India’s POSH compliance gap: Why workplace awareness must go beyond policies

This article is authored by Sidra Javed, lawyer, The Legal Swan.

India’s workplace sexual harassment framework has made significant strides in establishing institutional accountability. Yet, the presence of policies, Internal Committees and mandatory training programmes does not necessarily mean that employees understand their rights or know how to respond when faced with inappropriate behaviour. The real challenge lies in translating legal compliance into everyday workplace awareness.

POSH Act (Representational image)

New research by Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) at Work, the dedicated practise of The Legal Swan (TLS), highlights this disconnect. Drawing on two reports, The Quiet Crisis and The Silent Gap, the findings examine 103 workplace sexual harassment complaints handled in 2025 and survey responses from 6,353 participants, including employees, students, managers, Internal Committee members and trainers. Together, the reports offer insights into the challenges organisations continue to face in implementing the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, commonly known as the POSH Act.

One of the most striking findings is that 24.86% of employees surveyed were unaware that their organisation had a POSH policy. This raises an important question: How effective can a workplace protection mechanism be if a significant proportion of employees do not even know it exists? A POSH policy is not merely a document to be maintained for compliance purposes. It should help employees understand what constitutes sexual harassment, where they can seek assistance, how complaints are handled and what safeguards are available to protect the confidentiality of the process.

The findings also indicate that 38.45% of respondents did not recognise abusive or vulgar language in the workplace as a form of sexual harassment. While the legal assessment of any incident depends on its specific circumstances and the applicable statutory requirements, the finding points to a broader problem: Employees may not always recognise inappropriate conduct or understand when it warrants intervention.

This gap in understanding can affect both reporting and prevention. Behaviour that makes an individual uncomfortable may go unreported because the person is uncertain whether it qualifies as misconduct, while others may fail to recognise the seriousness of their own actions. For organisations, the implication is clear. Communicating the existence of a policy is only the first step; ensuring that employees understand its practical application is equally important.

The research also highlights concerns around confidentiality during the complaint-handling process. According to the survey, 54.27% of employees and 41.14% of managers said they would discuss an ongoing harassment complaint with colleagues. This finding deserves particular attention because confidentiality is fundamental to a fair and credible redressal mechanism. The POSH Act places specific confidentiality obligations on those involved in the complaint process, including restrictions on the publication or communication of information relating to complaints, proceedings and the identities of the parties, subject to the applicable legal provisions.

Workplace discussions about an ongoing complaint can expose individuals to speculation, social pressure and reputational harm. They may also undermine confidence in the internal committee and discourage others from reporting incidents. Organisations must therefore treat confidentiality as a practical responsibility rather than a clause in a policy. Employees and managers need to understand what information can be shared, with whom, and under what circumstances. Internal Committees must also follow appropriate procedures to safeguard sensitive information throughout the inquiry. A workplace that cannot protect the privacy of people involved in a complaint risks weakening the very system designed to provide them with recourse.

Another important insight from The Quiet Crisis concerns where incidents occur. The analysis found that 43.69% of the incidents examined did not occur within office premises. Instead, they took place in extended workplace settings, including company offsites, business travel, hotel rooms and after-hours gatherings. A further 25.24% of complaints involved both office and non-office settings. These findings challenge the assumption that workplace safety is limited to an organisation's physical premises. Professional relationships frequently extend beyond regular office hours. Employees travel together for business, attend conferences, participate in team-building activities and interact at company-sponsored social gatherings. Such interactions can form part of the broader employment environment, even when they take place away from the workplace.

The POSH Act recognises this broader context through its definition of the workplace, which includes certain locations visited by an employee during or arising out of employment. Whether a particular incident falls within the Act's scope depends on the circumstances and the applicable legal provisions. For employers, this means that prevention measures cannot be confined to office buildings. Workplace conduct policies, awareness sessions and reporting mechanisms must also address professional travel, offsite events and other employment-related settings. Managers should be equipped to recognise inappropriate behaviour in these environments, while employees must know that organisational standards of conduct do not disappear when a professional event moves outside the office.

The complaint analysis further found that 90.20% of the complaints examined involved hostile work environment harassment. The concerns included persistent comments, unwanted messages, inappropriate jokes and repeated boundary violations. The finding highlights the importance of examining workplace behaviour beyond isolated incidents. Repeated comments or unwanted communications can create an uncomfortable professional environment, particularly when individuals feel unable to object because of hierarchical relationships, fear of retaliation or uncertainty about the available complaint mechanisms.

At the same time, the legal classification of conduct depends on the facts of each case and the requirements of the POSH Act. Not every instance of inappropriate language automatically constitutes sexual harassment under the statute. The context, nature of the conduct and applicable legal criteria must be carefully assessed. Nevertheless, organisations should not wait until behaviour escalates into a formal complaint before addressing concerns about workplace culture. Clear behavioural expectations, accessible reporting channels and appropriate managerial intervention can help identify problems at an earlier stage. The objective should be to create an environment in which employees understand professional boundaries and feel confident seeking guidance when those boundaries are crossed.

A recurring challenge in workplace compliance is the tendency to measure success through activities completed rather than understanding achieved. A training session may be conducted, attendance recorded and a compliance report filed, but these steps alone cannot establish whether employees know how to apply the law. The findings of The Silent Gap suggest that awareness and practical understanding do not always move together. Employees may have heard of the POSH Act without understanding its scope, managers may be unsure about their responsibilities, and Internal Committee members may require continuing support to navigate complex situations. Effective training should therefore be tailored to the responsibilities of different stakeholder groups.

Employees need to understand acceptable workplace conduct, reporting options and the safeguards available under the law. Managers require guidance on responding appropriately to disclosures, avoiding informal investigations and preserving confidentiality. Internal Committee members need role-specific training on inquiry procedures, natural justice, documentation and the statutory framework.

Organisations should also periodically assess whether their training programmes are producing measurable improvements in understanding. Scenario-based exercises, knowledge assessments and feedback mechanisms can help identify gaps that conventional presentations may overlook. The objective is not simply to demonstrate that training has taken place, but to establish whether employees can recognise concerns and respond appropriately.

As scrutiny of workplace compliance continues, organisations must recognise that effective POSH implementation involves more than maintaining policies and constituting Internal Committees. It requires a sustained commitment to prevention, awareness, procedural fairness and accountability. The findings of The Quiet Crisis and The Silent Gap point towards a common concern: The distance between having a legal framework in place and ensuring that people understand how to use it. Adv. Shivangi Prasad, founder, The Legal Swan, emphasises this distinction, “Attendance in a training room does not guarantee awareness, and awareness does not always translate into understanding.” Her observation captures a central challenge for employers. Compliance must be assessed not only by the existence of institutional mechanisms but also by whether employees know where to turn, whether complaints can be handled confidentially and whether workplace conduct is consistent with the standards organisations claim to uphold.

A credible POSH framework should enable employees to raise concerns without unnecessary barriers, ensure that complaints are examined through appropriate procedures and encourage organisations to address behavioural risks before they become entrenched. Ultimately, workplace safety cannot be achieved through documentation alone. It depends on whether the law's principles are reflected in everyday interactions, managerial decisions and organisational culture.

India's next phase of POSH compliance must therefore focus on making awareness meaningful, training practical and accountability consistent. The measure of success is not simply whether an organisation has fulfilled its formal obligations, but whether its people understand the protections available to them and whether its systems are equipped to respond when those protections are needed.

(The views expressed are personal)

This article is authored by Sidra Javed, lawyer, The Legal Swan.