From Complaint-Driven Regulation To Positive Employer Duties: A Comparative Analysis Of India, Australia, And Sweden Under ILO Convention No. 190
Shruti Mishra, RKDF University, Ranchi
ABSTRACT
Workplace sexual harassment has traditionally been regulated through complaint-based legal mechanisms that focus on investigating and redressing individual grievances after harm has occurred. While such frameworks remain essential for accountability, they are often inadequate to address the organisational conditions and structural inequalities that enable workplace sexual harassment. The adoption of the International Labour Organization's Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190) and Recommendation No. 206 marks a significant normative shift by placing prevention and positive employer duties at the centre of workplace governance.
This article examines how ILO Convention No. 190 transforms employer obligations from a reactive complaint-driven model to a preventive governance framework based on organisational accountability. Using a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology, it analyses the legal frameworks of India, Australia, and Sweden to evaluate the extent to which India's Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 reflects emerging international labour standards.
The article argues that although the Indian framework incorporates important preventive measures, it remains predominantly centred on procedural compliance and complaint resolution. By contrast, Australia and Sweden impose broader proactive obligations requiring employers to identify workplace risks and implement continuous preventive measures. The article concludes that India's legal framework should adopt clearer preventive employer duties, stronger institutional oversight, and a risk-based approach to workplace governance in line with evolving international labour standards.
Keywords: workplace sexual harassment; employer obligations; ILO convention no. 190; posh act; preventive governance; positive duty; comparative labour law.
