PUERTO RICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jorge C Pizarro-García, José R González-Nogueras, Karla Rivera-Rubio and Lloyd Isgut-Rivera, Pizarro & González
In practical terms, Act 90-2020 and the accompanying government guidance have transformed workplace harassment investigations into one of the most critical compliance functions for HR departments in Puerto Rico. Employers must view investigations not only as mechanisms for resolving individual complaints but also as evidence of compliance with a statutory duty to maintain a respectful and dignified workplace. Sexual Harassment Investigations Sexual harassment investigations remain one of the most highly regulated and closely scrutinised areas of internal HR compliance in Puerto Rico. Act No 17 of April 22 of 1988 establishes sexual harassment in employment as a form of sex discrimination and imposes affirmative duties on employers to prevent, discourage and correct such conduct. In recent years, these obligations have been significantly expanded through legislative amendments and administrative guidance, placing internal investigations at the centre of employer compliance strategies. A critical development for employers is the statutory requirement to promulgate and implement a formal protocol to address sexual harassment in the work - place. Article 15 of Act No 17 of April 22 of 1988, added by Act 82-2022, mandates that employers either adopt the model protocol issued by the Depart - ment of Labor and Human Resources or implement an internal protocol that meets or exceeds the mini - mum standards established by the government. This requirement effectively transforms sexual harassment investigations from discretionary internal processes into legally mandated procedures that must conform to defined structural and substantive expectations. The Department of Labor and Human Resources’ Model Protocol for the Prevention and Management of Sexual Harassment Cases, published in November 2022, provides detailed guidance on how employers should receive, investigate and adjudicate complaints. Although employers may tailor their protocols to organisational needs, the model reflects the baseline against which investigative adequacy is increasingly measured. The protocol emphasises prompt initiation of investigations, impartiality of the investigator, pro - tection against retaliation, confidentiality safeguards,
and thorough documentation of findings and recom - mendations. From an investigative perspective, the protocol clari - fies that employers must investigate not only formal written complaints but also verbal complaints, anony - mous complaints, and even workplace rumours when based on “real suspicion”. This expansive trigger standard reinforces the preventive purpose of the stat - ute and requires HR departments to maintain active monitoring mechanisms. Employers cannot defer investigative action simply because a complaint lacks formality or because the alleged conduct has ceased. The model protocol also places particular emphasis on the neutrality and independence of the investiga - tor. Investigations must be conducted by individuals who are not related to any of the parties and who can demonstrate independent judgement in evaluating evidence and making recommendations. This require - ment has practical implications for HR departments, especially in smaller organisations, where conflicts of interest are more likely. As a result, many employers increasingly rely on external investigators for sexual harassment matters to preserve the credibility and defensibility of the process. Another significant development is the formalisation of interim protective measures during investigations. The protocol requires employers to implement provisional measures when necessary to protect complainants, witnesses and collaborators from retaliation or contin - ued exposure to alleged conduct. These measures are expressly characterised as non-disciplinary and may include temporary reassignment, separation of the parties, or administrative leave. Courts and agencies increasingly evaluate whether employers assessed interim measures appropriately and whether such measures were proportional and non-punitive in effect. Recent statutory amendments have also expanded the enforcement landscape beyond internal investi - gations. Article 16 of Act No 17 of April 22 of 1988 contemplates the creation of a centralised govern - ment portal through which individuals may obtain information and electronically file sexual harassment complaints. This centralised portal has not yet been implemented by the Government of Puerto Rico.
325 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook