Why sexual violence and harassment are not addressed: comparative insights from Cambodia's construction sector

Abstract

Purpose This article assesses whether workplace formality determines how sexual violence and harassment (SVH) complaints are interpreted, understood and addressed by workplace intermediaries in three cement factories and on 39 construction sites in Cambodia. Design/methodology/approach Survey responses from 600 workers capture the prevalence and forms of SVH, reporting rates and victims' reasons for non-reporting. Data from interviews with 140 workers and 41 intermediaries, including company representatives, subcontractors, team leaders, union representatives and security guards, are used to understand the mechanisms behind reporting and complaint handling. Findings Despite the substantial differences in levels of workplace formality, patterns of reporting and grievance-handling were remarkably similar across both settings, with intermediaries' interpretive frameworks substantially shaping both the process and its outcomes. Practical implications Efforts to address SVH in the workplace must go beyond establishing formal complaint structures to recognise and address this overlooked layer of decision-making. Originality/value Comparing formal and informal construction workplaces, this study draws attention to the critical yet largely invisible gatekeeping role of workplace intermediaries in SVH reporting in low-enforcement contexts. In doing so, it moves beyond generalised discussions of reporting processes and outcomes to establish a fine-grained model that captures the three stages through which intermediaries filter complaints.