Her boss was out to get her
His work was treated with disdain.
Her confidence is shattered.
He is feeling anxious, depressed, angry and paranoid.
Her friends and family have turned away.
They just left a job from hell.
And they are not alone. According to the International Labor
Organization, “bullying” – targeting employees for intimidation – is
among American workers’ fastest-growing complaints. “We don’t use $8
billion worth of antidepressants in this country for nothing,” says
Jim Landgraf, President of the Educational Testing Service, “The
corporate culture is so accepting of these kinds of aggressive
actions, it’s not going to go away.”
Workplace abuse is a growing epidemic worldwide concern
effecting workers from the United States, Sweden, Australia, Canada,
United Kingdom, Ireland and more.
Workplace abuse targets both men and women of all races and
ages who have systematically suffered from emotional abuse and
harassment in the workplace by either peers or supervisors and are
suffering dire emotional consequences as a result. Because workplace
abuse is a huge and growing problem in the United States today, one
that cuts across genders, age groups, and employment categories,
there is a huge and growing potential audience for this book. The victims of bullying are more likely to be women than men,
and tend to be non-confrontational, competent people who are viewed
by the bully as a threat. They also tend to be non- political types
who believe they can rise above the fray.
What is workplace bullying?
As referenced in
Wikipedia,
Workplace bullying, like
childhood
bullying, is the tendency of individuals or groups to use
persistent aggressive or unreasonable behavior against a co-worker.
Workplace bullying can include such tactics as verbal, nonverbal,
and even physical abuse. This type of aggression is particularly
difficult because unlike the typical forms of schoolyard bullying,
workplace bullies often operate within the established rules and
policies of their organization and their society. Bullying in the
workplace therefore takes a wide variety of forms, from being rude
or belligerent, to screaming or cursing, destruction of property or
work product, social ostracism, and even physical assault. According
to Tracy, Lutgen-Sandvik, and Alberts[1],
researchers associated with the
Project for Wellness and Work-Life workplace bullying is most
often "a combination of tactics in which numerous types of hostile
communication and behavior are used" (p. 152).
Gary and Ruth Namie define workplace bullying as "repeated,
health-harming mistreatment, verbal abuse, or conduct which is
threatening, humiliating, intimidating, or sabotage that interferes
with work or some combination of the three.".[2].
Pamela Lutgen-Sandvik[3]
expands this definition, stating that workplace bullying is
"persistent verbal and nonverbal aggression at work, that includes
personal attacks, social ostracism, and a multitude of other painful
messages and hostile interactions."
Workplace bullying is also referred to as
mobbing, although mobbing can also mean any bullying by
more than one person. Other synonyms include "emotional abuse" at
work, "social undermining", and general workplace abuse. According
to Pamela Lutgin-Sandvik[4],
the lack of unifying language to name the phenomenon of workplace
bullying is a problem because without a unifying term or phrase,
individuals have difficulty naming their experiences of abuse, and
therefore have trouble pursuing justice against the bully. Unlike
the term "sexual harassment," which named a specific problem and is
now recognized in U.S. law (and many international laws), workplace
bullying is still being established as a relevant social problem and
is in need of a specific vernacular.
Statistics
Statistics[5]
from the Waitt Institute for Violence Prevention show that one in
three employees personally experiences bullying at some point in
their working lives. At any given time, 1 out of every 10 employees
is a target of workplace bullying. Nearly half of all American
workers (49%) have been affected by workplace bullying, either being
a target themselves or having witnessed abusive behavior against a
co-worker.
Although socio-economic factors may play a role in the abuse,
researchers from the
Project for Wellness and Work-Life[1]
suggest that "workplace bullying, by definition, is not explicitly
connected to demographic markers such as sex and ethnicity" (p.
151). Because one out of ten employees experiences workplace
bullying, the prevalence of this issue is cause for great concern,
even as initial data about this issue are reviewed.
In terms of gender, the Workplace Bullying Institute (2007)
states that women appear to be at greater risk of becoming a
bullying target, as 57% of those who reported being targeted for
abuse were women. Men are more likely to participate in aggressive
bullying behavior (60%), however if the bully is a woman, her target
is more likely to be a woman as well (71%).
Race also may play a role in the experience of workplace
bullying. According to the Workplace Bullying Institute (2007), "the
comparison of combined bullying (current + ever bullied) prevalence
percentages reveals the pattern from most to least: Hispanics
(52.1%), African-Americans (46%), Whites (33.5%) and Asian-Americans
(30.6%). The reported rates of witnessing bullying were
African-Americans (21.1%), Hispanics (14%), Whites (10.8%), and
Asian-Americans (8.5%). The percentages of those claiming to have
neither experienced nor witnessed mistreatment were among
Asian-Americans (57.3%), Whites (49.7%), Hispanics (32.2%) and
African-Americans (23.4%)."
Health effects of bullying
According to Gary and Ruth Namie, as well as Tracy, et al.[6],
workplace bullying can harm the health of the targets of bullying.
Organizations are beginning to take note of workplace bullying
because of the costs to the organization in terms of the health of
their employees.
According to scholars at the
Project for Wellness and Work-Life at
Arizona State University, "workplace bullying is linked to a
host of physical, psychological, organizational, and social costs."
Stress is the most predominant health affect associated with
bullying in the workplace. Research indicates that workplace stress
has significant negative effects that are correlated to poor mental
health and poor physical health, resulting in an increase in the use
of "sick days" or time off from work (Farrell & Geist-Martin, 2005).
In addition, co-workers who witness workplace bullying can also
have negative effects, such as fear, stress, and emotional
exhaustion[3].
Those who witness repetitive workplace abuse often choose to leave
the place of employment where the abuse took place. Workplace
bullying can also hinder the organizational dynamics such as group
cohesion, peer communication, and overall performance. Bullying is
not a good thing, it can scar people for life.
Financial cost of bullying to a company
In a report by the International Labour Organization of Geneva,[7]
they highlight three interesting facts about the financial cost of
bullying in the work place:
- According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety
Health (NIOSH) mental illness among the workforce leads to a loss
in employment amounting to $19 billion and a drop in productivity
of $3 billion (Sauter, et al., 1990).
-
Leymann (1990) estimated the cost of bullying for the
organisation to account for approximately $30,000-100,000 per year
for each individual subjected to bullying.
- A recent Finnish study of more than 5,000 hospital staff found
that those who had been bullied had 26% more certified sickness
absence than those who were not bullied, when figures were
adjusted for base-line measures one year prior to the survey (Kivimaki
et al, 2000). According to the researchers these figures are
probably an underestimation as many of the targets are likely to
have been bullied already at the time the base-line measures were
obtained.
Research by Dr Dan Dana has shown organizations suffer a large
financial cost by not accurately managing conflict and bullying type
behaviors. He has developed a tool to assist with calculating the
cost of conflict.[8]
In addition, researcher Tamara Parris discusses how employers need
to be more attentive in managing various discordant behaviors in the
workplace, such as, bullying, as it not only creates a financial
cost to the organization, but also erodes the companies human
resources assets.
[9]
Types of workplace bullying
Tim Field suggested that workplace bullying takes these forms[10]:
- Pressure bullying or unwitting bullying
- Organizational bullying
- Corporate bullying
- Institutional bullying
- Client bullying
- Restroom bullying
- Serial bullying
- Secondary bullying
- Pair bullying
- Characterization bullying (e.g. Pokémon Characterization)
- Gang/group bullying, also called
mobbing
- Vicarious bullying
- Regulation bullying
- Residual bullying
- Cyber bullying
Workplace bulling tactics
Research by the Workplace Bullying Institute, see ,[11]
suggests that the following are the most common 25 tactics used by
workplace bullies.
- Falsely accused someone of "errors" not actually made (71
percent).
- Stared, glared, was nonverbally intimidating and was clearly
showing hostility (68 percent).
- Discounted the person's thoughts or feelings ("oh, that's
silly") in meetings (64 percent).
- Used the "silent treatment" to "ice out" and separate from
others (64 percent).
- Exhibited presumably uncontrollable mood swings in front of
the group (61 percent).
- Made up own rules on the fly that even she/he did not follow
(61 percent).
- Disregarded satisfactory or exemplary quality of completed
work despite evidence (58 percent).
- Harshly and constantly criticized having a different standard
for the target (57 percent).
- Started, or failed to stop, destructive rumors or gossip about
the person (56 percent).
- Encouraged people to turn against the person being tormented
(55 percent).
- Singled out and isolated one person from coworkers, either
socially or physically (54 percent).
- Publicly displayed gross, undignified, but not illegal,
behavior (53 percent).
- Yelled, screamed, threw tantrums in front of others to
humiliate a person (53 percent).
- Stole credit for work done by others (47 percent).
- Abused the evaluation process by lying about the person's
performance (46 percent).
- Declared target "insubordinate" for failing to follow
arbitrary commands (46 percent).
- Used confidential information about a person to humiliate
privately or publicly (45 percent).
- Retaliated against the person after a complaint was filed (45
percent).
- Made verbal put-downs/insults based on gender, race, accent or
language, disability (44 percent).
- Assigned undesirable work as punishment (44 percent).
- Created unrealistic demands (workload, deadlines, duties) for
person singled out (44 percent).
- Launched a baseless campaign to oust the person; effort not
stopped by the employer (43 percent).
- Encouraged the person to quit or transfer rather than to face
more mistreatment (43 percent).
- Sabotaged the person's contribution to a team goal and reward
(41 percent).
- Ensured failure of person's project by not performing required
tasks, such as sign-offs, taking calls, working with collaborators
(40 percent)
Bullying and personality disorders
In 2005, psychologists Belinda Board and Katarina Fritzon at the
University of Surrey, UK, interviewed and gave personality tests
to high-level British executives and compared their profiles with
those of criminal psychiatric patients at
Broadmoor Hospital in the UK. They found that three out of
eleven
personality disorders were actually more common in managers than
in the disturbed criminals, they were:
They described the business people as successful
psychopaths and the criminals as unsuccessful psychopaths.
[12]
Robert Hare and Paul Babiak discuss psychopathy and workplace
bullying thus[13]:
- “Bullies react aggressively in response to provocation or
perceived insults or slights. It is unclear whether their acts of
bullying give them pleasure or are just the most effective way
they have learned to get what they want from others. Similar to
manipulators, however, psychopathic bullies do not feel
remorse,
guilt
or
empathy. They lack insight into their own behaviour, and seem
unwilling or unable to moderate it, even when it is to their own
advantage. Not being able to understand the harm they do to
themselves (let alone their victims), psychopathic bullies are
particularly dangerous.”
- “Of course, not all bullies are psychopathic, though this may
be of little concern to their victims. Bullies come in many
psychological and physical sizes and shapes. In many cases,
“garden variety” bullies have deep seated psychological problems,
including feelings of inferiority or inadequacy and difficulty in
relating to others. Some may simply have learned at an early stage
that their size, strength, or verbal talent was the only effective
tool they had for social behaviour. Some of these individuals may
be context-specific bullies, behaving badly at work but more or
less normally in other contexts. But the psychopathic bully is
what he is: a callous, vindictive, controlling individual with
little or no empathy or concern for the rights and feelings of the
victim, no matter what the context.”
In 2007, researchers Catherine Mattice and Brian Spitzberg at
San Diego State University, USA, also found a strong
relationship between
narcissism and the motivation to bully, and further discovered
narcissism to be unrelated to aggressive forms of bullying (e.g.,
threatening violence, making false accusations), but related to more
indirect, or passive, forms of bullying (e.g., ignoring,
micromanaging) (Mattice & Spitzberg, 2007).
Workplace bullying and the law
Each state has its own legislation.
In
Queensland there is no law against workplace bullying although
anti-discrimination and stalking laws could be used to prosecute if
appropriate.
In
Victoria, legislation comes from Worksafe Victoria. if bullying
endangers a worker's health causing stress or any other physical
harm, a corporation can be found liable for not providing a safe
place for their employees to work.[14]
The Canadian Province of
Quebec
introduced legislation addressing workplace bullying on 1 June 2004.
In its Act representing Labour Standards "psychological harassment"
is prohibited. The
Commission des normes du travail is the organization responsible
for the application of this act.[15]
Under the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act 1979, "all
employers must take every precautions reasonable in the
circumstances to protect the health and safety of their workers in
the workplace. This includes protecting them against the risk of
workplace violence "[16].
The Act requires establishment of Joint Occupational Health and
Safety Committees for larger employers.
Under the act, workplace violence is defined as "...the
attempted or actual exercise of any intentional physical force that
causes or may cause physical injury to a worker. It also includes
any threats which give a worker reasonable grounds to believe he or
she is at risk of physical injury"[17][16].
Currently, as the Act is written, the Ontario Occupational Health
and Safety Act does not specifically cover the issue of
psychological harassment
[16].
On Dec 13, 2007 MPP Andrea Horwath introduced for first reading a
new Bill, Bill-29, to make an amendment to the Ontario Occupational
Health and Safety Act. This Bill-29 is proposing "to protect workers
from harassment and violence in the workplace" and will include
protection from psychological abuse and bullying behaviors in the
workplace in Ontario.
[18]
The Canadian Province of
Saskatchewan made workplace bullying illegal in 2007 by passing
The Occupational Health and Safety (Harassment Prevention) Amendment
Act, 2007. The act broadened the definition of harassment, as
defined in the The Occupational Health and Safety Act 1993, to
include psychological harassment.[19]
In
Ireland, there is a Code of Practice for employers and employees
on the prevention and resolution of bullying at work.[20]
The Code notes the provision in the Safety, Health and Welfare Act
2005 requiring employers to manage work activities to prevent
improper conduct or behaviour at work. The Code of Practice provides
both employer and employee with the means and the machinery to
identify and to stamp out bullying in the workplace in a way which
benefits all sides.
Workplace bullying in
Sweden
is covered by the Ordinance of the Swedish National Board of
Occupational Safety and Health containing Provisions on measures
against Victimization at Work, which defines victimisation as
"...recurrent reprehensible or distinctly negative actions which are
directed against individual employees in an offensive manner and can
result in those employees being placed outside the workplace
community."[21]
The act places the onus on employers to plan and organise work so
as to prevent victimisation and to make it clear to employees that
victimisation is not acceptable. The employer is also responsible
for the early detection of signs of victimisation, prompt counter
measures to deal with victimisation and making support available to
employees who have been targeted.
In the
United Kingdom, although bullying is not specifically mentioned
in workplace legislation, there are means to obtain legal redress
for bullying. The Protection from Harassment Act 1997[22]
is a recent addition to the more traditional approaches using
employment-only legislation. Notable cases include
Majrowski v Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust wherein it was held
that an employer is vicariously liable for one employee's harassment
of another, and
Green v DB Group Services (UK) Ltd, where a bullied worker was
awarded over £800,000 in damages. In the latter case, at paragraph
99, the judge Mr Justice Owen said:
- "...I am satisfied that the behaviour amounted to a
deliberate and concerted campaign of bullying within the ordinary
meaning of that term."
Bullying behaviour breaches other UK laws. An implied term of
every
employment contract in the UK is that parties to the contract
have a (legal) duty of trust and confidence to each other. Bullying,
or an employer tolerating bullying, typically breaches that
contractual term. Such a breach creates circumstances entitling an
employee to terminate his or her contract of employment without
notice, which can lead to a finding by an
Employment Tribunal of unfair dismissal, colloquially called
constructive dismissal. An employee bullied in response to
asserting a statutory right can be compensated for the detriment
under Part V of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and if dismissed,
Part X of the same Act provides that the dismissal is automatically
unfair. Where a person is bullied on grounds of sex, race or
disability et al, it is outlawed under anti-discrimination
laws.
It was argued, following the obiter comments of Lord Hoffman in
Johnson v. Unisys in March 2001,[23][24]
that claims could be made before an Employment Tribunal for injury
to feelings arising from unfair dismissal. It was re-established
that this was not what the law provided, in Dunnachie v Kingston
upon Hull City Council, July 2004
[25] wherein the Lords
confirmed that the position established in Norton Tool v Tewson in
1972, that compensation for unfair dismissal was limited to
financial loss alone. Unfair dismissal compensation is subject to a
statutory cap set at £60600 from Feb 2006. Discriminatory dismissal
continues to attract compensation for injury to feelings and
financial loss, and there is no statutory cap.
In the
United States, comprehensive workplace bullying legislation has
yet to be passed by the federal government or by any U.S. state
government, but since 2003, many state legislatures have considered
bills.[26]
As of October 2007, 13 U.S. states have proposed legislation; these
are:[27]
- New Jersey (2007)
- Washington (2007, 2005)
- New York (2006)
- Vermont (2007)
- Oregon (2007, 2005)
- Montana (2007)
- Connecticut (2007)
- Hawaii (2007, 2006, 2005, 2004)
- Oklahoma (2007, 2004)
- Kansas (2006)
- Missouri (2006)
- Massachusetts (2005)
- California (2003)
These workplace bullying bills have typically allowed employees
to sue their employers for creating an "abusive work environment,"
and most have been supported by the notion that laws against
workplace bullying are necessary to protect public health.
Although most U.S. states operate under the 19th Century doctrine
of
at-will employment (which, in theory, allows an employer to fire
an employee for any reason or no reason), American workers have
gained significant legal leverage through discrimination and
harassment laws, workplace safety laws, union-protection laws. etc.,
such that it would be illegal under federal and the laws of most
states to fire employees for a whole host of reasons. These
employment laws typically forbid retaliation for good faith
complaints or exercising legal rights, such as organizing a union.
Discrimination and harassment laws enable employees to sue for
creating a "hostile work environment," which can include bullying,
but the bullying/hostility must be tied in some way to a
characteristic protected under the discrimination/harassment law,
such as race, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation,
etc.
- ^
a
b
Tracy, Lutgen-Sandvik, and Alberts
Nightmares,
Demons and Slaves, Exploring the Painful Metaphors of Workplace
Bullying, 2006
-
^ Namie, Gary and
Ruth
Workplace Bullying Institute Brochure
- ^
a
b
Lutgen-Sandvik, Pamela
Take This Job and . . . : Quitting and Other Forms of Resistance
to Workplace Bullying
-
^ Lutgin-Sandvik,
Pamela,
The Communicative Cycle of Employee Emotional Abuse, 2003
-
^ Bully Busters
Workplace Bullying Defined
-
^ Namie, Gary
and Ruth
The WBI 2003 Report on Abusive Workplaces
- ^
http://oldweb.unicz.it/lavoro/ILOCOST.pdf
-
^
Dan Dana
-
^
Hugh Downs School of Human Communication
-
^ Field, Tim,
Bullying: what is it?
-
^
Workplace Bullying Institute Harper Collins, 2006
- ^
Board, B.J. & Fritzon, Katarina, F. (2005). Disordered
personalities at work. Psychology, Crime and Law, 11, 17-32
-
^ Hare, Robert and
Babiak, Paul,
Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work Harper
Collins, 2006
-
^
Worksafe, Victorian Workcover Authority
-
^
Commission des normes du travail
- ^
a
b
c
Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act 1979 Ministry of
Labor, Ontario, Canada
- ^
Workplace Violence Ministry of Labor, Ontario, Canada
- ^
Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Canada
- ^
The Occupational Health and Safety (Harassment Prevention)
Amendment Act, 2007 in Saskatchewan
-
^
Republic of Ireland - 2007 Code of Practice for Employers and
Employees on the Prevention and Resolution of Bullying at Work
-
^ Ordinance of
the Swedish National Board of Occupational Safety and Health
containing Provisions on measures against Victimization at Work
AFS 1993:17
Official English translation
- ^
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
-
^
Judgments - Johnson (A.P.) v. Unisys Limited, Uk Parliament
- Publications
-
^
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2001 IRLR 279 House of Lords], Case
Summaries, Equal Opportunities Commission, UK
-
^
Dunnachie v Kingston upon Hull City Council 2004
-
^ Said, Caroline (2007-01-21).
Bullying bosses could be busted: Movement against worst
workplace abusers gains momentum with proposed laws.
San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved on
2007-10-19.
-
^
Workplace Bullying Institute
See also
More
links