Workplace Bullying, Harassment, Mobbing and Victimisation. Have you ever been bullied by a psychopath? If not, then you are lucky...for now! as chances are you will eventually come across their path sooner or later. Psychopaths and Bullies are everywhere in Australian corporate offices. How to identify the bully, the impact & effects of bullying and how to survive. If there is a bully lurking behind you, move forward to put the bully truly Behind You.
28 September 2009
PAPER : Bullying in the Workplace: A Proposed Model for Understanding the Psychological Harassment Process
26 September 2009
NEW ZEALAND BULLIES - One in 10 are victims of workplace bullies
Bullying is defined by the researchers as a situation in which a person feels they have been repeatedly on the receiving end of negative actions from another worker, in an environment where it is difficult to defend themselves. In other words, it must be ongoing and between people with different levels of power within an organisation.
Preliminary findings have confirmed restaurant kitchens are hotbeds of workplace bullying something referred to as the "Gordon Ramsay effect" after the British chef known for his fiery temper.
In the past year the Employment Relations Authority has investigated several cases of workplace bullying, including a university employee who claimed "insidious bullying" by her superior, and a man sacked for abusive and aggressive behaviour towards an employee that included driving a forklift in a manner that threatened his safety.
Claims of bullying and intimidation were also made against members of parliament last year as part of an in-house staff survey by Parliamentary Services.
NZ RESEARCH
The research, funded by the Health Research Council and the Department of Labour, aims to show how workplace bullying affects a worker's health, wellbeing and job performance, as well as finding out what is being done at an organisational level to counteract the problem.
O'Driscoll says if there was a more organisational response it wouldn't happen as much. "Many organisations don't quite know how to deal with the problem. Most have a harassment policy and a stress policy but they don't often capture issues of bullying, and that's a problem."
23 September 2009
OPINION: Rudd outburst an abuse of power
THE latest airing of the now infamous Kevin Rudd temper suggests that, despite his protestations, the PM has bullying tendencies and needs counselling.
By his own admission Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is a workplace bully.
Reports this week that Mr Rudd verbally abused colleagues in a profane tirade during a discussion about printing allowances have not been denied by the Prime Minister.
In fact, they have been defended with the PM saying, "I make no apology for either the content of my conversation or the robustness with which I expressed my views."
So what was the "robust content" Mr Rudd was talking about?
"I don't care what you f---ers think," Mr Rudd reportedly told Labor faction representatives. "You can get f---ed. Don't you f---ing understand?"
Let's not mince words, because Mr Rudd clearly doesn't.
The Prime Minister's behaviour in the workplace could be seen as workplace bullying all over Australia, including the Australian Capital Territory, where this unsavoury incident took place.
If Kevin Rudd were running a corner store, carpet store or real estate agency, his staff would be well within their rights to claim workplace bullying, and seek support and compensation.
In a normal workplace the abusive boss could be forced into counselling. But, apparently if you're the PM, it's just "robust" discussion.
What rubbish.
Imagine if a story broke in the Sunday Herald Sun and other Sunday papers that Kevin Rudd was overheard talking to his wife, Therese, like that?
Imagine if someone saw Mr Rudd standing there red-faced telling Therese: "You can get f---ed. Don't you f---ing understand?" What do you think the reaction would be?
My guess is there'd be an enormous public outcry, with most sensible people concluding the behaviour was a form of spousal abuse.
Now, I assume Kevin doesn't treat his wife like that. So why does he feel it's OK to treat his staff like that? Why should they have to put up with it?
The answer is that they shouldn't. Actually, you could also argue that as Prime Minister, Mr Rudd is no ordinary boss and should be held to a higher standard. And yet he seems to get a free pass and the right to smugly laugh off his abusive behaviour, hiding behind words like "robust".
Calling someone a "f---er" is not robust. It is abusive and Kevin Rudd needs to pull his head in.
I don't care if this is the way it's always been. Up until a few years ago the same lame excuse was used to justify bosses sexually harassing secretaries, and a while before that the same excuse was used to allow husbands to rape their wives.
Clearly, Kevin Rudd has a problem and he needs to put his hand up and acknowledge he needs help to curb his abusive tendencies.
There is, sadly, a pattern here. You'll remember Mr Rudd also screamed at a hostess on a RAAF flight when not happy with his meal.
Imagine being screamed at by the leader of the country because he didn't like the meal you had brought him.
Talk about a power imbalance.
And not only is he a bully, he is also apparently hypocritical.
This is the man who sent Belinda Neal to anger management counselling after she abused a staff member at the Iguana nightclub in NSW.
Clearly, Kevin, we hate in others what we hate in ourselves.
And, by the way, where is the intellectual Left during this debate?
Surely they should be speaking out against this latest outrageous example of workplace abuse. Their silence speaks volumes about how little they really stand by their principles.
If that was my husband or child being abused by a boss like that, I would be insisting the bully was brought to account.
Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, it is time for you to clean up your act before you abuse somebody else.
And I would say to those members of Parliament who were at the meeting and saw or were subjected to the abuse, it is not simply enough to leak this story to a newspaper.
If you really believe in protecting Australians workers from abuse in the workplace, you have a responsibility to make a formal complaint about your boss's behaviour.
Sharryn Jackson, Maria Vamvakinou, Carol Brown, Michael Forshaw, Don Farrell and David Feeney - you have a clear responsibility not just to each other, but to workers everywhere.
The Prime Minister is a nasty bully and his flippant justification shows he doesn't get it.
His bullying won't stop until he is made to stop.
It's time to remind the Prime Minister his behaviour wouldn't be accepted in any other workplace in the country.
Source: http://www.news.com.au/opinion/rudd-outburst-an-abuse-of-power/story-e6frfs99-1225778072502
22 September 2009
Bullies at the Top - What happens when the bully is the Prime Minister of your country? 'Rudd outburst an abuse of power'
By his own admission Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is a workplace bully.
Reports this week that Mr Rudd verbally abused colleagues in a profane tirade during a discussion about printing allowances have not been denied by the Prime Minister.
In fact, they have been defended with the PM saying, "I make no apology for either the content of my conversation or the robustness with which I expressed my views."
So what was the "robust content" Mr Rudd was talking about?
"I don't care what you f---ers think," Mr Rudd reportedly told Labor faction representatives. "You can get f---ed. Don't you f---ing understand?"
Let's not mince words, because Mr Rudd clearly doesn't.
The Prime Minister's behaviour in the workplace could be seen as workplace bullying all over Australia, including the Australian Capital Territory, where this unsavoury incident took place.
If Kevin Rudd were running a corner store, carpet store or real estate agency, his staff would be well within their rights to claim workplace bullying, and seek support and compensation.
In a normal workplace the abusive boss could be forced into counselling. But, apparently if you're the PM, it's just "robust" discussion.
What rubbish.
Imagine if a story broke in the Sunday Herald Sun and other Sunday papers that Kevin Rudd was overheard talking to his wife, Therese, like that?
Imagine if someone saw Mr Rudd standing there red-faced telling Therese: "You can get f---ed. Don't you f---ing understand?" What do you think the reaction would be?
My guess is there'd be an enormous public outcry, with most sensible people concluding the behaviour was a form of spousal abuse.
Now, I assume Kevin doesn't treat his wife like that. So why does he feel it's OK to treat his staff like that? Why should they have to put up with it?
The answer is that they shouldn't. Actually, you could also argue that as Prime Minister, Mr Rudd is no ordinary boss and should be held to a higher standard. And yet he seems to get a free pass and the right to smugly laugh off his abusive behaviour, hiding behind words like "robust".
Calling someone a "f---er" is not robust. It is abusive and Kevin Rudd needs to pull his head in.
I don't care if this is the way it's always been. Up until a few years ago the same lame excuse was used to justify bosses sexually harassing secretaries, and a while before that the same excuse was used to allow husbands to rape their wives.
Clearly, Kevin Rudd has a problem and he needs to put his hand up and acknowledge he needs help to curb his abusive tendencies.
There is, sadly, a pattern here. You'll remember Mr Rudd also screamed at a hostess on a RAAF flight when not happy with his meal.
Imagine being screamed at by the leader of the country because he didn't like the meal you had brought him.
Talk about a power imbalance.
And not only is he a bully, he is also apparently hypocritical.
This is the man who sent Belinda Neal to anger management counselling after she abused a staff member at the Iguana nightclub in NSW.
Clearly, Kevin, we hate in others what we hate in ourselves.
And, by the way, where is the intellectual Left during this debate?
Surely they should be speaking out against this latest outrageous example of workplace abuse. Their silence speaks volumes about how little they really stand by their principles.
If that was my husband or child being abused by a boss like that, I would be insisting the bully was brought to account.
Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, it is time for you to clean up your act before you abuse somebody else.
And I would say to those members of Parliament who were at the meeting and saw or were subjected to the abuse, it is not simply enough to leak this story to a newspaper.
If you really believe in protecting Australians workers from abuse in the workplace, you have a responsibility to make a formal complaint about your boss's behaviour.
Sharryn Jackson, Maria Vamvakinou, Carol Brown, Michael Forshaw, Don Farrell and David Feeney - you have a clear responsibility not just to each other, but to workers everywhere.
The Prime Minister is a nasty bully and his flippant justification shows he doesn't get it.
His bullying won't stop until he is made to stop.
It's time to remind the Prime Minister his behaviour wouldn't be accepted in any other workplace in the country.
source
20 September 2009
STUDY - Workplace bullying of junior doctors: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey
Journal of the
| Abstract Aim Workplace bullying is a growing concern amongst health professionals. Our aim was to explore the frequency, nature, and extent of workplace bullying in an Auckland Hospital (Auckland, New Zealand). Method A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of house officers and registrars at a tertiary hospital was conducted. Results There was an overall response rate of 33% (123/373). 50% of responders reported experiencing at least one episode of bullying behaviour. The largest source of workplace bullying was consultants and nurses in equal frequency. The most common bullying behaviour was unjustified criticism. Only 18% of respondents had made a formal complaint. Conclusion Workplace bullying is a significant issue with junior doctors. We recommend education about unacceptable behaviours and the development of improved complaint processes. |
- Threat to professional status
- Threat to personal standing
- Isolation
- Enforced overwork
- Destabilisation-(4)
It is generally accepted that bullying incorporates negative behaviour(s) which are carried out repeatedly, rather than a single episode. It is not the perpetrator's intention, but instead the victim's perception, that determines whether the bullying has occurred.
In this study, we attempted to determine the prevalence of bullying at Auckland City Hospital, which is the largest teaching hospital in New Zealand.
Method
The questionnaire collected information on the participant’s age, gender, postgraduate year, country of training, ethnicity, and whether they were doing a medical or surgical run.
The participants were presented with a table of 14 bullying behaviours (Table 1). They were asked to identify whether they had experienced any of the behaviours in their previous term (3- or 6-month clinical attachment). If they had, they were asked to identify the staff group who perpetrated the behaviour and rate on a scale of 1–5 how frequently they encountered the behaviour.
If they had experienced any bullying behaviours, they were asked whether they had made a formal complaint, and whether this was effective. If they did not make a formal complaint, they were asked why they did not.
Statistics - All analyses were performed using SAS (SAS Institute Inc, v9.1) software. Continuous normally distributed variables were compared using Student’s unrelated groups test and Chi-squared analysis was used for categorical data. All tests were two-tailed and p<0.05>
Table 1. Questionnaire
Bullying behaviour | Consult
ant | Registrar | HO | Radio
logy | Nurse | Pharm
acist | Patient
/family | Other (specify) |
Undermine your work |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unjustified criticism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo and sarcasm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verbal threats |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Making jokes about you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teasing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Physical violence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Violence to property |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Withholding necessary information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ignoring you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undue pressure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting impossible deadlines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undervaluing of your efforts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discrimination |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results
50% (93/186) of those who were bullied were either first-year house officers, or first-year registrars (p value=0.008). There was a trend for RMOs doing a surgical run to report a higher incidence of at least one bullying behaviour compared to those doing a medical run (59% [27/46] vs 44% [27/62], p=0.17).
RMOs under the age of 25 reported bullying more frequently than those over the age of 25 (72% [17/24] vs 44% [43/99], p=0.024). There were no differences in gender, ethnicity, or whether the RMO was trained in New Zealand or overseas.
Consultants and nurses were the main perpetrators of bullying behaviour (30% [63/214] each) followed by patients (25% [53/214]), radiologists (8% [18/214]), and registrars (7% [17/214]) (Figure 1). Registrars were more often bullied by consultants, and house officers by nurses.
Only 18% (33/186) of those who had experienced at least one episode of a bullying behaviour made an official complaint. 63%(20/33) of those who complained were house officers, and 83% (27/33) were female (p=0.042). Of those who made a complaint, 54% (18/33) reported some improvement. Of those people who did not make an official complaint, 82% (125/153) were not sure how to complain, and 79% (121/153) were afraid of the consequences. 72% (134/186) of those who had been bullied dealt with it themselves.
Figure 2. Most common bullying behaviour (total complaints = 214)
Discussion
Irrespective of these qualifying factors, the perception of the victim is still the most important aspect of bullying behaviour. Secondly, in our study, junior doctors have identified instances where they have been bullied on a single occasion which would not meet the accepted definition of bullying.
Despite this, it is reassuring (although still totally unacceptable) that the prevalence of bullying amongst medical staff at our hospital when measured by similar methods and limitations is in line with the reported prevalence (30–50%) as defined from other overseas studies.1,3,5,6
In addition, this study identifies two further issues. Firstly, while our medical personnel may be accused of bullying due to the hierarchical nature of the education structure, it is difficult to explain the high frequency of bullying by nurses towards house officers. Secondly, the majority of doctors who had experienced bullying behaviour did not complain and 79% stated that they were afraid of complaining. This is in line with a study by Dickson in which he states, “It is not that the victim cannot complain; it is that they perceive themselves as helpless or they perceive the consequences of complaining as worse than the status quo.”8
While the bullying behaviour may not have been of sufficient stature to warrant a formal complaint it is still a major concern that a significant number of doctors did not know the process by which they could address the issue. In contrast, however, it was reassuring to note that 54% of those that did complain noted an improvement which somewhat validates our current processes.
In summary, our study has identified a high prevalence of perceived bullying by junior doctors. While the bullying may be a misperception by the victim, it is still of sufficient concern that it requires further study. Organisational support should be given to all employees to minimise such behaviour and support potential victims. We recommend training sessions on effective communication and delivery of constructive criticism for the main perpetrator groups identified in this study. Possibly a formal complaint process should be identified with a standardised format, open accessibility, and confidentiality restrictions. Following these interventions, a repeat study should be conducted to confirm a positive change in bullying behaviours.
Competing interests: None known.
Author information: Joanne Scott, House Officer, Department of General Medicine, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland; Chloe Blanshard, House Officer, Department of General Medicine, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland; Stephen Child, Director of Clinical Training, Clinical Education and Training Unit (CETU), Auckland City Hospital, Auckland
Acknowledgements: We thank David Spriggs (Clinical Director, Department of General Medicine, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland); Gill Naden (Manager, CETU, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland); and Medical Council of New Zealand for their assistance.
Correspondence: Dr Stephen Child, CETU, Level 15, Support Building, Auckland City Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand.
- Cheema S, Ahmad K, Giri SK, et al. Bullying of junior doctors prevails in the Irish health system: a bitter reality. Ir Med J. 2005;98(9):274–5.
- Kelly S. Workplace bullying: the silent epidemic. N Z Med J. 2004;117(1204). http://www.nzmj.com/journal/117-1204/1125
15 September 2009
10 September 2009
STUDY ABSTRACT - Workplace Bullying Link to Sleep Disturbances
Findings from a Large Scale Cross-Sectional Survey in the French Working Population
Isabelle Niedhammer, PhD1,2; Simone David, MSc1; Stéphanie Degioanni, MSc1; Anne Drummond, PhD2; Pierre Philip, MD, PhD3; 143 occupational physiciansa
1INSERM, U687-IFR69, Saint-Maurice, France; 2UCD School of Public Health & Population Science, Dublin, Ireland; 3Clinique du Sommeil, CHU Pellegrin, Bordeaux, France
Study Objectives:
The purpose of this study was to explore the associations between workplace bullying, the characteristics of workplace bullying, and sleep disturbances in a large sample of employees of the French working population.
Design:
Workplace bullying, evaluated using the validated instrument developed by Leymann, and sleep disturbances, as well as covariates, were measured using a self-administered questionnaire. Covariates included age, marital status, presence of children, education, occupation, working hours, night work, physical and chemical exposures at work, self-reported health, and depressive symptoms. Statistical analysis was performed using logistic regression analysis and was carried out separately for men and women.
Setting: General working population.
Participants:
The study population consisted of a random sample of 3132 men and 4562 women of the working population in the southeast of France.
Results:
Workplace bullying was strongly associated with sleep disturbances. Past exposure to bullying also increased the risk for this outcome. The more frequent the exposure to bullying, the higher the risk of experiencing sleep disturbances. Observing someone else being bullied in the workplace was also associated with the outcome. Adjustment for covariates did not modify the results. Additional adjustment for self-reported health and depressive symptoms diminished the magnitude of the associations that remained significant.
Conclusions:
The prevalence of workplace bullying (around 10%) was found to be high in this study as well was the impact of this major job-related stressor on sleep disturbances. Although no conclusion about causality could be drawn from this cross-sectional study, the findings suggest that the contribution of workplace bullying to the burden of sleep disturbances may be substantial.
Keywords:Sleep disturbances, workplace bullying
Citation: Niedhammer I; David S; Degioanni S; Drummond A; Philip P. Workplace bullying and sleep disturbances: findings from a large scale cross-sectional survey in the French working population. SLEEP 2009;32(9):1211-1219.
source
Workplace Bullying Linked to Insomnia - Survey in the French Working Population
Being bullied at work may make you toss and turn all night.
Researchers have found that people who are intimidated, insulted, or otherwise harassed on the job are more likely to have sleep disturbances than are other workers. Their findings appear in the Sept.1 issue of the journal Sleep.
Workplace bullying may be a common occurrence, according to the new study, which involved more than 7,600 middle-aged workers in southeast France. The study participants answered questionnaires regarding their work environment and ability to fall asleep and return to sleep after early awakenings.
In the study, 11% of women and 9% of men reported being exposed to bullying at work at least once a week for at least six months of the previous year. Workplace bullying was defined as "hostile behavior on the part of one or more persons in the work environment that aim continually and repeatedly to offend, oppress, maltreat, or to exclude or isolate over a long period of time."
The researchers found that women exposed to bullying on the job every day or nearly every day were about twice as likely as their peers to have sleeping difficulties. Men who had to deal with such hostile behavior now or in the past had more than two times the sleep disturbances as men who had not.
The more often someone was bullied on the job, the more likely they were to have sleeping difficulties. The results took into consideration other factors that can affect sleep, such as age, occupation, work hours, and symptoms of depression.
Sleep Also Eludes Observers
The sleep woes also affected those who saw someone else being bullied. Slightly more than a third of workers said they witnessed bullying on the job in the previous 12 months. Among the findings:
• Men who observed workplace bullying had an estimated 60% higher chance of having sleep disturbances.
• The odds for disturbed sleep were 20% higher in women who saw someone else being bullied.
The chances for sleep problems increased more if the workers both saw and experienced bullying. The study authors say their findings highlight the need for greater efforts to prevent bullying in the workplace.
"Workplace bullying may be considered as one of the leading job stressors and would be a major cause of suicide and other health-related issues," Isabelle Niedhammer, PhD, epidemiologist and researcher at the UCD School of Public Health & Population Science at the University College Dublin in Ireland, says in a statement. "Our study underlines the need to better understand and prevent occupational risk factors, such as bullying, for sleep disorders."
Adjustment insomnia is the medical term for sleep difficulties that result from an identifiable stressor, such as workplace bullying. According to the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, symptoms may also involve anxiety, worry, depression, muscle tension, and headaches. Adjustment insomnia usually goes away within three months, but it may linger if the person remains in the stressful environment or can’t otherwise adapt to the situation.
source
This story has hit the news today also, interesting how it has been reported... take a look ..
Work Bullying Linked With Poor Sleep
The reach of the work bully extends well beyond the office.
New research shows that victims of work bullying often have sleep problems once they get home. The trauma of bullying in the workplace is so great that it even appears to affect those who witness a co-worker being mistreated, according to a study published in the medical journal Sleep.
Workplace bullying can include everything from belittling comments and yelling to spreading gossip and excluding someone from an important meeting. Victims often are helpless to defend themselves because many companies don’t have procedures in place to combat the behavior. A study last year found that workplace aggression can be more damaging than sexual harassment.Work Bullying Linked With Poor Sleep
A study last year found that workplace aggression can be more damaging than sexual harassment. In the latest study, researchers from the French national ...
Blame office bullies for your sleep problems
Workplace bullying disrupts sleep
Trouble sleeping? Blame your bullying boss and co-workers
08 September 2009
Australian Workplace Bullying Is Out Of Control - 25% of Australians have been bullied
Bullying is rife in Australian workplaces, a new survey shows, with one half of respondents saying they had witnessed the behaviour.
The Drake International survey of more than 800 employees also revealed 25 per cent had experienced bullying themselves.
Silence, isolation, verbal insults and sarcasm were the most common cases, with public humiliation ranking in second place.
Bullying from managers or supervisors represented about 50 per cent of cases, while 25 per cent of respondents reported being targeted by other employees.
Gender proved no barrier to the behaviour, with almost equal numbers of male and female perpetrators, the survey found.
Both sexes were also equally targeted by workplace bullies.
Poor management of issues leads to Identifiable psychological Hazards
Drake International said the results were disappointing and worrying from an organisational perspective.
"Bullying is an identifiable psychological hazard in the workplace and therefore this is not just a conduct issue," Drake's national client services manager Judy Harper said.
"Organisations need to do more - as a minimum they have a statutory duty of care to manage and control this inappropriate and damaging behaviour."
source
Subtle digs most hurtful in workplace
Workplace bullying is usually subtle, taking the form of silence and isolation, verbal insults, and sarcasm, a recent study has shown.
36 per cent cited subtle forms of bullying as the most common and damaging behaviour. Public humiliation and criticism was the second-most common behaviour – representing 26 per cent of instances. Gender was also revealed as no barrier; male and females were almost equally at fault as the bully or as the target of the behaviour.
Responses highlighted workplaces’ lack of policy and action on dealing with workplace bullying, with only 30 per cent of bullying targets and less than 50 per cent of witnesses satisfied with their organisation’s handling of the situation. More than 50 per cent of respondents also noted that the bullying behaviour had been going on for more than six months.