TOP 10 REASONS FOR BEING TARGETED

1. I remained independent, refused to be controlled. (70%)

2. My competence and reputation were threatening. (67%)

3. The Bully’s personality. (59%)

4. My being liked by co-workers and customers (47%)

5. In retaliation for my reporting unethical or illegal conduct, whistleblowing. (38%)

6. I was focused solely on work and ignored the politics. 36%)

7. Bully had personal problems. (35%)

8. I am nonconfrontative and easily overrun by others. (33%)

9. I was at a time of personal medical or life vulnerability or changes. (30%)

10. I could not afford to leave the job and the bully knew it. (30%)

* From Workplace Bullying Institute (2003)(non-scientific survey of 1,000 volunteer respondents who visited WBI’s web site).

STATE HARASSMENT/DISCRIMINATION LAWS

  • California passed a general anti-harassment law in 2014, AB 1825, that went into effect on January 1, 2015. It requires that supervisors in all firms with 50 or more employees receive training in “abusive conduct.” This requirement was added to an existing law requiring employers to provide two hours of sexual harassment training  to supervisors within the first six months of the employee’s assumption of a supervisory role. The new law defines “abusive conduct” as:

  . . . conduct of an employer or employee in the workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.  [It] may include repeated infliction of verbal abuse, such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults, and epithets, verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work performance.”

Malice is conduct that is “intended by the defendant to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others.”

The new law states that a “single act shall not constitute abusive conduct, unless especially severe or egregious.”

  • Tennessee approved a “Healthy Workplace Act” in 2014 that is designed to curb verbal abuse at work by making public-sector employers immune to bullying-related lawsuits if they adopt a policy that complies with the law. The law applies only to public-sector employers, and administrators aren’t required to follow guidelines. If they do, however  they receive immunity from potential lawsuits.
  • Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed HB 216 into law in 2014 to mandate Abusive Conduct training for public sector The law requires state agencies to train supervisors and employees about how to prevent abusive conduct. The law takes effect July 1, 2015. Utah is the second state to pass a training-only law to begin to address abusive conduct in the workplace.

Every state has laws that protect employees from unlawful discrimination. These laws may be more expansive than similar federal laws, encompassing more employers and additional classes of victims.  They may offer protection that is  not available under federal law. For example, the U.S. Congress has yet to adopt legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but almost half of the states and the District of Columbia have adopted such laws.  Thus, a victim of harassment based on sexual orientation may be able to file a lawsuit in state court that would not be possible in federal court.  State  discrimination laws may offer a wider range of damages, especially with claims related to age discrimination.  Many attorneys prefer to bring suit in state courts to avoid federal courts, which tend to be hostile to employment law claims.  You should check the laws in your state.

Other State Remedies

STATUTORY & COMMON LAW REMEDIES

Note: Workers’ compensation laws may preempt tort (personal injury) claims in some states.

  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

    (IIED).  A tort is a civil action to redress a wrongdoing. According to the Restatement of Torts 2nd § 46: “One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress, and if bodily harm to the other results from it, for such bodily harm.”

One court found the conduct must be “‘so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community’…but does not extend to ‘mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.'” Porter v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co., 2002 U.S. Dist LEXIS 20627, at 5-6 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 25, 2002) (dismissing intentional infliction of emotional distress claim where employee claimed that he was falsely accused of fraud and bullied and intimidated during questioning about the alleged fraud).

However, the Supreme Court of Indiana said in dicta in Raess v. Doescher, 883 N.E.2d 790 (Ind. 2008) that workplace bullying could be a form of  IIED .  Id. at 799.  In that particular case, the jury rejected the plaintiff’s IIED claim but did find in favor of the plaintiff on a claim for assault. The jury awarded the plaintiff $325,000 in damages.  The Indiana Supreme Court found there was substantial evidence or reasonable inferences to support the assault claim and upheld the damages award.

The plaintiff in Raess was hospital operating room perfusionist who claimed the defendant, a cardiovascular surgeon, was “angry at the plaintiff about reports to hospital administration about the defendant’s treatment of other perfusionists” and “aggressively and rapidly advanced on the plaintiff with clenched fists, piercing eyes, beet-red face, popping veins, and screaming and swearing at him.” 883 N.E.2d at 794.  The plaintiff, fearing imminent physical harm, backed up against the wall and held his hands up. Instead of striking the plaintiff, the surgeon stopped, turned, and stormed out of the room, declaring, “you’re finished. you’re history.” Id.

The plaintiff did not return to work, in part, because he developed a panic disorder and depression, limiting his ability to perform under pressure in an operating room.

(Note: This case marked the first time that Gary Namie, the founder of the Workplace Bullying Institute, was allowed to testify as an expert on workplace bullying, over the objections of the defense. Namie called the 2001 incident an “episode of workplace bullying” and called the doctor “a workplace abuser.”  Defense counsel argued Namie was not qualified to be an expert because his is not a clinical psychologist, and that Namie based his report on a telephone call with the Plaintiff, without ever speaking to the Defendant. The Indiana Court of Appeals  ruled the trial court committed reversible error in allowing the doctor to be labelled a workplace bully and overturned the jury award.  However, the Indiana Supreme Court reinstated the jury’s award, finding, among other things, that the defendant’ s objection to Namie’s testimony was procedurally flawed.  One of the four justices dissented and said Namie’s testimony was highly prejudicial and violated an evidentiary rule that permits expert opinion testimony only as to  “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge” to “assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.”

See also, Subbe-Hirt v. Baccigalupi, 94 F.3d 111 (1996), where the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a jury could find the plaintiff, a female salesperson, was the victim of IIED by her boss, Robert Baccigalupi. The Court said the Subbe-Hirt was not limited to damages under the New Jersey’s worker’s compensation law because of evidence  of deliberate intent on Baccigalupi’s part.  The Court said Subbe-Hirt had demonstrated her supervisor’s conduct was sufficiently outrageous to support an IIED claim.  Among other things, the Court said, witnesses testified:

” … Baccigalupi replaced females’ given names … with the term “cunt,” to depersonalize and deride the women in the office … Moreover, he would ask Subbe-Hirt for her resignation almost every time she was in the office. Baccigalupi even went so far as to have an unsigned resignation on his desk; we would then ask Subbe-Hirt “why don’t you sign it; if you don’t want to sign it, go on disability … Baccigalupi would “grill” her on work she submitted, asking “why did you do this, what did you do here, what was said here?” If he was not “satisfied” with her answer, he would call Subbe-Hirt’s clients in front of her and say “Elaine says this; what do you say?”

… After one meeting with Baccigalupi, Subbe-Hirt “literally blacked out behind the wheel and hit a tractor trailer just from stress and emotion[,]” suffering severe injuries that required eight days of hospitalization. This incident forced Subbe-Hirt to take temporary disability leave; indeed, her treating psychiatrist has opined that she remains totally disabled with post traumatic stress disorder triggered by Baccigalupi’s badgering and intimidation.”

Key evidence was a note Subbe-Hirt presented to  Baccigalupi from her psychiatrist stating she  was capable of working but should not be placed under undue stress. He refused her request to place it in her personnel file, and continued his allegedly abusive behavior.

  • Breach of Contract

    Is there an anti-bullying or anti-harassment provision in your employee handbook? In an “at-will” employment states, where an employee can be fired for any reason (except illegal discrimination), this might be the basis for a lawsuit alleging the employer breached its contract of employment.

  • Defamation.

    A communication is defamatory if it tends to harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him. There must be a false and defamatory statement, an unprivileged publication to a third party, and fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher.

  • Assault and/or battery

    If this does not rise to the seriousness of a criminal act, it may still be an intentional tort. Assault consists of intentionally and voluntarily causing the reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact. Battery consists of intentional and harmful or offensive physical contact.  See above entry for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress where a defendant was found guilty of assault in a workplace bullying case where a doctor approached him in a rage with raised fists but never actually touched him.

  • Invasion of Privacy

    This includes an intentional interference with a person’s interest in solitude or seclusion, either as to his/her person or as to his/her private affairs or concerns. The intrusion must be of a kind that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. It might include such things as placing a camera or a peephole in an employee bathroom or forcing your way into a person’s hotel room.

  • False imprisonment.

    An actor is subject to liability to another for false imprisonment if h/she intends to and does confine the other or a third person in a confined space and the other is conscious of the confinement or harmed by it.   This might work if, for example, if a bully boss confines you inside an office and blocks your ability to leave.

  • Tortuous interference with the employment contract or business relationships.

    Generally, a third party must  knowingly induce the employer to break the employment contract.  Theoretically, it could be argued the supervisor acted outside the scope of  his/her employment relationship in bullying the target .

  • Failure of an employer to exercise reasonable care with respect to the hiring, supervision and retention of the abuser

    See Daka, Inc. v. McCrae, 839 A.2d 682 (D.C. 2003), where a male banquet chef complained he was sexually harassed by a male supervisor, the catering director, for several months after he refused the supervisor’s dinner invitation. The chef was subsequently demoted and fired.  The chef could show that other supervisors were aware of the harassment but did nothing. He sued for negligent supervision, and a jury awarded him $187,500 in compensatory damages and $4.8 million in punitive damages. Negligent supervision claims generally require a tort to be committed by the supervised employee before the employer can be held liable.   A tort is a  civil wrong recognized by the law as the basis for a lawsuit that results in an injury or harm. This remedy also has been successfully invoked by victims of sexual assault where a company hired a supervisor who had a record of sex offenses and in police brutality cases, where an officer had a record of complaints.

  • Constructive dismissal:

    If you are forced to quit a job to escape a bully boss, you may still be able to get unemployment benefits. An employee can argue the employer changed the fundamental terms and conditions of the job for which the employee was hired, effectively dismissing the employee.

(05/11)

For Employers

Bullying is a costly management problem.  Yet, all too often, instead of being the first line of defense, the Human Resources Department reinforces the bullying and further undermines the victim. The result is costly turnover, poor morale, and expensive litigation.  Stopping bullying makes economic sense for employers.  Does your company have an anti-bullying policy?  Is it strictly enforced, even when the bully is a highly valued employee?  Are employees encouraged to report bullying and do you insure they are protected from retaliation?   If not, you are inviting needless expense and risk.  – PGB

________________________________

“Bully bosses are the bane of management. They are the ones who take credit for their subordinates’ ideas, engage in abusive behavior, humiliate employees in public, talk behind people’s backs, and send others to do their dirty work. Bullies often make the numbers; that’s why it’s hard to get rid of them. When bullies resist all help, they must be removed from the organization. FROM:  Article by John Baldoni, Harvard Management Update; Sept. 2005, Vol. 10 Issue 9, p1-3, 3p.

_________________________________

THE TAB FOR EMPLOYERS

It is astonishing that American employers tolerate workplace bullying.  Never-mind the devastation that bullying wreaks on the target, bullying wreaks havoc on the company’s bottom line. Bullying results in higher health costs, needless turnover, lower morale and motivation, lost work hours, absenteeism, etc. etc. etc.

Consider:

  • According to Christine Pearson at UNC-Chapel Hill and Christine Porath of USC’s Marshall School of Business (The Cost of Bad Behavior: How Incivility Is Damaging Your Business and What to Do About It (2009))  targets of bullying react in the following ways:

-48% decreased their work effort,

-47% decreased their time at work,

-38% decreased their work quality,

-66% said their performance declined,

-80% lost work time worrying about the incident,

-63% lost time avoiding the offender

  • Bullying causes needless turnover.

According to the Level Playing Field Institute, more than two million managers and professionals flee their jobs every year as a result of workplace unfairness, including bullying. The cost of replacing just one $8-per-hour employee can range from $3,500 to $25,000, depending on the industry. The  exodus of two million workers costs businesses $64 billion.

Research shows that bullying also contributes to turnover among witnesses of bullying, who suffer emotional distress that is almost as great as that experienced by the victims of bullying. Furthermore, more than a quarter of employees who leaves because of unfairness do not recommend the employer to potential employees, and many do not recommend the company’s products and services to others.

  • Bullying results in costly litigation.

Even if the employer wins, it can cost the employer tens of thousands of dollars to defend the lawsuit.

The employer doesn’t always win. In Indiana, a medical technician was awarded $325,000 after successfully suing a surgeon who bullied him in an operating room for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and assault.

A lawsuit, and attendant publicity, can be harmful to a business in terms of public perception and the ability to attract quality employees.

____________________________________

Five Tips for Businesses on Handling Workplace Bullying

(Excerpted from Teresa A. Daniel,  Stop Bullying at Work (ISBN 9781586441357, September 2009, $17.95)

To properly approach the bully and create individual change:

1.  Confront and monitor existing bullies.

– Talking directly to the bully about the consequences of his or her behavior;

– Training bullies about how to treat others fairly in the workplace; and

– Implementing performance evaluation and appraisal mechanism to discourage bullying behaviors, such as a 360-degree performance feedback system.”

2. Obtain a senior management commitment to a bully-free environment. Organizations need to demonstrate in visible and continuous ways that senior management is committed to addressing and eradicating the bullying phenomenon. Because of the power differential that exists in the relationship between the bully and the targeted employee, the reluctance to report bullying appears to be linked to the belief that nothing will be done and also to the fear of retaliation if something is done.

3.   Develop an anti-bullying policy. “Any policy that you develop should be customized to fit your organization’s specific culture, values, and needs. An anti-bullying policy will generally address the following types of issues: your company’s commitment to a culture of mutual respect and zero-tolerance of bullying, clear definitions of bullying, managerial responsibilities, complaint procedures, any support or counseling offered to the target, assurances that all complaints are taken seriously and will be treated confidentially, a ‘no retaliation’ provision, and who to contact to get further information.”

4.  Create monitoring, investigation, and complaint systems, disciplinary procedures, and follow-up measures. “Whether or not you elect to develop and implement an anti-bullying policy, a specific internal group or department needs to be identified as being responsible for receiving complaints and educating your employees. An investigation is a necessary response to a bullying complaint. All complaint resolution systems must include an effective disciplinary procedure that spells out the consequences for failure to abide by the company’s policy, including progressive discipline.”

5.  Train employees about conduct expectations. “Periodic training of employees must be conducted to ensure a culture of respect and accountability, and also that all employees understand the company’s expectations about their workplace conduct – what is and is not acceptable – and the consequences for failing to observe these requirements.”

——————————————————–

Research shows that  Human Resources often creates an environment where bullying “remains unchallenged, allowed to thrive or actually encouraged in an indirect way.” If the victim seeks help, HR  protects the employer’s interests rather than to seek a fair and just resolution. “The absence of collective voice … renders employees completely vulnerable, with no avenues for redressal … Issues of justice and morality inevitably arise … With managers being judge and jury combined, the correctness of managerial decisions remains largely unchecked … .”  FROM:  Premilla D’Cruz and Ernesto Noronha, Protecting My Interests: HRM and Targets’ Coping with Workplace Bullying, The Qualitative Report Vol.15, Number 3 (May 2010) http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-3/dcruz.pdf.

_________________________

In the case of despots, you need to depose them; in the case of bullies, you need to boot them. Few are worthy of rehabilitation. Power for them is both a means to an end as well as the end itself. “ – John Baldoni, 12 Steps to Power Presence: How to Assert Your Authority to Lead, (2010)

—————————————————

Excerpt from the Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workplace at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell:

Organizational Practices that cause worker stress:

  • Favoritism
  • Inflexible rules
  • Low pay and benefits
  • Poor supervision
  • Job insecurity
  • Responsibility without authority
  • Lack of input in decisions
  • Poor chances for advancement or growth
  • Unclear responsibilities or expectations
  • Multiple supervisors
  • Lack of recognition
  • Poor communication
  • Mandatory Overtime

* Patricia G. Barnes is an attorney with experience in both domestic violence and employment law. She is available for consultation, training on creating a healthy and positive management environment for employees and speaking engagements.






###

The Healthy Workplace Bill (2010)

This is  the  2010 version of the Healthy Workplace Bill,, drafted by  David C. Yamada, Professor, Suffolk University Law School, and supported by the Workplace Bullying Institute.  This proposal was sharply criticized by international scholars and others as being far less protective of worker rights than legislation in other industrialized countries. The bill has been improved since 2010 but still is problematic.  In any case, after more than a decade, it appears unlikely that a state-by-state approach is a viable option to the problem of workplace bullying. This blog supports a federal national approach, recognizing that workers who may need the most protection live in so-called “pro business” states that  will never adopt a workplace anti-bully protections. Also, workplace bullying is an important health and safety issue for workers and the United States lags behind other industrialized countries in addressing the problem.  Workers need help now! PGB

 ———————————————————————————————-

THE HEALTHY WORKPLACE BILL

By David C. Yamada, Professor, Suffolk University Law School

Section 1 – Preamble

(a) Findings

The Legislature finds that:

(1) The social and economic well-being of the State is dependent upon healthy and productive employees;

(2) Between 37 and 59 percent of employees directly experience health-endangering workplace bullying, abuse, and harassment, and this mistreatment is approximately four times more prevalent than sexual harassment alone;

(3) Workplace bullying, mobbing, and harassment can inflict serious harm upon targeted employees, including feelings of shame and humiliation, severe anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, impaired immune systems, hypertension, increased risk of cardiovascular disease, and symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder.

(4) Abusive work environments can have serious consequences for employers, including reduced employee productivity and morale, higher turnover and absenteeism rates, and increases in medical and workers’ compensation claims;

(5) If mistreated employees who have been subjected to abusive treatment at work cannot establish that the behavior was motivated by race, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, or age, they are unlikely to be protected by the law against such mistreatment;

(6) Legal protection from abusive work environments should not be limited to behavior grounded in protected class status as that provided for under employment discrimination statutes;

and,

(7) Existing workers’ compensation plans and common-law tort actions are inadequate to discourage this behavior or to provide adequate relief to employees who have been harmed by abusive work environments.

(b) Purpose

It is the purpose of this Chapter:

(1) To provide legal relief for employees who have been harmed, psychologically, physically, or economically, by being deliberately subjected to abusive work environments;  (2) To provide legal incentive for employers to prevent and respond to abusive mistreatment of employees at work.

Section 2 – Definitions

(a) Abusive work environment. An abusive work environment exists when the defendant, acting with malice, subjects an employee to abusive conduct so severe that it causes tangible harm to the employee.

(1) Abusive conduct. Abusive conduct is conduct, including acts, omissions, or both, that a reasonable person would find hostile, based on the severity, nature, and frequency of the defendant’s conduct. Abusive conduct may include, but is not limited to: repeated infliction of verbal abuse such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults, and epithets; verbal or physical conduct of a threatening, intimidating, or humiliating nature; the sabotage or undermining of an employee’s work performance; or attempts to exploit a employee’s known psychological or physical vulnerability. A single act normally will not constitute abusive conduct, but an especially severe and egregious act may meet this standard.

(2) Malice. Malice is defined as the desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another.

(b) Tangible harm. Tangible harm is defined as psychological harm or physical harm.

(1) Psychological harm. Psychological harm is the material impairment of a person’s mental health, as established by competent evidence.

(2) Physical harm. Physical harm is the material impairment of a person’s physical health or bodily integrity, as established by competent evidence.

(c) Adverse employment action. An adverse employment action includes, but is not limited to, a termination, demotion, unfavorable reassignment, failure to promote, disciplinary action, or reduction in compensation.

(d) Constructive discharge. A constructive discharge shall be considered a termination, and, therefore, an adverse employment action within the meaning of this Chapter. A constructive discharge exists where: (1) the employee reasonably believed he or she was subjected to abusive conduct; (2) the employee resigned because of that abusive conduct; and, (3) prior to resigning, the  employee brought to the employer’s attention the existence of the abusive conduct and the employer failed to take reasonable steps to correct the situation.

Section 3 – Unlawful Employment Practices

(a) Abusive Work Environment. It shall be an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter to subject an employee to an abusive work environment as defined by this Chapter.

(b) Retaliation. It shall be an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter to retaliate inany manner against an employee who has opposed any unlawful employment practice under this Chapter, or who has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation or proceeding under this Chapter, including, but not limited to, internal complaints and proceedings, arbitration and mediation proceedings, and legal actions.

Section 4 – Employer Liability and Defense

(a) An employer shall be vicariously liable for an unlawful employment practice, as defined by this Chapter, committed by its employee.

(b) Where the alleged unlawful employment practice does not include an adverse employment action, it shall be an affirmative defense for an employer only that:

(1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any actionable behavior; and,

(2) the complainant employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of appropriate preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.

Section 5 – Employee Liability and Defense

(a) An employee may be individually liable for an unlawful employment practice as defined by this Chapter.

(b) It shall be an affirmative defense for an employee only that the employee committed an unlawful employment practice as defined in this Chapter at the direction of the employer, under threat of an adverse employment action.

Section 6 – Affirmative Defenses

It shall be an affirmative defense that:

(a) The complaint is based on an adverse employment action reasonably made for poor performance, misconduct, or economic necessity;

(b) The complaint is based on a reasonable performance evaluation; or,

(c) The complaint is based on a defendant’s reasonable investigation about potentially illegal or unethical activity.

Section 7 – Relief

(a) Relief generally. Where a defendant has been found to have committed an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter, the court may enjoin the defendant from engaging in the unlawful employment practice and may order any other relief that is deemed appropriate, including, but not limited to, reinstatement, removal of the offending party from the complainant’s work environment, back pay, front pay, medical expenses, compensation for emotional distress, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.

(b) Employer liability. Where an employer has been found to have committed an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter that did not culminate in an adverse employment action, its liability for damages for emotional distress shall not exceed $25,000, and it shall not be subject to punitive damages. This provision does not apply to individually named employee defendants.

Section 8 – Procedures

(a) Private right of action. This Chapter shall be enforced solely by a private right of action.

(b) Time limitations. An action commenced under this Chapter must be commenced no later than one year after the last act that constitutes the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Section 9 – Effect on Other Legal Relationships

The remedies provided for in this Chapter shall be in addition to any remedies provided under any other law, and nothing in this Chapter shall relieve any person from any liability, duty, penalty or punishment provided by any other law, except that if an employee receives workers’ compensation for medical costs for the same injury or illness pursuant to both this Chapter and the workers’ compensation law, or compensation under both this Chapter and that law in cash payments for the same period of time not working as a result of the compensable injury or illness or the unlawful employment practice, the payments of workers’ compensation shall be reimbursed from compensation paid under this Chapter.

Are you being bullied?

Note: The irony of workplace bullying is that the “victim” may be an excellent employee who is well liked, works hard, and demonstrates creativity and initiative. Bullying is often motivated by the bully’s insecurity, fear and jealousy. You may be targeted because the bully perceives you to be a threat. Employers take note – Good employees  quit or are fired while bullies – who do not act in the company’s s best interests – remain to wreak more havoc.  Also, co-workers who witness bullying are more likely to quit if the employer tolerates the abuse  –  PGB

Are you being bullied?

Here’s a Workplace Aggression Research Questionnaire developed by researchers from the State University of New York in New Paltz and Wayne State University that identifies often subtle bullying behaviors.

Take the quiz to find out if you’re a victim of bullying. Occasional insults don’t count. Bullying occurs when the behavior has occurred consistently during the past six months.

In the past six months have you regularly:

  • Been glared at in a hostile manner?
  • Been excluded from work-related social gatherings?
  • Had others storm out of the work area when you entered?
  • Had others consistently arrive late for meetings that you called?
  • Been given the “silent treatment”?
  • Not been given the praise for which you felt entitled?
  • Been treated in a rude or disrespectful manner?
  • Had others refuse your requests for assistance?
  • Had others fail to deny false rumors about you?
  • Been given little or no feedback about your performance?
  • Had others delay action on matters that were important to you?
  • Been yelled at or shouted at in a hostile manner?
  • Been subjected to negative comments about your intelligence or competence?
  • Had others consistently fail to return your telephone calls or respond to your memos or e-mail?
  • Had your contributions ignored by others?
  • Had someone interfere with your work activities?
  • Been subjected to mean pranks?
  • Been lied to?
  • Had others fail to give you information that you really needed?
  • Been denied a raise or promotion without being given a valid reason?
  • Been subjected to derogatory name calling?
  • Been the target of rumors or gossip?
  • Shown little empathy or sympathy when you were having a tough time?
  • Had co-workers fail to defend your plans or ideas to others?
  • Been given unreasonable workloads or deadlines — more than others?
  • Had others destroy or needlessly take resources that you needed to do your job?
  • Been accused of deliberately making an error?
  • Been subjected to temper tantrums when disagreeing with someone?
  • Been prevented from expressing yourself (for example, interrupted when speaking)?
  • Had attempts made to turn other employees against you?
  • Had someone flaunt his or her status or treat you in a condescending manner?
  • Had someone else take credit for your work or ideas?
  • Been reprimanded or “put down” in front of others?

Steps to take if you are being bullied:

  • In the early stages, consider telling the bully that his/her behavior is not acceptable and firmly ask them to stop. You can ask a supervisor or co-worker  to be with you when you approach the person.  This may not be helpful if the bully is a sociopath who lacks empathy.  It could even backfire, causing an escalation of the bullying.  It’s a judgment call.
  • It is very important to keep a factual journal or diary and record each instance of bullying.  The record should include:

o The date, time and what happened in as much detail as possible.

o The names of witnesses.

o The outcome of the event.

Here’s a possible example of a journal entry:  11/21/10: Bob came down the corridor at approximately 10 a.m.  He grabbed my arm, pulled me into an unattended office and shouted, “Get that ***** project on my desk by lunchtime.” He  then walked out without giving me a chance to reply. I felt humiliated, pressured, disrespected, and emotionally distressed.  John Doe witnessed the incident; I talked to John later that afternoon. John said he was shocked by Bob’s  actions, which he called “violent” and “uncalled for.”

Keep your notes in a safe place – not at the workplace.

  • RETAIN copies of  letters, memos, e-mails, faxes, etc., received from the person.
  • RESPOND to criticisms or allegations in writing, and ask the bully to respond in writing.
  • KEEP all memos and correspondence related to your work if the quality of your work is challenged.
  • It may be necessary to file a complaint. It may be advisable to first consult with an employment lawyer in your community. Most employees work  in an “at will” employment state, which means they  can be fired for any reason except an unlawful reason (such as race or age discrimination).  It is important to know your rights so you have a realistic assessment of your options.
  • If you COMPLAIN,  follow the process outlined in your employee or workplace policy manual. Complain to the individual who is identified as handling harassment complaints.   The courts will interpret this as providing proper notice to your employer of the harassment and bullying.  If your concerns are minimized, proceed to the next level of management.  It is usually advisable to make sure that your complaint clearly  states the problem; this is not the time to sugar coat the issue or to worry about being the squeaky wheel.  If feel you are being bullied because of race discrimination, provide the evidence upon which you base your belief to your employer.  Down the road, the account you provide in your complaint my be important in a retaliation or wrongful termination lawsuit.

Sadly, the Human Resources officer may not be an objective or neutral arbiter.  He or she may perceive their role as acting as an agent for management.  Management  may view your abuser as more valuable to the organization than you.  It is important to provide management with as detailed a record as possible about what is occurring so the employer can see the pattern of abuse.  A single instance may be dismissed as  trivial.   One would hope that management would recognize that  the bully is having a negative impact in the workplace or is creating needless legal liability.  But be aware that most targets of bullying are forced to  quit or are fired. Some experts advise targets to immediately start looking for another job.

BUT DO NOT …

RETALIATE

If you retaliate, you could appear to be a perpetrator.  This may  confuse the manager who is  responding to your complaint.  Also, an estimated 70 percent of bullies are bosses and in these cases the power dynamics do not favor the target .

Abusive bosses  may simply be clueless, insecure and poorly trained.  However, an abusive boss may a  narcissist or sociopath. without empathy. Their actions may be very  deliberate. They could be skilled at manipulating management and co-workers.   To the bully, it’s the equivalent of a chess game.  But  you may feel a range of  strong emotions, including fear and anger.  Bullies often try to manipulate their targets into making an impulsive and unwise move.  As best you can, stay detached and focused. Don’t give the bully more ammunition than he or she already possesses.

* Patricia G. Barnes is an attorney with expertise in both domestic violence and employment law.

DISPATCHES

Articles about employment discrimination, workplace abuse, workplace bullying and other forms of workplace violence.

Was University of Virginia Editor a Victim of Bullycide?

The following story by ABC news presents a troubling picture of the death of the Managing Editor of the Virginia Quarterly Review, raising questions about whether he was a victim of bullycide, which occurs when a target of bullying is driven to take his or her own life.  In any case, one wonders whether his employer, the University of Virginia, might have averted this tragedy with better complaint handling techniques. PGB

————————————————–

From ABC News:

Editor Made 18 Calls to University Before Committing Suicide

By RAY SANCHEZ

Aug. 19, 2010—

In the days before Kevin Morrissey committed suicide near the University of Virginia campus, at least two co-workers said they warned university officials about his growing despair over alleged workplace bullying at the award-winning Virginia Quarterly Review.

“I told them, ‘I’m very concerned about Kevin; I’m afraid he might try to harm himself,'” said a colleague and friend of Morrissey, who asked not to be identified. “They asked me to clarify what I meant and I repeated that I was afraid he might harm himself. If someone had just done something.”

On July 30, Morrissey, the review’s 52-year-old managing editor, walked to the old coal tower near campus and shot himself in the head. Morrissey’s death underscored the turmoil at the high-profile journal, according to co-workers.  It also raises questions about whether Morrissey was a victim of bullycide – which is a suicide that is prompted by depression over bullying.

Maria Morrissey said her brother’s phone records showed that he placed at least 18 calls to university officials in the final two weeks of his life. The phone records, obtained by ABCNews.com, showed calls to the human resources department, the ombudsman, the faculty and employee assistance center, and the university president.

“Kevin was asking for help,” said Maria Morrissey, who had been estranged from her brother in recent years, but has started looking into the circumstances of his death.

Morrissey’s sister and co-workers acknowledged that he long suffered from depression. But they insisted that he took his life only after the university failed to respond to repeated complaints about alleged bullying by his boss, Ted Genoways. Other employees, they said, also complained about being bullied by the journal’s top editor.

“Bullying seems to make it like some sort of schoolyard thing,” said the colleague who asked not to be named. “It’s really a much more subtle kind of erasure. ‘I’m not going to talk to you. I’m going to come in the side office and shut the door. I will pretend you don’t exist.’ The university has these [human resources] people, but they don’t do anything. After one of your colleagues has killed himself, it’s beyond the point of mediation. They didn’t protect us. We went again and again and again and they didn’t protect us.”

Genoways, who is highly regarded in literary circles, has denied the allegations of bullying. He said Morrissey’s own depression prompted the suicide. “His long history of depression caused him trouble throughout his career, leading often to conflicts with his bosses,” he said in a statement to the Chronicle of Higher Education.

In the statement, Genoways claimed that the university already “reviewed all the allegations being made against me and found them to be without grounds.” A university spokeswoman said the investigation, including a financial audit of the magazine, was continuing.

A Suicide and Accusations of Workplace Bullying

On Aug. 1, two days after Morrissey’s death, Genoways sent an e-mail informing friends and colleagues of the suicide and defending himself against the accusations of bullying.

Genoways said he had known Morrissey since 2000 and they had been close friends. When Genoways’ son was born in 2002, the first flowers to arrive at the hospital were from Morrissey. He hired his friend as managing editor in 2004, Genoways wrote.

“But I never had any illusions about who Kevin was,” he continued in the e-mail, which ABC News has obtained. “He was prickly, mercurial, often brooding.”

Genoways said the two men basked in the small review’s recent literary success, but that Morrissey had become withdrawn and “his mood darkened” in recent months, leading to strained relations with his boss.

Genoways wrote that Morrissey “felt less important to me professionally as our staff grew. I know that he came to feel trapped, paradoxically, by a job he considered too good to quit. As Kevin struggled through these issues, particularly in the last year, his work suffered and his demeanor, to my mind, was often unacceptable for the workplace. We feuded over this often, and the majority of the VQR staff sided with Kevin.

“That tension between my staff and me grew poisonous,” he wrote.

“Kevin in particular had a history of disagreeing with his bosses, and now that I was the boss I should expect to be hated,” Genoways wrote.

“I don’t doubt that these conflicts fed Kevin’s depression, but I cannot accept the final blame. … I feel unspeakably saddened by Kevin’s death, but I do not feel responsible,” Genoways wrote.

Genoways’ lawyer, Lloyd Snook, also defended his client, who he said was in contact with the human resources department regarding the work environment at the Virginia Quarterly Review.

“Any time there’s a suicide, a lot of folks end up either looking in mirrors and saying to themselves, ‘What could I have done differently?’ or they end up looking for other people to blame,” Snook told ABCNews.com. “There’s a lot of that going around on both sides. It’s obviously an intensely sad time.”

Workplace bullying may be getting worse with the recession. In good times, abused workers simply walk out, said Gary Namie, a social psychologist and founder of the Washington-based Workplace Bullying Institute. But with high unemployment, many employees feel they must stay put.

The Issue of Workplace Bullying

“The story behind the story is the employer’s failure to respond,” Namie said. “They don’t know what to do about it. We’ve come to realize that when the institution doesn’t know what to do, by default it does nothing, and they worsen the problem.”

Namie said University of Virginia officials contacted him about general bullying issues two years ago.

“They wanted a motivational speaker,” he said, but the two sides were unable to agree on terms and Namie never spoke at the school. Wood could not confirm the school contacted Namie, but said a daylong university-wide workshop on workplace bullying was held in March 2009.

The university has launched an investigation into the allegations of bullying at the journal. In a statement, university spokeswoman Carolyn Wood declined to discuss “confidential personal matters” but added: “We can say unequivocally that before Mr. Morrissey’s death, all Virginia Quarterly Review staff members had been working with human resources professionals to address issues within the VQR office.”

“In the wake of Mr. Morrissey’s death,” the statement said, “the university continues to work with all members of the VQR staff to address and resolve these issues.”

In Morrissey’s case, co-workers said he appeared to become more despondent in recent months as his relationship with his boss and longtime close friend deteriorated with no solution in sight.

“I am convinced that the escalating events of the last two weeks of his life drove him to a point where he felt there was no relief available for him,” the co-worker said.

Genoways had recently argued with Morrissey and another employee and banished the pair from the office for one week, ordering Morrissey to not communicate with any of his colleagues, according to co-workers.

At times, co-workers said, Genoways could be heard yelling at Morrissey behind closed doors. Other times, they said, the Genoways was openly dismissive of Morrissey.

Though the workplace tension at the journal had been mounting for years it seemed to escalate recently, even though Genoways was out of the office much of the time on a fellowship.

Genoways had his staff read and forward his e-mails, but about an hour before Morrissey killed himself, Genoways sent him an angry e-mail questioning his apparently tardy response to a Mexican journalist who was covering that country’s drug wars who felt he was in mortal danger.

“But just so I’m clear: Why did it take you ten days to forward a message from someone asking our assistance with saving his life,” Genoways demanded in his e-mail, of which ABC News has obtained a copy.

“Kevin had repeated meetings with people in human resources, the office of the university ombudsman and the president,” the co-worker said. “Last spring, four staff members, including Kevin, went to the president’s staff and told them that we were finding work conditions under Ted completely untenable. …They sort of said, ‘Oh, working with creative people is sometimes difficult.'”

Workplace Bullying Described as “Bullycide”

Experts acknowledge that it is nearly impossible to pinpoint what pushes a depressed person to the brink of suicide.

David Yamada, director of the New Workplace Institute at Suffolk University Law School in Boston, studies workplace bullying. He said in the case of a suicide a confluence of factors — including limited family support, isolation and work stress — often contribute. He said experts call it “bullycide.”

“Especially when someone takes their life, we don’t know what may have pushed him over the top,” he said. “One of the common scenarios in workplace bullying is that the offender often is very good at taking advantage of an individual’s vulnerabilities to the point where their health is impaired. Thanks goodness it doesn’t usually result in someone committing suicide.”

Yamada said he was not familiar with the details of Morrissey’s death, but said, “I would hope that we at least evaluate this tragedy in light of what we do know about workplace bullying, which does suggest that bullying-related suicide is at least a plausible scenario.”

Maria Morrissey, who obtained her brother’s phone records and checked his home computer after his death, said she suspected that her brother felt increasingly isolated in those final weeks. He made 18 calls to university officials, she said. He checked his home computer for extended-stay hotels in the area, she said. She said he repeatedly marked the pages of the book, “Working with the Self-Absorbed: How to Handle Narcissistic Personalities on the Job,” by Nina Brown. “He was anxious about his job,” she said. “He doesn’t know why he’s in trouble. He’s got a condo that he’s got a mortgage for. He got a new car that he’s got a note for. He doesn’t have a college degree and there aren’t a whole lot of jobs for the managing editor of some literary journal. He’s looking at having to uproot his entire life if he doesn’t get help. He found himself utterly trapped.”

According to his sister, Morrissey typed his suicide note on his home computer which read, “I’m sorry. I know she won’t understand this, but I just couldn’t bear it anymore.” Maria Morrissey, who is thinking about suing the university, said the note referred to a longtime friend from Minnesota.

Morrissey called the police to report the shooting before actually taking his own life.

Copyright © 2010 ABC News Internet Ventures

Power and Control

One can see similarities between domestic violence and workplace abuse by looking at a tool developed by domestic violence advocates in Duluth, Minnesota, 30 years ago to illustrate the tactics used by domestic violence abusers, the Power and Control Wheel (see below).  By substituting the workplace for the home, one can see the application of this tool in the context of workplace abuse:

  • Instead of male privilege, abusive bosses exert “supervisory” privilege.
  • The abusive boss alone feels entitled to define the boss/employer relationship, whether or not it bears any similarity to the victim’s job description.
  • The abusive boss emotionally abuses the victim, putting him/her down, calling him/her names, etc.
  • The abusive boss uses intimidation, coercion or threats, including unfair threats of demotion or dismissal.
  • The abusive boss uses economic tools to abuse the victim by meting out rewards and punishment as he or she pleases, without regard to merit or actual job performance.
  • When the abuse is pointed out, the abusive boss makes light of it,  minimizes it, or accuses the victim of being overly sensitive.
  • The abusive boss may send out a signal that encourages others to abuse an employee, a phenomenon that has been called “mobbing.”
  • The abusive boss may isolate the employee by making it clear the employee is “unsafe” to be around because he/she is viewed as a pariah by management.

Here’s my primitive adaptation of the Power and Control Wheel for workplace abuse/bullying situations, followed by the original Duluth Model Power and Control Wheel:

 

 

Here’s the original Duluth model:


Definitions: Workplace Abuse & Bullying

There is no universally agreed upon definition for abuse or bullying.  There are many critical differences between workplace conflict and bullying.  The bully is often a supervisor who  abuses his/her authority. A bully boss intentionally, repeatedly and unfairly undermines or destroys the credibility of the target. The bully’s actions are  motivated by self-interest, not the good of the company.  The bully is often threatened by the target, who may be a talented, well liked and hard worker. What follows are authoritative definitions of workplace bullying  from diverse source. All point to the common theme that a bullying supervisor is seeking improper power and control over the target.   – PGB

_____________________________________

INTERNATIONAL

A  general definition for workplace bullying suggested by leading international  scholars on the topic is:

  • Harassing, offending, socially excluding someone or negatively affecting someone’s work tasks.
  • The interaction or process occurs repeatedly and regularly (e.g. weekly) and over a period of time (e.g. about six months).
  • The process escalates until the person confronted ends up in an inferior position and becomes the target of systematic negative social acts.

(Note: In some countries, a single incident of bullying is sufficient to trigger a civil remedy.)

* From  Katherine Lippel, Introduction, 32 COMP. LABOR LAW & POL’Y JOURNAL 2  (2010), citing Ståle Einarsen et al., The Concept of Bullying and Harassment at Work: The European Tradition, in Stale Einarsen, et al, BULLYING AND HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE: DEVELOPMENT IN THEORY, RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 3, 32 (2d ed., forthcoming  2011).

____________________________________________

THE U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

The EEOC has an Enforcement Guidance entitled Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors  that discusses employer liability for harassment.

Generally, harassment is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. Harassment becomes unlawful where

1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or
2) the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.

Federal anti-discrimination laws also prohibit harassment against individuals in retaliation for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or lawsuit under these laws; or opposing employment practices that they reasonably believe discriminate against individuals, in violation of these laws.

*EEOC

EEOC ENFORCEMENT GUIDANCE

The EEOC has an Enforcement Guidance entitled Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors  that discusses employer liability for harassment.

Generally, harassment is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. Harassment becomes unlawful where

1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or
2) the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.

Federal anti-discrimination laws also prohibit harassment against individuals in retaliation for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or lawsuit under these laws; or opposing employment practices that they reasonably believe discriminate against individuals, in violation of these laws.

____________________________________________

Strategic Harassment: Bad Employers

Many lawsuits involve employers that use bullying tactics  strategically to rid the workplace of good employees to avoid a legal obligation.  For example, employers may  bully employees to force them to quit so The employer can  downsize without paying unemployment compensation or avoid a potential worker’s compensation claim. Many employers use bullying strategically to rid the workplace of employees who  demand pay or overtime to which they are entitled or who assert a legal right to organize collectively. One of the most common types of employee lawsuits involves retaliation, where an employer bullies an employee for complaining about illegal discrimination or harassment.

–  Patricia G. Barnes, J.D., author, Surviving Bullies, Queen Bees & Psychopaths in the Workplace.

______________________________________________

An April  2011  publication by the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries contains an overview of workplace and corporate bullying. It  provides the following definition:

“Workplace bullying refers to repeated, unreasonable actions of individuals (or a group) directed towards an employee (or a group of employees), which are intended to intimidate, degrade, humiliate, or undermine; or which create a risk to the health or safety of the employee(s).”

_________________________________________________

The phenomenon of workplace abuse has been well studied in Europe, where it is called “mobbing.” The concept was introduced in the United States with the publication, Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace. Here is how the authors define mobbing:

  1. Assaults on dignity, integrity, credibility, and competence;
  2. Negative, humiliating, intimidating, abusive, malevolent, and controlling communication;
  3. Committed directly or indirectly in subtle or obvious ways;
  4. Perpetrated by  ≥1 staff member;
  5. Occurring in a continual, multiple, and systematic fashion over time;
  6. Portraying the victim as being at fault;
  7. Engineered to discredit, confuse, intimidate, isolate, and force the person into submission;
  8. Committed with the intent to force the person out;
  9. Representing the removal as the victim’s choice;
  10. Unrecognized, misinterpreted, ignored, tolerated, encouraged, or even instigated by management.

*  Source: Adapted  from Davenport N, Schwartz RD, Elliott GP. Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace. Ames, IA: Civil Society Publishing; 1999:41.

_____________________________________________

GAINING INSIGHT FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE …

Although abuse in our society is silo-ed, in reality, abuse exists on a continuum. It starts in childhood and progresses until the problem behavior is addressed by the abuser or there is an intervention by an outside party.

Here is a definition of abuse used by the federal government in the context of domestic violence. Many aspects of this definition could apply to abuse in the workplace.

The U.S. Dept. of Justice Office of Violence Against Women says domestic violence can be defined as a pattern of abusive behavior in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner.

Domestic violence can be physical, sexual, emotional, economic, or psychological actions or threats of actions that influence another person. This includes any behaviors that intimidate, manipulate, humiliate, isolate, frighten, terrorize, coerce, threaten, blame, hurt, injure, or wound someone.

Some specific categories of domestic violence:

Physical Abuse: Hitting, slapping, shoving, grabbing, pinching, biting, hair-pulling, biting, etc. Physical abuse also includes denying a partner medical care or forcing alcohol and/or drug use.

Sexual Abuse: Coercing or attempting to coerce any sexual contact or behavior without consent. Sexual abuse includes, but is certainly not limited to marital rape, attacks on sexual parts of the body, forcing sex after physical violence has occurred, or treating one in a sexually demeaning manner.

Emotional Abuse: Undermining an individual’s sense of self-worth and/or self-esteem. This may include, but is not limited to constant criticism, diminishing one’s abilities, name-calling, or damaging one’s relationship with his or her children.

Economic Abuse: Making or attempting to make an individual financially dependent by maintaining total control over financial resources, withholding one’s access to money, or forbidding one’s attendance at school or employment.

Psychological Abuse: Causing fear by intimidation; threatening physical harm to self, partner, children, or partner’s family or friends; destruction of pets and property; and forcing isolation from family, friends, or school and/or work.

Workplace abuse usually does not include overt physical  behaviors – though it certainly can. For example, sexual harassment is a form of workplace abuse that can involve both men and women.

However, more often, workplace bullying involves emotional and economic abuse.

________________________

In April  2010 the Massachusetts’ state legislature unanimously passed what is called the toughest anti-bullying law in the nation with respect to schools. The law was precipitated by two cases of  Massachusetts youths committing suicide after allegedly being bullied. The legislation requires school employees to report all instances of bullying and require principals to investigate them. PGB

ACCORDING TO THE MASSACHUSETTS‘ 2010  SCHOOL ANTI-BULLYING LAW:

“Bullying”, the repeated use by one or more students of a written, verbal or electronic expression or a physical act or gesture or any combination thereof, directed at a victim that:

(i)  causes physical or emotional harm to the victim or damage to the victim’s property;

(ii) places the victim in reasonable fear of harm to himself or of damage to his property;

(iii) creates a hostile environment at school for the victim;

(iv) infringes on the rights of the victim at school; or

(v) materially and substantially disrupts the education process or the orderly operation of a  school. For the purposes of this section, bullying shall include cyberbullying.

—————————————————————————————–

THE INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION (ILO) SAYS …

Workplace bullying is one of the fastest growing complaints of workplace violence. It constitutes offensive behaviour through vindictive, cruel, malicious or humiliating attempts to undermine an individual or groups of employees through such activities as:

  • Making life difficult for those who have the potential to do the bully’s job better than the bully;
  • Shouting at staff to get things done;
  • Insisting that the bully’s way of doing things is the only right way;
  • Refusing to delegate because the bully feels no one else can be trusted;
  • Punishing others by constant criticism or by removing their responsibilities for being too competent.

*ILO

—————————————————————————————

Bullying behaviors may include:

  • making life difficult for those who have the potential to do the bully’s job better than the bully;
  • punishing others for being too competent by constant criticism or by removing their responsibilities, often giving them trivial tasks to do instead;
  • refusing to delegate because bullies feel they can’t trust anyone else;
  • shouting at staff to get things done;
  • persistently picking on people in front of others or in private;
  • insisting that a way of doing things is always right;
  • keeping individuals in their place by blocking their promotion;
  • if someone challenges a bully’s authority, overloading them with work and reducing the deadlines, hoping that they will fail at what they do; and
  • feeling envious of another’s professional or social ability, so setting out to make them appear incompetent, or make their lives miserable, in the hope of getting them dismissed or making them resign.

*Duncan Chappell and Vittorio Di Martino, VIOLENCE AT WORK, International Labour Organization (2006)

_______________________________________________

The Workplace Bullying Institute defines workplace bullying as “repeated, health-harming mistreatment of one or more persons (the targets) by one or more perpetrators that takes one or more of the following forms:

  •  Verbal abuse.
  • Offensive conduct/behaviors that are threatening, humiliating, or intimidating.
  • Work interference, i.e. sabotage, that prevents work from being done.

_______________________________________________

PSYCHOLOGICAL TERROR

“Workplace bullying is traumatic because it is unexpected and always perceived as undeserved and unjustified (Keashly and Neuman, 2005). Abuse is not a requisite aspect of work duties, is unrelated to job demands, and is, consequently, perceived as unwarranted. The shock of being singled out for repeated abuse can be as traumatic as divorce or a loved one’s death (Mikkelsen and Einarsen, 2002) and can evoke levels of anxiety and psychological pain necessitating therapeutic help (Randall, 2001). What makes this experience especially corrosive is that it is ongoing, frequent, enduring, and escalatory—typically worsening over time. The trauma is also a function of the intensive fear and dread bullying creates. In fact, bullying and mobbing are often called ‘psychological terror’ (Leymann, 1996: 375).”

– Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and …: Quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73, 406-433.