Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: The Legal and Institutional Cost of Silence

Introduction

Sexual harassment in the workplace constitutes a serious violation of an employee’s personal rights, dignity, and freedom to work. If not managed properly, it may expose the employer to legal liability, including compensation claims, litigation, and possible criminal investigations, as well as reputational risk.

This article examines the legal framework governing workplace sexual harassment, the most common risk areas encountered in practice, and the preventive measures applicable to all companies. It also includes a separate section addressing the specific challenges faced by global and multinational companies operating in Türkiye.

What Is Sexual Harassment, and How Does It Differ from Sexual Assault?

Sexual harassment refers to any unwanted statement, conduct, or approach of a sexual nature. Physical contact is not required. Common examples include:

• Persistent romantic advances despite an express refusal;
• Sexual jokes, comments, insinuations, or remarks concerning a person’s body;
• Disturbing looks, following a person, or repeatedly standing excessively close to them;
• Sending sexually explicit messages, photographs, or videos;
• Making promotion, bonuses, shifts, or similar employment benefits conditional upon sexual conduct; and
• Unwanted touching, hugging, or holding a person’s hand or shoulder.

Sexual harassment allegations require an internal investigation and a proportionate disciplinary process. Where there is a suspicion of sexual assault under Article 102 of the Turkish Criminal Code (“TCC”), the victim’s safety must immediately be secured, access to the judicial authorities must be facilitated with appropriate legal support, and the internal investigation must not obstruct or delay the criminal process.

Legal Framework

Labour Law No. 4857 expressly regulates sexual harassment as a ground for termination for just cause.

Under Article 24/II(b) and (d), an employee may terminate the employment agreement for just cause where the employer or another employee sexually harasses the employee, or where the employer fails to take the necessary measures after being informed of the harassment.

Article 25/II(c) of the same Law provides that an employee’s sexual harassment of another employee or a third party, such as a customer, may constitute grounds for termination for just cause by the employer.

In addition, sexual harassment may constitute an infringement of personal rights and give rise to claims for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages under the general provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations (“TCO”). Article 417 of the TCO, which regulates the employer’s duty to protect and safeguard employees, provides a legal basis for claims concerning both sexual harassment and broader forms of psychological or power-based harassment.

The conduct may also be subject to an independent criminal investigation under the TCC. The processing of statements and documents collected during an investigation must comply with the Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698 (“PDPL”).

A. Assessment Under Criminal Law

TCC contains important provisions that employers should consider in relation to workplace sexual harassment and sexual assault.

• Sexual Harassment (Article 105 of the TCC): A person who sexually harasses another person may, upon the victim’s complaint, be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of three months to two years or to a judicial fine. The sentence is increased by one half where the offence is committed through the abuse of influence arising from a hierarchical or service relationship or by taking advantage of working in the same workplace. Where the victim is compelled to leave employment because of the conduct, the sentence imposed may not be less than one year. This provision demonstrates that sexual harassment committed through the abuse of workplace hierarchy is treated as an aggravated offence.
• Sexual Assault (Article 102 of the TCC): A person who violates another person’s bodily integrity through sexual conduct may, upon the victim’s complaint, be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five to ten years. Where the conduct remains at the level of sexual molestation, the applicable sentence is imprisonment for a term of two to five years. The sentence is increased by one half where the offence is committed under aggravated circumstances, such as against a person who is unable to defend themselves physically or mentally, or through the abuse of influence arising from public office or a service relationship. In such aggravated cases, the investigation is conducted ex officio.
• Connection with Blackmail (Article 107 of the TCC): Conduct involving a sexual demand in exchange for promotion, bonuses, or job security may also constitute blackmail, depending on the circumstances. Workplace incidents should therefore be assessed as a whole rather than exclusively under a single criminal offence.

B. Criminal Investigations, the Exclusion of Conciliation, and the Independence of Employment Proceedings

The basic forms of sexual harassment under Article 105 of TCC and sexual assault under Article 102/1 of TCC are subject to the victim’s complaint. The complaint must be submitted within six months from the date on which the victim becomes aware of both the act and the offender. Aggravated offences are investigated ex officio.

Under the Turkish Criminal Procedure Code, the conciliation procedure does not apply to offences against sexual inviolability. An employer may therefore not attempt to close the matter merely by persuading the parties to reach an agreement and must conduct the internal investigation independently.

Criminal proceedings and employment-law proceedings concerning termination and compensation are conducted independently. An acquittal in criminal proceedings based on insufficient evidence does not bind the labour court and does not necessarily prevent the employer from terminating the employment relationship on the basis of its internal investigation.

Assessment of Evidence and Relevant Case Law

A well-established principle in the case law of the Turkish Court of Cassation is that the particular evidentiary difficulties involved in sexual harassment allegations must be taken into account.

Because such conduct frequently occurs in environments without witnesses, requiring direct and conclusive evidence in every case may further disadvantage the victim. Witness statements, correspondence, and changes in behaviour should therefore be assessed together. An acquittal in criminal proceedings based on insufficient evidence does not bind the civil court.[1]

This principle can also be observed in cases that have attracted public attention. In one case, harassment in a retail workplace through looks and verbal conduct was accepted by the Court of Cassation as grounds for termination for just cause, and sexual harassment was described as an attack on the employee’s freedom to work.

In another case, an employee’s harassment of a customer in a hotel was accepted as grounds for termination for just cause by the employer. In a further case, an implicit threat accompanying persistent approaches through text messages was considered an independent factor increasing the seriousness of the conduct.

Common Risk Areas in Practice

The risk of sexual harassment may arise in different forms depending on the nature of the workplace. In office environments, it is more frequently encountered through verbal or digital conduct, including messages, emails, or remarks made during meetings. In factories, warehouses, workshops, and other predominantly blue-collar environments, the risk profile may differ.

• Power Imbalance Between Shift Supervisors or Forepersons and Employees: A supervisor’s authority over shifts, overtime, or bonuses may turn harassment into a concealed means of pressure.
• Shared Living and Working Areas: Supervision and complaint mechanisms may be weaker in employee accommodation, company transportation, cafeterias, and similar areas than in office environments.
• Contractor and Subcontractor Employees: Contractor personnel working at the same site may remain outside the principal employer’s policies and training. However, where an incident occurs at the workplace, responsibility may also extend to the principal employer.
• Seasonal and Migrant Workers: Language barriers and insecure employment may discourage victims from reporting misconduct.
• Night Shifts and Lone Working: Environments without witnesses may both facilitate harassment and make it more difficult to prove.

These differences require policies, training programmes, and complaint channels to be adapted to the nature and conditions of each workplace.

Relationship with Power Harassment

Sexual harassment often forms part of a broader pattern of power harassment rather than occurring as an isolated incident.

A manager may initially use their hierarchical position to intimidate or humiliate an employee, and this pressure may later develop a sexual dimension. Following a complaint, retaliatory conduct may occur in the form of ignoring, excluding, obstructing, or marginalising the complainant.[2]

Corporate policies and training should therefore not be limited to conduct specifically classified as sexual harassment. They should also cover other forms of abuse of managerial authority, including humiliation, threats, discriminatory treatment, and retaliation.

Preventive Measures for All Companies

Regardless of the size, sector, or ownership structure of the workplace, every employer should implement at least the following measures:

• Prepare a written respectful-workplace policy in clear and accessible language and formally communicate it to all employees, including contractor personnel, against written acknowledgement.
• Provide regular awareness training adapted to different employee profiles, such as office and field employees and individuals with different levels of education;
• Provide separate training for managers on managerial responsibility and the prevention of abuse of authority;
• Establish multiple and easily accessible complaint channels, including telephone lines, digital platforms, human resources contacts, and field or employee representatives;
• Clearly communicate the confidentiality of complaints and the prohibition of retaliation;
• Establish a written procedure for impartial and timely internal investigations; and
• Systematically document circumstantial evidence, including correspondence, witness statements, and records of behavioural changes.

Special Considerations for Global and Multinational Companies

For global companies operating in Türkiye, the principal risk is that policies and procedures developed by the parent company may not correspond to local workplace conditions.

The following matters require particular attention:

• Localisation: Even where a global policy has been translated into Turkish, it should be adapted to the everyday language and literacy level of field employees and, where possible, supported by visual materials. A policy written exclusively in legal language may be ineffective in practice.
• Accessibility of Reporting Channels: A global whistleblowing hotline may not be sufficient on its own. It should be supported by simple local channels that blue-collar employees can use in their daily working environment, such as telephone lines, reporting boxes, or field representatives.
• Protection of Personal Data: Where information collected during an investigation is transferred to a central office or abroad, the provisions of the PDPL concerning cross-border data transfers must be considered.
• Trade Union and Collective Bargaining Relations: In unionised workplaces, disciplinary proceedings, the applicable collective bargaining agreement, and the stages at which a union representative must be involved should be clarified in advance. Global disciplinary procedures should be aligned with the local framework.
• Contractor and Subcontractor Relationships: Contractor personnel working at the same site should not be excluded from the scope of global policies. Supplier and subcontractor agreements should include appropriate compliance obligations.
• Early Involvement of Local Counsel: When an incident occurs, local legal counsel in Türkiye should be involved at an early stage alongside the global human resources or legal function. This is important for ensuring that the investigation and termination process complies with local law. Otherwise, procedural errors may result in reinstatement or compensation risks.
• Cultural Awareness: Differences between the norms of the parent company’s home jurisdiction and the social and legal expectations in Türkiye, including reluctance to report misconduct and respect for hierarchy, should be considered when designing training programmes.

For a global company, the appropriate approach is not to apply the central policy without modification, but to preserve its fundamental principles while adapting its implementation to local law, language, and workplace conditions.

Managing the Complaint Process

1. Record the complaint without blaming the victim or minimising the incident.
2. Physically separate the complainant and the person against whom the allegation has been made until the investigation is completed, for example by changing shifts or work locations.
3. Promptly initiate a confidential investigation through an impartial person or team, preferably outside the local human resources function where appropriate and, if necessary, with external adviser support.
4. Collect available evidence without delay, including witness statements, correspondence, and camera recordings.
5. Depending on the findings, impose a proportionate disciplinary measure or terminate the employment relationship and document the process in writing.
6. Provide the complainant with appropriate feedback without breaching confidentiality and ensure that no retaliation occurs.

Conclusion

The case law of the Turkish Court of Cassation recognises workplace sexual harassment as a serious violation of both an employee’s personal rights and freedom to work. It also adopts an approach that takes into account the particular evidentiary difficulties faced by victims, while requiring employers to support termination decisions with sufficiently concrete facts. Regardless of a company’s size or ownership structure, the appropriate approach is to establish an institutional compliance framework based on preventive policies, accessible complaint mechanisms, and impartial investigation procedures. For global companies, adapting this framework to Türkiye’s local legislation, language, and workplace conditions is essential for managing legal risks and protecting corporate reputation.

References

9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 2017/14071 E., 2020/1819 K. Numbered Decision. (2020, 02 10). Retrieved from https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/yargitay/9-hukuk-dairesi-e-2017-14071-k-2020-1819-t-10-2-2020

9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 2022/4922 E., 2022/6503 K. Numbered Decision. (2022, 05 25). Retrieved from https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/yargitay/9-hukuk-dairesi-e-2022-4922-k-2022-6503-t-25-5-2022