Workplace bullying and harassment: building a culture of - Acas

20 Pages·2006·0.42 MB·English

Acas Policy Discussion Papers
No 4, June 2006
Workplace bullying and harassment: building a culture
of respect
Reports charting an alarming Despite the majority of
increase of bullying and organisations now operating
The Acas Policy Discussion
harassment have been an anti-bullying policy, there
Papers series is designed
widespread in the British media is evidence of a persistent gap
to stimulate discussion
during the past decade. Calls between policy and practice.
and debate about key
about bullying and harassment In a 2005 report by the
employment relations
to Acas’ own helpline in 2004/ campaigning forum ‘Opportunity
issues.
05 numbered over 45,000, a Now’, 59 per cent of women
disturbing statistic. Yet, despite managers and 74 per cent
This Acas Policy Discussion
the worrying indications that of male managers said that
paper was written
bullying and harassment are they felt ill-equipped to handle
by Professor Duncan
on the increase, many people instances of bullying and
Lewis, Acas Professor of
Workplace Futures at the remain unclear as to what harassment of women in their
Business School of the these terms really mean. team. The report, based on a
University of Glamorgan. The emergence of workplace survey of 800 line managers,
bullying and harassment concluded that more training
Special thanks are given as serious social and investment was required on
to staff at the Cardiff organisational issues cannot be the part of organisations
Acas office who gave questioned. Research evidence if managers were to deal
their time to outline from across the globe indicates effectively with bullying and
their experiences of
that significant numbers of harassment issues.
dealing with bullying
the working population feel This Acas Policy Discussion
and harassment with
they are experiencing bullying Paper aims to offer clarity
employers and employees.
or harassment of one kind or and guidance so that we
another. What is less clear is might better understand the
We welcome your
the legitimacy of these claims. complexities and ambiguities
comments and opinions.
This is because workplace of bullying and harassment,
These should be sent
bullying and harassment have to help improve the working
to the authors c/o
only risen to the fore and been environment for us all. It also
[email protected]
reported on in the last 10 years outlines Acas’ experience of
or so. Researchers and policy dealing with these issues and
makers are only now beginning examines:
to understand the difference
between genuine bullying and • definitions of workplace
inappropriate behaviour. As bullying and harassment
with any emerging field, there
will be confusion before there • the legislative and policy
is clarity. context
• the extent of the problem in UK both unwanted acts. Key to understanding
workplaces whether either bullying or harassment has
occurred is not whether the conduct was
• the individual and organisational impact
intended on the part of the perpetrator, but
of bullying and harassment
whether it was unwanted on the part of the
recipient.
• the incidence of different forms of
The other key difference between bullying
negative behaviour, such as harassment
and harassment, that the above definitions
against minority ethnic groups and
make clear, is that harassment is linked to a
‘upwards’ bullying
personal characteristic of the recipient, and
• the most effective prevention strategies therefore linked to anti-discrimination law in
and this country.
The terms used to describe bullying tend
• the moral and business case for to vary between countries and studies. For
effectively tackling bullying and example, in much of Europe ‘mobbing’ is
harassment. used instead of bullying, while in the US the
term bullying has only recently replaced the
Defining bullying and harassment more general term ‘emotional abuse’.
It has been suggested that focusing on
There is considerable confusion about definitions is not that important. Rather, it is
the similarities – and indeed differences the diversity of our knowledge that informs
– between bullying and harassment. our thinking about bullying and harassment.
While there is clear anti-discrimination Neatly bounded definitions of bullying and
legislation covering, for example, race, sex harassment – that establish set margins
and disability, bullying is far less clearly for behaviour – may prove unsatisfactory.
defined. Acas defines bullying as ‘offensive, For example, some individuals could fail to
intimidating, malicious or insulting qualify even though they have legitimate
behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power grievances, while others may be forced to
through means intended to undermine, shoehorn their own situation into the terms
humiliate, denigrate or injure the recipient.’ of the definition.
Acas’ definition of harassment is For example, one well used and broadly
‘unwanted conduct affecting the dignity of accepted definition of workplace bullying
men and women in the workplace. It may be suggests that for bullying to count as
related to age, sex, race, disability, religion, bullying, the experience must occur
sexual orientation, nationality or any repeatedly and regularly over time, for
personal characteristic of the individual, and example, six months. If such a boundary
may be persistent or an isolated incident.’ was established in a policy document or
The harassment definition makes clear definition, how would someone who had
that an individual’s dignity is affected experienced bullying for four months feel?
by harassing behaviour and that the Would their case be dismissed as failing to
harassment is unwanted. While the definition qualify? Could they be forced into enduring
of bullying does not express bullying as more bullying for a further eight weeks
unwanted, it is taken for granted that no in order to comply with the accepted
one desires bullying or that their dignity definition? It makes more sense for those
is affected by bullying: the reality of both dealing with bullying and harassment to
bullying and harassment is that they are have latitude in interpreting a definition.
2
What follows is therefore a broad set of preclude an individual from bringing forward
principles and behaviour around which a their own grievance, nor should it prevent
definition may be more helpfully constructed. managers from identifying examples of
Workplace bullying is most often bullying and harassment.
defined as the repeated, less favourable
treatment of a person by another or
The legislative context
others in the workplace, which may be
considered unreasonable and inappropriate Explaining the differences between
workplace practice. Unreasonableness or bullying and harassment is difficult. In
inappropriateness relate to actions that are many situations, the terms are used
offensive, intimidating, humiliating, or that interchangeably although ‘bullying’ is more
degrade, ridicule or insult an individual at widely used than harassment.
work. Often – although not exclusively –
these actions are carried out by managers or Bullying
supervisors against their staff. Bullying and
harassment tend to consist of negative acts The legislative context of workplace bullying
that occur regularly and repeatedly. A good is difficult to interpret. As the legislation
legal tenet to apply is ‘would a reasonable changes with regularity and case law sets
person observing such behaviour see this as new precedents, it is wise to seek up-to-date
bullying or harassment?’ advice from a legal source.
Verbal actions generally regarded as Most people would agree that the law
typifying workplace bullying include yelling, should encourage preventative measures to
screaming, angry outbursts, name-calling, minimise occurrences of bullying at work,
inappropriate comments about a person’s but there is no specific legal provision
appearance, malicious teasing or being made protecting employees from bullying. We
the brunt of pranks or practical jokes. Other would also expect the law to protect all
bullying behaviour includes: employees and to recognise employers who
take proactive steps to deal with bullying
• excessive or harsh criticism of work or incidents as they arise. Similarly, we would
abilities expect the law to provide aid to victims,

including compensation or other entitlements
• isolating employees from normal work
if they have suffered from bullying in the
interaction
workplace.
There is a range of statutes that can be
• ignoring the person
relied on in cases of bullying. For example,
• deliberately withholding productive work the Employment Rights Act 1996 enables
opportunities an employee to claim unfair constructive
dismissal if the employer has failed to
• assigning meaningless tasks maintain trust and confidence and has

breached their employment contract.
• undermining work performance
The employer’s duty of care under health
• devaluing work efforts and and safety law could also apply to cases

of alleged bullying. As well as forming a
• failure to give credit when due.
common law duty, there is the Health and
Safety at Work Act 1974. An employer could
These descriptions of bullying allow for broad be civilly liable for damages if inadequate
interpretation. Any definition should not steps have been taken to fulfil its duty
3
to an employee. In the worst cases, the • discrimination on grounds of race, sex,
perpetrator of the bullying behaviour could disability, sexual orientation, religion,
be criminally liable under the Public Order or other belief if employees believe that
Act 1997 or the Protection from Harassment an employer has not dealt with their
Act 1997. concerns
• unfair constructive dismissal and/or
Harassment
Harassment, in its general interpretation, • criminal penalties for intentional
tends to be applied to front line employees harassment.
such as hospital or social services workers
From an employer’s perspective it is clear
who are experiencing unwanted attention
that, to avoid legal actions, a preventative
from members of the public. In its
strategy is the best course of action.
more specific interpretation, it refers to
discriminatory behaviour, for example, of
a sexual or racial nature. It is important Why does bullying occur?
to understand that in an employment
There are many possible answers to this
law context, harassment only applies to
question. Research evidence is varied and
behaviours that are covered by the various
typically focuses on one of three different
strands of anti-discrimination legislation.
areas: people who have been traumatised
A key development has been the UK’s
by their experience of being bullied at work,
adoption of the Equal Treatment Amendment
the exploration of workplace bullying within
Directive (2002/73). This directive
a working population, or the use of incidence
has effectively altered the 1975 Sex
studies.
Discrimination Act to allow ‘free standing’
There is significant evidence indicating
harassment claims, bringing the provision
that the speed of organisational change
into line with the other anti-discrimination
is a contributory factor in the incidence
strands. From October 2006, of course,
of bullying and harassment. Today,
the new legal definition of, and remedy for,
organisations have to cope with the
harassment will also apply to age.
demands of a rapidly changing and
Employers are liable for actions of their
competitive environment that in turn can
employees who commit bullying and
lead to pressures in how they manage staff.
harassment unless reasonable steps have
Employers also have to adapt quickly to
been taken to prevent it – this is known
a vast range of challenges exacerbated by
as vicarious liability. Action could still be
globalisation, for example, the pressure
taken against an employer even though an
of technological change, the need for
employee has left the organisation. Equally,
corporate social responsibility and enhanced
action could be taken against an employer
ethical practice, and fluctuating economic
for behaviour of third parties such as clients
conditions. In an environment of constant
or customers when these parties are under
restructuring, the result can be a decline in
the control of the employer.
staff morale. All these factors increase the
An employer who does not take reasonable
pressure on both managers and employees
steps to prevent bullying and harassment
and set the scene for an environment in
of an employee could therefore be liable for
which workplace bullying may proliferate.
any of the following:
Organisational pressures such as
• a breach of duty of care to provide a safe
these might encourage the development
and healthy working environment
of cultures where the achievement of
4
organisational goals justifies the means. behaviours associated with bullying than is
Where such a culture develops, managers reported. This evidence also means that the
may be predisposed or forced to use label of bullying may act as a barrier to our
whatever means are at their disposal understanding of the phenomenon. We will
to organise their human resources. This return to this later.
process might create an environment of While a number of studies among different
perceived bullying. working populations have been conducted
Change puts pressure on the way people in the UK, there appears to be no research
surveying the workforce economy-wide.
relate to each other. This pressure can result
There is therefore no reliable estimate
in inappropriate behaviour and perceptions
of the overall number of UK employees
of, or actual, bullying.
experiencing workplace bullying. This is
A small number of research psychologists
because UK surveys of bullying are mere
have argued that personalities of both bully
snapshots based on individual employers,
and victim help to inform our understanding.
particular professions, specific sectors or
It has been suggested that those who are
trade union memberships.
seen to be the perpetrators of bullying have
Evidence from the Acas helpline in
limited social skills, are autocratic, have
2004/05 showed that most calls about
poor communication skills, or enjoy hurting
bullying were from employees rather than
others. Conversely, it has been suggested
employers, and that most callers were
that targets or victims of bullying are
women. The majority of calls were from
vulnerable or are not strong enough to resist
people aged over 35 and minority ethnic
the bullying.
groups were over-represented in the calls
Far from a few dysfunctional individuals
made. The public sector was represented
being responsible for the phenomenon,
more than the private sector in calls to the
the contributory factors can actually be
helpline.
many and varied. They might include
organisational culture, management style,
Individual impact
performance expectations, inadequate
staffing levels and a lack of mutual trust There are many studies quantifying the
within the employment relationship. effects of workplace bullying on those
people who experience it. Researchers of
How many people experience bullying workplace bullying have described a range of
at work? health effects caused by workplace bullying.
Psychological effects such as severe stress
On an international level, the research symptoms or anxiety, panic attacks, sleep
indicates that between 5 per cent and disturbances, concentration difficulties,
50 per cent of employees will experience mistakes and accidents at work, smoking,
bullying at some time in their working excessive drinking, and overeating have
lives. More time-specific analysis indicates all been reported. International health
that between 10 per cent and 20 per cent authorities report physiological effects
of employees report feeling bullied at any contributing to raised blood pressure
one time. It is important to note that, in and heart disease, reduced resistance to
some studies, employees recognised that infection, stomach and bowel problems,
they were suffering the negative acts that skin problems, fear or anxiety or depression
constitute bullying but did not subsequently leading to suicide, and severe loss of
label themselves as being bullied. This confidence and self-esteem. Studies have
finding requires further research but, if shown that medical support or professional
shown to be commonplace, would mean that counselling are often needed to deal with the
many more people experience the negative symptoms resulting from bullying.
5
It is important to understand that the international research studies. There are
impact of bullying is not confined to the also similar productivity effects on co-
person on the receiving end. Colleagues workers who witness bullying. For example,
who witness the negative behaviour can be in the case of staff who have resigned
prone to health and emotional effects, and because of bullying, a realistic estimate
domestic relationships with partner or family of lost productivity costs should also
can also be affected. include the initially lower efficiency level
Unfortunately, symptoms tend to persist of replacement employees until they reach
over long periods: in some cases, the the same standard of performance as those
psychological experience of bullying can they replaced. This also applies, although
last many years after the bullying has to a lesser extent, to situations where the
ceased. For example, one overseas study person who has experienced the bullying
reported that three-quarters of people who transfers to a new position within the same
experienced long-term bullying showed organisation.
symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder Lost opportunity costs also need to
(PTSD), including 65 per cent of people be identified. These exist where people
where the actual bullying had ceased five who experience bullying do not take
years previously. The individual cost is often up training or promotion opportunities,
immeasurable. or become inflexible about working
hours or arrangements that in turn
The organisational impact reduce organisational opportunities and
productivity. The potential loss of employee
It is very difficult to come up with an innovation and creativity can be hard to
accurate picture of organisational costs. quantify but can have a serious effect on
From existing research it has been missed company growth and profits.
established that direct economic effects, The negative impact on employee
such as the cost of paid sick leave relations and on customer and client
and replacing staff, and the legal and relationships also needs to be considered.
compensation outlay arising from complaints Corporate reputation can be seriously
and grievances, are significant. European damaged in high-profile litigious cases, with
estimates put the cost at between £18,000 the resultant impact on shareholders and
to £60,000 per case in Sweden and other key stakeholders. In the modern,
£30,000 per case in the UK. One of the media-intensive gaze of society, corporate
limitations of such studies is that they tend social responsibility (CSR) extends beyond
to be restricted to those impacts readily glib claims of corporate-social harmony
identifiable such as related absenteeism, to include the very real issue of internal
staff turnover, lost productivity, investigation stakeholder wellbeing. Bullying at work
time, local management time, and the time therefore counts as a very real cost to good
spent by other employees such as welfare CSR practice.
officers and senior managers. These cost
estimates are likely to be conservative.
Minority ethnic groups and bullying
Investment in any Employee Assistance
Programme and occupational health costs Evidence from a very recent report on
are often significant but concealed, for stress, health and ethnicity for the Health
example. and Safety Executive (HSE) found that racial
Other productivity effects such as reduced discrimination, especially when combined
work output, impaired decision making, with gender, is a significant influence on
reduced quality and increased wastage stress at work. In a broader social sense,
through errors have all been reported in UK society continues to evidence higher
6
crime rates for some minority ethnic groups, The Secret Policeman, showed determined
lower employment opportunities and high attempts to bully one member of staff, from
economic inactivity in some households. a minority ethnic background, out of the
Broad social and economic figures such as force. It is not difficult to see how anyone
these demonstrate significant disadvantage from a minority group who is working in
for minority ethnic peoples. This section such a culture could become easy prey for
therefore casts the spotlight on this one the workplace bully.
area of discrimination to provide some
insight into the incidence and experience
Should we separate bullying from
of racial harassment, while bearing in mind
racism?
that harassment covers all those groups
covered by the various strands of UK anti- There is limited research exploring the
discrimination law. link between bullying and racism. We do
Institutional racism within some UK not definitively know, in all cases, whether
organisations has been shown to continue to people who are bullied at work are being
exist. For example, the Macpherson report bullied because of their personality, their
into the Stephen Lawrence inquiry revealed race, their disability or their gender. More
clear evidence of institutional racism within research is needed to explore the underlying
the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The reasons for the inappropriate behaviour.
Commission for Racial Equality (CRE 2003) The existing research indicates that
indicated that institutional racism also stigmatised individuals exist because of both
existed in the Prison Service following the bullying and persistent racism. Whether
murder of Zahid Mubarek. Yet, despite such such stigmas are caused by racism first and
evidence, research into workplace bullying bullying – or indeed harassment – second,
against ethnic minority groups is in its or bullying first and race second, is in
infancy. one sense irrelevant. What should be of
Few studies have concentrated on primary concern is the abolition of negative
bullying and ethnicity directly, although behaviour, regardless of the labels applied.
secondary analysis has demonstrated that A glance at the research evidence may
specific problems exist for minority ethnic help to uncover the extent to which racism
employees. For example, a study of a plays a role in bullying behaviour. In a
regional UK Fire Service revealed bullying to recent study conducted in South Wales
be endemic, partly because of the culture among public sector workers, less than one
of the service but also because of ‘white in 10 (9 per cent) of white respondents said
male dominance’. It was argued that such that they had experienced bullying, while
a culture had a negative influence on both over a third (35 per cent) of minority ethnic
gender and race issues. The research respondents said that they had been bullied.
demonstrated how initiation ceremonies The research also revealed that minority
might be misconstrued as hostile or isolating ethnic individuals experienced more bullying
rather than as a universally applied ritual. from line managers as the perpetrator group
The conditional unwritten rule of having to compared to their white colleagues. This
‘fit-in’ appears to be a major cultural barrier was the most evident in negative behaviours
inside many organisations. such as demeaning work, continued criticism
We know from undercover TV reporting of and exclusion. Equally startling was the
some UK police forces that both new recruits finding that peer-to-peer bullying – for
and other employees hold discriminatory example, being patronised or belittled – was
beliefs. The 2004 documentary by the BBC, three to five times more likely to be reported
7
by minority ethnic employees compared to of people is prohibited. If such behaviour
white employees. is detected, it needs to be dealt with
These survey results, although gathered swiftly, consistently, and in accordance with
in one region, demonstrate that minority well-developed policies that address the
ethnic employees suffer consistently problem. Swift justice will help to prevent
higher levels of bullying compared to their or limit future occurrences. Any workplace
white colleagues. What is not discernable anti-bullying policy should also outline the
from this study is whether the bullying positive behaviours that are expected of
occurred directly because of racist attitudes. staff.
Nevertheless, the high incidence of reported The Welsh research also makes clear that
bullying by minority ethnic groups points to standardised intervention strategies for
the need for more research in this area. dealing with bullying are unlikely to work.
If the evidence indicates that managers
Fostering a culture of respect and peers are more likely to bully minority
ethnic groups than white employees, training
With the caveat of further research being and intervention strategies require careful
needed to verify the emerging evidence of targeting. Management training for this area
a higher level of bullying against black and will need to be distinct from other training
minority ethnic groups, the fact remains that programmes.
disadvantage at work exists, or is perceived With the UK and much of Western Europe
to exist, among minority ethnic employees. facing continued labour shortages in some
This finding also appears to be borne out by sectors, such as nursing and education,
the higher proportion of calls by people from and recruitment difficulties in others such
minority ethnic groups to the Acas helpline. as catering, hotels and tourism, we are
It is important to note that, while the increasingly reliant on non-UK labour
South Wales study focused on bullying and sources. Our reliance on global labour will
ethnicity, we should not lose sight of the force us all to consider the implication
importance of other forms of ‘difference’, of ‘difference’ at work and in society. An
whether this is the result of disability, organisation’s competitive advantage rarely
gender, sexual orientation or any other form comes from equipment or machinery. Rather,
of harassment. it arises from the quality, productivity,
The research indicates that organisational efficiency and effectiveness of its staff in
culture is a good starting point to dealing with customers, suppliers, other
understand the roots and incidence of some stakeholders and with each other. Instead
types of bullying and harassment. While of seeing difference as a source for attack,
being notoriously difficult to understand we should see difference as a foundation
and research, organisational culture of opportunity and competitive success. We
locates many prejudices. If cultures and should not discriminate, full stop.
sub-cultures exist between managers and
employees, or between peers that encourage
Understanding the routes that bullying
bullying of any minority group, this seriously
can take
disadvantages all employees.
It also means that managers specifically, Research conducted in the UK in 2000
and all employees more generally, have revealed that supervisors and managers
a responsibility to develop a workplace are increasingly vulnerable to workplace
culture where inappropriate behaviour bullying. In today’s leaner organisations,
is not tolerated. It should be made clear supervisory positions are scarcer and there
that behaviours associated with workplace is therefore greater competition for such
bullying and the discriminatory mistreatment positions. Furthermore, roles have been
8
enlarged and supervisors tend to be more It is increasingly reported that managers feel
vulnerable because of the intensity of vulnerable to inappropriate claims of bullying
change processes. by those staff who are unwilling to accept
In a 2005 study sponsored by Acas, performance targets, negative performance
UNISON and the Chartered Management appraisals or personal improvement plans.
Institute, well over a third (39 per cent) Staff members may use such environs
of managers reported being bullied in the to ‘get back’ at the manager by accusing
last three years with managers across all them of being a bully. In upwards bullying,
grades experiencing such behaviour. Middle it appears that any personal adversity
managers formed the group with the highest or hindrance is followed by a search for
incidence of being bullied, and the sources someone or something to blame, rather than
of such behaviour were not only hierarchical. accountability for one’s actions.
Bullying by junior colleagues was reported, There can be a very thin line between
for example, as was bullying by customers bullying and firm management. Managers
or clients. have a legitimate right to manage and set
Many more managers are now responsible realistic performance objectives, and raise
for aspects of people management than poor performance with team members. The
was the case two decades ago. Appraisals, key point is the manner in which managers
training, recruitment and selection, raise and communicate poor performance
performance management and other HR issues: for example, an open and inclusive
processes are increasingly the domain of management style can do far more to
the manager. These tasks, coupled with encourage better performance than an
tight budgetary constraints, can make the authoritarian management style.
management role a highly pressured one. The routes of bullying do not necessarily
One of the main reasons for the existence follow a vertical line either upwards or
of bullying relates to power and the abuse of downwards. As the Welsh research on
it. For some time, it has been reported that bullying and minority ethnic employees
most bullying in organisations is caused by shows, peer-to-peer bullying also exists.
managers who abuse their power because While bullying by managers towards
of the status they hold. While this is both subordinates is still the most common form
straightforward to understand and helps to of bullying, the upwards and horizontal
explain the phenomenon of bullying, it is forms are becoming more recognised and
only one piece of the jigsaw. Power is both need to be dealt with just as firmly. It has
formal and informal. It is formal because of been suggested that, if an organisation does
officially appointed roles, and it is informal not treat the claims of those who experience
because of associations with a person’s workplace bullying seriously, and deal with
influence, or a person’s knowledge and the situation carefully and quickly, it is
experience, or because of another person’s colluding with the perpetrator. Whatever the
vulnerabilities or lack of power. The potential source of the negative behaviour, prompt
therefore exists for those in informal action is essential.
positions of power to perpetrate workplace
bullying against those in formal positions of
A preventative policy
power, such as a supervisor or manager.
Legitimate management authority applied As indicated above, there appears to be
in performance management or appraisal a close correlation between the growth in
scenarios is fertile ground for false claims case law on bullying and harassment and
of bullying. Fear of being branded can make an increase in policy development in the
some line managers cautious about tackling area. The late 1990s saw a rush in policy
performance or capability issues. writing by employers and trades unions as
9
they struggled to have in place preventative • the positive behaviours that are expected
measures to tackle bullying and harassment. of employees
Numerous policies are to be found on
organisational websites and most follow a • how harassment and bullying are covered
standard format. But are they appropriate? by existing legislation
One of the fundamental problems of policies
• some reference to the organisation’s
is that they focus on the negative alone: for
commitment to recent legislative changes
example, outlining negative behaviours and
on race equality (in statute from April
actions and advising how they will be dealt
2006)
with. This policy discussion paper advocates
the more positive stance of developing a
• procedural details, including timescales
Dignity at Work policy, as indeed a number
and formal and informal processes
of employers and trade unions have done.
Perhaps we should turn our attention to the
• a contact name and secondary name to
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
cover the possibility that such contacts
where article 1 states:
may be themselves accused of bullying
“All Human Beings are born free and equal
in dignity and rights. They are endowed • statements on fairness of process,
with reason and conscience and should appeals, guidance and support and
act towards one another in a spirit of
• how this policy fits into wider statements
brotherhood”.
of values, ethical conduct and corporate
Construction of a policy around a set of social responsibility practices.
positive behaviour principles like these could
These central policy components are a
help to promote standards to be upheld that
minimum and not a maximum. A positive
reinforce the organisation’s expectations.
approach, that allows for proactive
Failure to uphold these standards would then
mechanisms to implement the policy, should
have consequences for those who fail to
also be incorporated. Regular review should
meet them.
be a key feature of any organisational policy.
Induction and training are also key
Policy framework forums to help prevent bullying, and a good
opportunity to promote the employer’s
The law, as it stands, requires positive
expectations for good conduct. There are
action from employers and it is essential
several factors that can contribute to the
that a policy on bullying and/or harassment,
success of any such initiatives, for example:
however named, should include the
following: • the active support of senior management
• a glossary of terms and what they mean • appointing a senior HR and trade union/
works council representative to have
• examples of negative behaviours that direct input
may constitute bullying and harassment
(also making clear that the list is not • training those with specific responsibilities
exhaustive) within the policy and
• a clear statement that the behaviours • regular review of complaints and
outlined will not be tolerated and if grievances to observe patterns of
proven, could result in dismissal behaviour that may lead on to bullying or
harassment.
10