Summary: The effectiveness of the POSH framework cannot be measured merely by the number of complaints received by an organisation. Sometimes, important warning signs of workplace harassment appear through informal conversations, verbal disclosures, colleagues’ concerns or anonymous emails. This article examines whether the Internal Committee (IC) should concern itself only with formal written complaints or whether it has a broader role in creating a safe and responsive workplace. It distinguishes the IC’s statutory inquiry function from its role in listening to concerns, facilitating access to the complaint mechanism and taking appropriate preventive and organisational measures. Where an aggrieved woman approaches an IC member informally, the member should listen patiently, explain the POSH mechanism and, where she wishes to make a formal complaint but cannot put it in writing, provide reasonable assistance in reducing the complaint to writing. The article also considers anonymous complaints, explaining that although an anonymous communication may not ordinarily constitute a formal complaint for a statutory inquiry, it may nevertheless be a warning signal requiring appropriate preventive and risk-management measures. At the same time, the IC should not conduct an informal investigation based merely on rumours or anonymous allegations in a manner that compromises confidentiality or natural justice. The article proposes a “Listen–Facilitate–Assess–Act” approach and concludes that an effective IC should help build trust before a complaint arises, with employees feeling safe enough to raise concerns in the first place.
- Introduction
- A Formal Complaint: The Starting Point for a Statutory Inquiry
- The IC Member as a Facilitator
- What About Anonymous Complaints?
- The IC Must Not Become an “Informal Police Station”
- A Simple Framework for IC Members
- LISTEN
- FACILITATE
- ASSESS
- ACT
- The IC Is More Than an Inquiry Committee
- Conclusion
Introduction
The effectiveness of the POSH framework cannot be measured merely by the number of complaints received by an organisation. Sometimes, the most important warning signs of workplace harassment appear much earlier—through an informal conversation, a verbal disclosure, a colleague’s concern, or even an anonymous email.
This raises an important question:
Should the Internal Committee (IC) concern itself only with formal written complaints? Or does it have a larger role to play?
The answer lies in understanding the distinction between the IC’s statutory inquiry function and its broader role in creating a safe and responsive workplace.
A Formal Complaint: The Starting Point for a Statutory Inquiry
The POSH Act, 2013 provides a formal mechanism for an aggrieved woman to make a complaint of sexual harassment. A written complaint enables the IC to invoke the statutory inquiry process and ensures that the principles of natural justice, confidentiality and due process can be followed.
However, an employee may not always be ready to submit a formal complaint immediately.
She may first approach an IC member informally and say:
“I don’t want to file a complaint, but I need someone to listen to me.”
This conversation should not be dismissed merely because it is not yet a written complaint.
The IC Member as a Facilitator
An IC member has an important role in creating confidence in the system.
Where an aggrieved woman approaches an IC member verbally, the member should listen patiently, understand the concern, explain the POSH mechanism and inform her of the available options.
If she wishes to make a formal complaint but is unable to put it in writing, the IC should provide reasonable assistance in reducing the complaint to writing.
Thus, the IC member’s role is not to pressure the woman into filing a complaint, but to enable her to make an informed choice.
The distinction is subtle but extremely important:
Facilitation is not coercion.
Listening is not inquiry.
Guidance is not adjudication.
The requirement that the IC provide reasonable assistance where a complaint cannot initially be made in writing is also discussed in TaxGuru’s material on the POSH Act, 2013 and its sexual harassment complaint mechanism.
What About Anonymous Complaints?
Anonymous complaints present a different challenge.
An anonymous email alleging that a senior executive is behaving inappropriately cannot ordinarily be treated as a formal complaint by an identifiable aggrieved woman for the purpose of conducting a statutory inquiry.
But does that mean the IC should simply ignore it?
Certainly not.
An anonymous communication may be a warning signal of a deeper workplace issue. It may indicate fear of retaliation, lack of confidence in the reporting mechanism or a possible culture in which employees do not feel safe coming forward.
The IC should therefore distinguish between:
“We cannot conduct a statutory inquiry on this anonymous allegation”
and
“There is nothing we can do.”
These are not the same thing.
The information may warrant appropriate preventive and organisational measures—such as reinforcing awareness of reporting channels, sensitising employees, reviewing workplace risks and ensuring that employees are aware of confidentiality and protection against retaliation.
The objective should be to create an environment in which an affected employee feels sufficiently safe to approach the appropriate mechanism.
TaxGuru has also discussed the handling of anonymous complaints under the POSH framework, including the issues that arise where allegations are received without an identifiable complainant.
The IC Must Not Become an “Informal Police Station”
There is, however, another side to the issue.
The IC should not start an informal investigation merely because it has received an anonymous email or heard a workplace rumour.
Calling the alleged respondent, confronting colleagues, collecting statements or circulating the allegation without a formal complaint may compromise confidentiality and principles of natural justice.
An IC must therefore avoid two extremes:
Ignoring every informal or anonymous concern
and
initiating a formal investigation into every informal or anonymous allegation.
The correct approach lies somewhere between the two.
The importance of maintaining confidentiality and following a proper inquiry process is also reflected in TaxGuru’s discussion on how POSH Committees investigate workplace harassment using evidence and probability standards.
A Simple Framework for IC Members
IC members can adopt a simple “Listen–Facilitate–Assess–Act” approach:
LISTEN
Provide a safe and non-judgmental space for concerns to be expressed.
FACILITATE
Explain the POSH mechanism and assist an aggrieved woman in making a written complaint where required.
ASSESS
Determine whether the matter is a formal complaint, an informal disclosure, third-party information or an anonymous communication.
ACT
Where a formal complaint exists, follow the statutory process. Where it does not, consider appropriate preventive and risk-management measures without compromising confidentiality or natural justice.
The IC Is More Than an Inquiry Committee
Perhaps the greatest misconception about the IC is contained in its very name. While the Committee has a statutory inquiry function, its contribution to workplace safety is much broader.
A mature IC should help build trust before a complaint arises.
Employees should know:
- whom they can approach;
- what constitutes sexual harassment;
- how confidentiality is protected;
- what happens after a complaint is made;
- that retaliation is unacceptable; and
- that their concerns will be heard with sensitivity and fairness.
Therefore, the absence of a formal complaint should not automatically be interpreted as the absence of a workplace problem.
The broader responsibilities of the IC and employer, including awareness, training, constitution of the Committee and implementation of POSH requirements, are covered in TaxGuru’s Mandatory POSH Compliances & Penalties guide.
The importance of awareness programmes and orientation of IC members is also addressed in TaxGuru’s article on POSH – Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace.
Conclusion
A strong POSH framework is not one where employees merely know where to file a complaint. It is one where they have the confidence to speak before the situation escalates.
An anonymous complaint may not be an inquiry—but it may be a warning.
An informal disclosure may not yet be a complaint—but it may be an opportunity to facilitate access to justice.
And an IC member is not merely an investigator after an incident. The IC member can also be a listener, facilitator, educator and custodian of workplace dignity.
Ultimately, the success of POSH compliance should not be measured only by how efficiently an organisation handles complaints, but also by whether employees feel safe enough to raise concerns in the first place.
Because sometimes, the first step towards a safe workplace is not a complaint—it is simply being heard.
****
Author: CS, CMA Shukla Bansal | FCS, FCMA, MCOM, POSH Trainer & Consultant | Practising Company Secretary | Email: [email protected]
