Go to aim.com.au

  • Blog
  • Confirmation
Home / Blog

A Problem That Cannot Be Ignored

September 24, 2014
by AIM
2 Comments

workplace-bullying

More common in the workplace than in the schoolyard, bullying not only harms those on the receiving end, it’s bad for business. By Emma Williams

Bullying is generally associated with the schoolyard. However, it is a very real and “adult” problem affecting many workplaces throughout Australia.

Psychologist and expert on workplace bullying, Evelyn Field, says bullying among adults is far more common than people realise. Often it’s found in subtle forms.

“We look at one in five kids being bullied at school, but it’s more at work,” Field says. “I’d say one in three adults is affected by workplace bullying in Australia, but it can be up to 90-95 per cent in some industries like nursing or teaching.”

Researchers at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business looked at the impact workplace ostracism has on employee health and found workplace exclusion was more harmful than more obvious types of bullying. The research found many employees thought ostracism to be socially acceptable, less psychologically harmful, and less likely to be prohibited than harassment.

Despite this perception, Field says people subjected to any kind of bullying may be affected by headaches, stomach pains, high blood pressure, weight gain, sleep problems, memory issues, depression, anxiety and/or panic attacks.

“Their personal life is affected. Those who are really injured say they’re a different person. A third of people seriously traumatised by bullying never work again.”

In 2008, apprentice Alec Meikle committed suicide after relentless bullying. In the NSW Coroner’s Court, it was alleged the 17-year-old was burnt with a welding torch, set on fire and told he would be raped if he made too many mistakes.

Alec’s direct supervisor was alleged to have been a main perpetrator of the bullying. Another co-worker admitted spraying Meikle with flammable liquid while he was welding, knowing it would catch alight, but said it was a joke.

Bullies don’t affect only the victim; they also cost companies and the community. A 2012 report by the House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Education and Employment (“Workplace Bullying: We just want it to stop”) found workplace bullying costs the Australian economy up to $36 billion a year. A workplace bullying case costs employers an average $17,000 to $24,000 per claim.

Field says organisations need to regard bullying as the canary in the coal mine: a sign there are major problems. Key indicators can be low productivity, low employee motivation, mistakes, absenteeism and high turnover of staff.

Ultimately, “bullying is a result of poor management and your bottom line is going to suffer. When people get bullied, they’re not doing what they’re paid to do and nor are the bullies or bystanders.

“If you work in an organisation where you are valued and respected, you try harder because you feel good and part of the team. If you’re not valued, you won’t perform at your best or put in extra.

“If there is a naughty child, you look to their parents. At work, whether they are a bully, target, or both, look at the manager. If the manager isn’t communicating with staff and able to see these issues, then what else is the manager not doing?”

Field says bullies are usually “politically clever” and know how to win favour with those above them while making those below them seem less credible. She finds women in particular often fall victim to a “boys’ club” mentality, when men stand up for their male colleagues who have been accused of bullying, and cites the disparity of high numbers of female law graduates with low numbers of women practising law as just one example of this.

“That’s a huge cost to the community, when we train people and they can’t work,” Field says. Yet a University of Buffalo School of Management study found workplace bullies were often rewarded and promoted above colleagues with less dominant behaviours.

Bullying behaviour can involve spreading rumours about a person’s work or capabilities, which can be difficult to defend when the victim doesn’t know what has been said. Field advises bullying victims to see a psychologist, who can teach them ways of dealing with the perpetrator or perpetrators.

She also encourages clients to note interactions in a diary or confirm what was said via email. Field doesn’t like the phrase “stamping out bullying”. Instead, she advises the best way to deal with bullying is a collaborative, not adversarial, approach. It is not about proof an employee was bullied; it’s about how they feel about it.

She suggests too many companies are succumbing to hour-long “tick and flick” training, which involves watching a DVD or completing a brief induction, so the company can report that everyone has received training. “Good training is crucial and I don’t think anywhere in Australia is doing it yet,” Field says.

Chair of the National Centre Against Bullying and former chief justice of the Family Court of Australia Alastair Nicholson says the new Fair Work Act amendments (since January this year) apply serious financial penalties.

Under current legislation, employees can complain about bullying to the Fair Work Commission, which it is obliged to act upon within 14 days. If the Fair Work Commission finds bullying has occurred, an organisation will be expected to comply with any orders to prevent the worker from further bullying. Failure to comply could penalise the organisation a maximum $51,000 for each offence. Employees, managers and directors found to be breaching the orders could also be penalised individually.

In Victoria, bullies face more severe consequences. In 2011, the state introduced Brodie’s Law after the 2006 suicide of a young woman, Brodie Panlock, who was subjected to relentless bullying by co-workers. Brodie’s Law makes workplace and cyber bullying a criminal offence by extending the application of the stalking provisions in the Crimes Act 1958. Stalking, and therefore conduct that amounts to serious bullying, carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.

“I don’t think sufficient workplaces are conscious of the problem,” Nicholson says. “Many would have workplace bullying policies, but the problem with policies is they aren’t much good if they’re put in a drawer. “They need to be well done and acted on. There needs to be a lot more work from businesses in this area, otherwise it is going to cost them a lot of money.”

How to Fast-Track Wins in Your Business
Management Article Round-up
About the Author
Social Share
  • google-share
  • http://www.egliassessments.com/ Bernie Althofer

    Whilst many organisations will have the policies and procedures, there is an argument
    in one corner that HR should do more. As I indicated recently, managers,
    supervisors and workers have to be more accountable and responsible for the
    prevention, detection, reporting and resolution of workplace bullying and other
    counterproductive workplace behaviours.

    Unfortunately, whilst many organisations do have the performance management systems and processes that should be used, work practices may see the policies not being implemented in the manner intended. As was indicated in a discussion
    today about this very issue, it seems that there are some people in management
    or supervisory positions who were promoted because of their operational skills
    and abilities. When it comes to the people aspect of management, they may
    contribute to perceptions of bullying because they too are under considerable
    pressure.

    In addition, workplace hazards and factors that contribute to bullying are not
    addressed so that even if training is conducted, the problem is still likely to
    occur given the environment in which all parties are expected to perform.

    I am in agreement with Evelyn about training. I would go so far to say that the
    one hour sessions are only conducted to show that some training has been
    conducted. I recently spoke to an employee in an organisation who had
    been given a self paced learning package to complete, with a short turn around.
    The package was duly completed. Was there any benefit for the
    individual and the organisation? I would suggest no, because the employee
    indicated that they did not understand or remember the content, the assessment
    was basically a ‘follow the text and complete the quiz’ assessment.

    It is one thing to provide a presentation on the policy and procedures.
    Managers and workers need to be in face to face sessions where they can
    test their understanding, participate in scenarios and learn what the policy
    means in the workplace.

  • http://www.egliassessments.com/ Bernie Althofer

    Public and private sector organisations do conduct a range of training initiatives designed to facilitate the prevention, detection, reporting and resolution of various forms of counterproductive workplace behaviours such as bullying.

    Bullying may thrive where:

    Poor people management, practices and skills exist
    There is inappropriate management style or lack of supervision
    Overwork happens
    Role ambiguity occurs
    Poor consultation processes occur
    There are inconsistent work flows and reporting procedures
    The level and nature of training is inadequate
    There are unreasonable performance expectations
    There are work places with high levels of job dissatisfaction

    However, in some cases, common hazards or risk factors that contribute to bullying may not be taken into consideration. Some of these common hazards/ risk factors
    include:

    Negative leadership styles (Includes autocratic styles and styles that are too
    relaxed with inadequate supervision and feedback.
    Organisational change
    Workplace relationships
    Organisational/workplace culture
    Human resources systems
    Inappropriate systems of work
    Poor workplace relationships
    Workforce characteristics

    In addition, some of the reasons why counterproductive workplace behaviours e.g. bullying is ignored can include:

    Responses are reactive rather than proactive
    Not seen as a core business activity
    Organisation focuses only on operational activities
    Lack of understanding about what is and what is not negative workplace behaviours
    e.g. workplace bullying
    Culture of tolerance leading to acceptability
    Lack of data showing extent, magnitude or costs of negative workplace behaviours
    e.g. workplace bullying
    Lack of reporting and lack of action
    Investigations fail to get to bottom of the incident
    Managers and staff not trained in all aspects of risk management
    Top down approach taken in relation to risk management
    Lack of consultation (with employees or clients/customers) – silo mentality
    Negative rather than positive
    —Unsystematic and inconsistent
    Organisation culture that tacitly supports or encourages negative workplace behaviours e.g. workplace bullying
    Part of the organisation where it is malignant – toxic, institutionalised and under
    the radar, is systemic and infects the whole system
    Politics of reporting counterproductive workplace behaviours e.g. workplace bullying
    that can cost people their job
    Dirty little secret no-one wants to talk about

    It seems that when the above hazards or risk factors are combined with the reasons why bullying is ‘ignored’ then there can be both organisational and/or reputational damage.

    ORGANISATIONAL
    Negative or adverse publicity e.g. David Jones
    Litigation and increased workers compensation premiums
    Loss of ‘employer of choice’ status – employer brand
    Sabotage and failure to address legal risks
    Allegations of corruption
    Loss of productivity
    Downgrading of credit ratings and declining market share

    INDIVIDUAL
    Adverse publicity e.g. Ashby v Slipper
    Criminal charges, ligation, vicarious liability and defamation
    Branding as ‘vexatious complainant’
    Legal, medical, physical and psychological costs
    Investigation costs
    Training costs

    When there is a deeper appreciation and understanding of the need to be more involved in the proactive and preventive approach, based on the potential level of risk exposure that can arise from not addressing the above issues, the approach taken to training or learning and development may change.

Search


Connect with AIM

Subscribe to the AIM Blog

Short on time? Sign up to receive a weekly summary of posts


AIM Privacy Policy & Collection Statement

Categories

  • Articles
  • Management Insider
  • Management Today
  • News
  • Q & A
  • Research

Archives

Recent Posts

Do women have to make hard choices to get ahead?
Feb 18, 2015
But I’ve already got a degree: the value of postgraduate education
Feb 13, 2015
An innovation recourse for the human resource
Feb 10, 2015
The 4 c’s of social media marketing
Feb 06, 2015
Management Article Round-up
Feb 05, 2015

Popular Posts

7 Leadership Lessons from AFL Legend Tommy Hafey
4 Comments
Happiness at Work with Dr Timothy Sharp
3 Comments
Why Should Supervisors and New Managers Develop Emotional Intelligence?
2 Comments
Practice Makes Permanent
2 Comments
A Problem That Cannot Be Ignored
2 Comments
Contact AIM | Privacy Policy & Collection Statement | Home © 1998 - 2014 Australian Institute of Management

Connect with AIM