Bill to curb sexual harassment passes after 20 years
(CNS): Two decades after legislation to curb sexual harassment in the community was first proposed, a bill was passed in parliament last week just days before the final meeting wrapped up ahead of the 2025 General Election. The new law, championed by Wayne Panton when he was premier, obligates employers to draw up policies and disciplinary consequences to tackle harassment in the workplace. It also introduces compensation and fines as well as possible jail time for those falling foul of the new rules.
The legislation defines sexual harassment, such as unwelcome sexual comments, gestures and advances, and unsolicited sexting or the sending of sexual images. Workers cannot be made to put up with sexual advances or harassment as part of their work; for example, hospitality staff can no longer be told by employers to ignore customers who sexually harass them while they are working, which is not uncommon.
The legislation establishes another tribunal to hear cases, though Opposition Leader Joey Hew pointed out that the government should merge that tribunal with those established under the labour and gender laws as they often tackle similar issues.
As it stands, the Anti-Sexual Harassment Tribunal will be made up of seven people appointed by Cabinet, comprising at least three lawyers and four experts in related fields. It will be able to order compensation of up to $20,000. If offenders fail to pay, they can be hit with a $5,000 penalty or even go to jail.
As he presented the bill, Isaac Rankine, who played almost no part in the development of the bill, having taken over the responsibility for gender affairs in November, said the need for the bill had been discussed by many administrations, but progress on the bill had been slow.
“However, the time for action is now,” he said. “The urgency of this issue has been repeatedly recognised and is long past due.”
Rankine acknowledged that Panton was behind the renewed commitment to tackling the issue and that it was under his leadership that the civil service began redrafting past drafts and shaping them into this new bill. “This bill represents a significant milestone in our commitment to safeguarding the rights and dignity of all individuals,” he said, adding it would create a safer society.
When he rose to welcome the arrival of the bill to parliament, Panton said he’d never been able to understand why others had not seen this legislation as a priority. He pointed out it was gender-neutral.
“This bill went through at least nine months of public consultation,” Panton said, as there was a feeling not enough people had been involved in the consultation process. But he said he was not going to complain about how long it had taken.
“I am just happy that today the Cayman Islands can say it is finally going to be addressing an issue that women in this country have begged for for twenty years,” he said, noting that “women can be absolutely terrified” or stripped of their dignity because of such behaviour.
He said he had seen this issue many times and knew the effects of it. He had seen female colleagues emotionally shattered and near to taking their own life because of sexual harassment. “You cannot get a more serious issue,” he said, as he stressed how much of a priority it should have been.
But now the majority of the people that “we represent” — given that more than 50% of voters are women — have the legislative protection they need, he said.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
There is a wrong assumption that this law is to protect women only and I suspect that is all it will be used for, but there are many women who harass men too.
yawn. you would find a negative in the only thing we progressed on in 30 years
In your dreams.
Will it be enforced ? Ask women what happens when walking past a construction site.
20 years????…no wonder the national symbol is a turtle……zzzzzzzzzzzz
Time also to reconsider open bar alcoholic company functions, or at minimum provide a nonalcohol lane for those 95% that are expected to later drive home. The drinking culture of Cayman is deadly.
Rife.
Like so many other laws here it probably won’t be enforced at all or will be so mangled by ineptitude and corruption it will do more harm than good. Hope I’m wrong.
Is she supported now Waynie?
Damn right she is and let us remind ourselves that in 1460 days between May 2017 and April 2021 the PPM and ALDEN and JOEY and JULIANA and DWAYNE SEYMOUR and DAVID all kept quiet and tacitly supported McKeeva Bush through not one but two highly embarrassing incidents of Bush, while he was Speaker of our Parliament no less, putting his hands on women.
ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND SIXTY DAYS.
That is a long time to abandon his female victims and leave him in power.
Thats because they all needed to guard the lock on their own closet full of skeletons
Ah, and there lies the rub. A shiny new law, 20 years in the making, finally sees the light of day—but will it actually change anything in a place where certain well-connected individuals seem to exist in a parallel legal universe?
Let’s not mince words: McKeeva Bush, the former Speaker, was caught on CCTV assaulting a woman, yet he still managed to slither through the system, escaping any meaningful consequences. The trial collapsed, conveniently, and the man was right back in the political mix, still enjoying public office perks while his peers pretended collective amnesia.
And he’s not alone. Cayman’s political and corporate culture has long enabled powerful men to treat the workplace (and public office) as their personal dating pool—or worse. How many cases of workplace harassment have been quietly buried under NDAs, social pressure, or straight-up fear of retaliation? How many women have been forced to endure advances, lewd comments, and unwanted propositions from men who knew that the system—especially before this law—was rigged in their favor?
Now, this new bill sounds great on paper. But laws are only as effective as the will to enforce them. Will it be applied equally? Will Cayman’s political elite and their buddies suddenly be held accountable? Or will this become another bureaucratic check-the-box exercise—one that applies to the average worker but mysteriously does not extend to those with the right connections, wealth, or political backing?
If history is any indication, I wouldn’t hold my breath. This law might be just in time for the election, giving certain politicians something to wave around while conveniently ignoring the rot that remains firmly entrenched in the halls of power.
Real change won’t come from just passing a law. It will come when the first big name—someone untouchable—actually faces the full force of it. Until then, it’s just another paper shield, unlikely to protect those who need it most.
McKeeva arrest in 5, 4, 3 …
Too bad it’s not retroactive. To add, I can think of a few women in the workplace that would have gone to the dock if this law was passed 20 years ago and one is now a journalist. Hmmm…
Hahaha!!! What planet are you on?? Big Mac read this as a law enabling sexual harassment.