explaining the predicament the library is facing by his continued behavior
should be made clear. Of course, she should also end the meeting by telling him that his donations
have sustained the library and hope that this would not jeopardize his continued support. Should
she want to give him the benefit of the doubt (or pretend to) the assertive approach is still enough to
take care of the problem. The ultimate goal to the confrontation is to reach an agreement about
future conduct.
Once the confrontation has been conducted, Sirignano should inform the staff that Cahill has
been advised and that any future harassment should be reported immediately and will be given high
priority. She should also apologize for her delay and convey her future support for them in these
matters. Informing staff that a policy is in place where this behavior will no longer be tolerated
provides added security to the staff. Supervisors must aid in providing a workplace that is free from
sexual harassment. A staff’s safety should never be jeopardized.
The confrontation should include provisions in the library’s policy
Sirignano knowledge of Cahill’s behavior could make the library liable for the act.
Although appeasement responses on Sigignano’s part may seem easier, it is not a defense for
stopping harassment. By
An active strategy for stopping sexual harassment in the workplace involves direct confrontation
in view of the fact that he is the major donor that monetarily sustains it or put an end to it either
through making him understand in an implicit manner the embarrassment that his behavior causes
to the lady staff or through explicit measures of getting him dragged into sexual harassment suits.
The dilemma faced by the Director Angelina Sirignano and Librarian Burton Kaiser is too serious
as they have to choose between either the option of putting up with the behavior of Cahill in the
overt exhibition of his fondness towards the opposite sex staff of the Library in view of the fact that
he is the major donor that monetarily sustains it or put an end to it either through making him
understand in an implicit manner the embarrassment that his behavior causes to the lady staff or
through explicit measures of getting him dragged into sexual harassment suits.
It is not as if Cahill (Jim) is partial in his love towards the lady staff of the Library. Right from the
young blonde reference staffer Lauanne Teufel to the director, he has been unanimously showering
his acts of love in the guise of loving the library; his overtures causes embarrassment and disgust in
the younger staff threatening at least by one of them to the extent of filing of sexual harassment
suits. Though, the director feels and says sorry after each time the cursed donor leaves, she knows
very well it is something which she cannot get away with such soft words.
If I am in the place of the Director, Sirignano, I would choose, however harsh it is, the path of
restraining Jim from this obnoxious behavior. It is true that he is a donor of substance whose money
makes the library from getting sick, but, that does not mean that ethical values could be
compromised for the money. It is possible for the amorous Jim to extend his acts of love to even to
the visiting public and if such a thing happens would it not damage the reputation of the Library
once for all? It is not as if the world is made up of only one donor and she should in all earnestness
start looking for other donors who may not look for such trade-offs. In the meanwhile, she should
start sensitizing politely Jim about the discomfort and ill will his obnoxious acts brings in which
demoralizes the lady staff. He should be made to realize that it is not only his reputation that is at
stake and also the reputation of a public institution which he professes to love. It is also necessary
for her to seek forbearance from the staff rather than a mere sorry by giving them the assurance that
she is seeking active viable alternatives and in the event that nothing works she is prepared to
forego the grants and uphold the values. Finally, if the Director does not succeed in her efforts to
resolve the situation which should visibly improve the behavior of Jim, she should resign from the
position so that the place could be taken by a much more resolute person.
My conclusion above stems out of my strong belief that moral values should have an upper hand
over monetary values.