MONSTER MANAGERS - Profiling Types of Monster Bosses

Monsters are real — as anyone who has ever worked for a nightmare manager can attest. Here we look at the qualities that distinguish a good boss from a bad one, and ways to avoid becoming a monster in the workplace.

Most monsters are frightening but fictional. However, we sometimes encounter a person who seems to have been pulled directly from our nightmares, and this is especially frightening when that person turns out to be our boss. A broad range of traits can make a manager seem monstrous, but that doesn't mean they're unique in their awfulness. In fact, it can be comforting to note that plenty of employees have to deal with nightmare bosses every day.

"These days there are websites where you can post horror stories about your boss, commiserate with other long-suffering subordinates or even e-mail your boss an anonymous letter telling him or her just how ineffectual he or she is," CFO Daily News explains. "Seems there's an epidemic of bad bosses out there."

The workplace can be a surprisingly spooky place. According to a survey from CareerBuilder.com, 18 percent of workers described their workplace as frightening. Based on a poll of 4,000 employees, here are the most common types of monsters — not all of them bad — workers said their bosses resemble:

• Glenda the Good Witch — Someone liked and respected by nearly everyone in the office (20 percent);
• The Wolf Man — A boss who's fine one minute and then terrible the next (11 percent);
• The Invisible Man — People notice that this boss is never around (10 percent);
• Casper the Friendly Ghost — A boss who is eager to help others, but is often misunderstood (9 percent);
• Dracula — This boss simply sucks the life out his employees (6 percent);
• Wicked Witch of the West — Unlike Glenda, this boss is conniving and has an army of underlings performing dirty work (5 percent);
• The Mummy — A slow-moving boss with an ancient management style (4 percent);
• The Grim Reaper — One who is constantly delivering bad news and inspiring fear among the staff (3 percent); and
• Frankenstein — A boss who's green with envy (1 percent).

Although many employees are dissatisfied with work conditions, problems with their bosses generally stem from a handful of specific problems that point to a fundamental disconnect between management and staff. An inability to listen is one of the key factors preventing a boss from engaging with employees.

"On one hand, there is the blabbermouth theory of leadership. In Western cultures, the person who talks the most is viewed as having the highest status. And interrupting people is a way to seize power," Robert Sutton, a professor in Stanford University's department of management science and engineering, told Inc.com. "Certainly talking is more pleasant than listening. But most bosses ought to shut up and listen more."

Listening is crucial not only because it improves relationships with employees, but also because it allows a manager to pick up on workplace details that he or she may not have noticed (or wanted to notice) before.

"One thing most bad managers have in common is they're not consciously aware that they're bad managers," BNET explains. "And if they are aware of it on some level, they're probably not willing to admit it to anyone, least of all themselves. That's because nobody wants to believe they're the problem."

So, as a manager, how can you tell if your employees view you as a bad boss? Sutton, writing at the AMEX OPEN Forum, offers the following signs that your reputation as a manager may be slipping:

• You look out for yourself and everyone else is an afterthought;
• You're hard on your workers because you think they'll screw up without your "guidance";
• You transmit but don't receive, mostly just pretending to listen to others;
• You never say "thanks" or "please" because it's a waste of time;
• You're a stickler for punishment, so your workers know when they make a mistake they'll pay for it;
• You never mess up, or in other words, never admit to messing up;
• You take all the credit, regardless of how much you contributed to the work;
• You don't tolerate dissent, making life hard for anyone who dares to disagree with you;
• You focus on your top performers, making sure they get the best of everything while everyone else is ignored;
• You only care about the big ideas, because the small stuff, like implementation or practical considerations, are beneath you; and
• You don't care what it's like to work for you, and if employees are dissatisfied, too bad.

No one wants to be a bad boss, but these traits can be hard to recognize in oneself. When performance begins to lag, employees become disinterested in their work or the atmosphere in the workplace becomes noticeably uncomfortable, signs point to a problem that management needs to address.

"You can tell if you're making mistakes as a leader because things go wrong — not just one catastrophic computer snafu but repeated errors," CNN.com explains. "Bad bosses turn away from these realities. They don't discuss problems; they just hunker down and hope the issue will go away. It won't. Untreated, a minor concern becomes a major issue becomes a catastrophe."

So what qualities define a good boss? According a recent survey from staffing firm Adecco, the types of leadership employees most desired were "visionary" (23 percent) and "democratic," (23 percent) meaning that workers want managers who set out clear, achievable goals and accomplish them with close collaboration and feedback from their employees. Moreover, 88 percent of employees said a good boss jumps right in to important projects and helps the team get the job done.

"Ultimately, the secret to being a 'best boss' isn't all that mysterious — employees respect bosses who work as hard as they do," Adecco explains. "They value constructive criticism regarding their work and they appreciate having a friendly relationship with their boss, but they don't feel the need to be 'friends' outside of work (or even online) with them. Employees want a boss who encourages a healthy work-life balance, while also practicing what they preach in leading by example."

source

Defining Workplace Violence ... what leads to Trauma and PTSD

Work trauma is the adverse effects and impact on the employee's physical and/or emotional wellness, health and safety as a result of physical and/or emotional violence experienced in the workplace.

These symptoms typically include, but are not limited to, external wounds and injuries and/or symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), excessive stress and/or stress-related illnesses. (Steinman, 2003)

Corporate Aggression refers to all situations where the majority of employees or any minority group feel subjected to unilateral conscious, calculated or planned negative actions, attitudes, rules and/or policies imposed by the employer to serve the employer's interests, in a situation where these employees feel that they are collectively unable to defend themselves and/or approach and/or reason with the source of aggression and/or effect any changes. (Steinman, 2002)

1. Definition of the term “Workplace Violence”

Workplace violence is defined as single or cumulative incidents where employee(s) are physically assaulted or attacked, are emotionally abused, pressurised, harassed or threatened (overtly, covertly, directly, indirectly) in work-related circumstances with the likelihood of impacting on their right to dignity, physical or emotional safety, well-being, work performance and social development.[1]Includes: Any physical violence such as an assault or attack and psychological or emotional violence such as threats, abuse, bullying/mobbing, sexual harassment and racial harassment.

GLOSSARY: Violence appears as physical violence or as psychological violence or structural violence in different forms, which may often overlap. Terms related to violence are defined in the following GLOSSARY

1.1 Physical Violence: The use of physical force against another person or group that results in physical, sexual or psychological harm.
Includes beating, kicking, slapping, stabbing, shooting, pushing, biting, pinching, strangling, among others.[2]

1.1.1 Assault/Attack: Intentional behaviour that harms another person or group physically, including sexual assault (i.e. rape).

1.2 Psychological Violence: Intentional use of power, including threat of physical force, against another person or group, that can result in harm to family life, livelihood, physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development. [3]Includes verbal abuse, bullying/mobbing, harassment, intimidation and threats.

1.2.1 Abuse: Behaviour that humiliates, degrades or otherwise indicates a lack of respect for the dignity and worth of an individual.[4]

1.2.2 Bullying/Mobbing: Repeated and overtime offensive behaviour through vindictive, cruel or malicious attempts to humiliate, disrespect or undermine an individual or groups of employees and includes, but is not limited to psychological pressure, harassment, intimidation, threats, conspiracies, manipulation, extortion, coercion and hostile behaviour which could impact on the worth, dignity and well-being of the individual or groups.[5].

1.2.3 Harassment: Any conduct based on age, disability, HIV status, domestic circumstances, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, race, colour, language, religion, political, trade union or other opinion or belief, national or social origin, association with a minority, property, birth or other status that is unreciprocated or unwanted and which affects the dignity of men and women at work.[6]

1.2.4 Sexual Harassment: Any unwanted, unreciprocated and unwelcome behaviour of a sexual nature that is offensive to the person involved, and causes that person to be threatened, humiliated, degraded or embarrassed.[7]

1.2.5 Racial harassment: Any implicit or explicit threatening conduct that is based on race, colour, language, national origin, religion, association with a minority, birth or other status that is unreciprocated or unwanted and which affects the dignity of women and men at work.[8]

1.2.6 Threat: Any implicit or explicit promised use of physical force or power (i.e. psychological force, blackmail or stalking), resulting in fear of physical, sexual, psychological harm or other negative consequences to the targeted individuals or groups.[9]

1.3 Structural Violence
The intentional use of power and/or organisational systems and structures or laws against an individual or entity (employer, management, shareholders, employee, group of employees, client, government, unions) to carry out a covert or unethical agenda, enforce change or indulge in unfair practices to the disadvantage of the affected individual or entity.
Includes but not limited to the disrespectful handling of changes in the organisation, unrealistic redistribution of workload, intimidation, policies, procedures, regulations, manipulation, coercion to act in a certain way and so on, exercised by an individual or entity. [10]

source

---

[1]Steinman, S: 2002-2007.
[2] Adapted from the World Health Organisation’s definition of violence.
[3] Adapted from the World Health Organisation’s definition of violence.
[4] Alberta Association of Registered Nurses
[5] Steinman, S: 2006
[6] Human Rights Act, UK
[7] ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI Joint Programme on Workplace Violence, 2001
[8]Adapted from Human Rights Act, UK
[9] ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI Joint Programme on Workplace Violence, 2001
[10] Susan Steinman, Workplace Dignity Institute, 2006

HOSPITAL WORKPLACE BULLYING- Dr Anne Sneddon Steps Down Over Bullying Where 9 Doctors resigned within 1 year

Head of Canberra Hospital Obstetrics & Gynaecology leaves behind Workplace Bullying environment for new job interstate

The Canberra Times has a stub on the Canberra Hospital obstetrics and gynaecology clinical chief Anne Sneddon walking away.

Sneddons departure comes after a difficult two years for the obstetrics and gynaecology unit, including the resignations of several other staff and investigations into bullying and harassment allegations.

Katy Gallagher was on the beast this morning saying Dr Sneddon was just taking a long break and there’s no problem. But can we believe anything she says now?

The Canberra Times has been told that Dr Sneddon quit the hospital recently to take up a position interstate.

The unit has been the subject of two external reviews after allegations of workplace bullying and harassment were made and several staff resigned.

The first review examined maternity services across the ACT and found Canberra Hospital staff had unsustainable workloads and some were victims of inappropriate behaviour.

The second inquiry specifically focussed on the bullying and harassment allegations but the findings are being kept confidential.

Health Minister Katy Gallagher says Dr Anne Sneddon is taking 12 months leave to pursue other career options.

She says it has been a turbulent 12 months at the unit.

"I really can't answer why Dr Sneddon has chosen now other than to say I think for everyone who has worked in the unit it has been a difficult 12 months," she said.

"We are on the road to making some major improvements, but Dr Sneddon has chosen to pursue some other opportunities elsewhere for a period of time."

Ms Gallagher says she hopes Dr Sneddon eventually returns to ACT Health.

"She is a very significant obstetrician and gynaecologist, nationally renowned. She does a lot of work in the third world, training and teaching midwives how to deliver babies," she said.

"She is an amazing doctor and I hope she comes back."

The ACT Opposition has renewed calls for the findings of the confidential review to be released.

Health spokesman Jeremy Hanson says there needs to be an open inquiry into the how the unit operates.

"This is nothing to do with a particular resignation. What I'm concerned about is the systemic issues, what actually occurred, why the complaints that were made were ignored, and has this been dealt with satisfactorily," he said.

source

THE BACKGROUND TO THE CANBERRA HOSPITAL WORKPLACE BULLYING

DOCTORS QUIT OVER 'HOSPITAL BULLYING'

The maternity unit at the Canberra Hospital could be on the verge of a staffing crisis, with nine doctors resigned in the past 12 months.

Six obstetricians have blamed a hostile working environment, with some complaining of bullying at management level, according to an industry representative.

Four junior doctors have also terminated their training at the hospital early over the past year, with more departures on the horizon.

The ACT representative for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Andrew Foote, said the doctors had approached him with concerns about the workplace culture and perceived bullying. He said some had complained of having difficulty getting days off work, while others had been humiliated by the way problems with patient management had been dealt with.

Dr Foote said at least one doctor had reported she had made a formal complaint to senior management and had been dissuaded from taking the matter further.

''The concern at a college level is that these are senior doctors at the highest level who have left the system,'' Dr Foote said.

''[One of the doctors] didn't leave town, which I think is particularly damning he just moved to the northside.''

Six doctors had also written to ACT Health Minister Katy Gallagher, offering to apply for two vacancies only if the workplace environment could be improved.

Dr Foote said there was now a shortage of obstetricians, with only half the number needed to properly treat the number of patients going through the system.

''I think they [the hospital] are adopting the approach of 'There's nothing wrong, mate'.''

OPPOSITION CALLS FOR BULLYING REPORT RELEASE

The ACT Opposition says the government is acting cowardly by refusing to release a report into claims of bullying at Canberra Hospital.

Nine obstetricians have resigned from the hospital since the the start of last year, amid allegations of doctor shortages, harassment and bullying.

ACT Health says it has finished its inquiry, but is bound by the Public Interest Disclosure Act not to release the findings.

MALPRACTICE COVER UP? Problems at Canberra Hospital denied

The ACT government has defended an exodus of obstetricians from Canberra Hospital amid claims of a senior doctor shortage and workplace bullying.

The hospital has lost nine obstetricians over the past 13 months and has been rocked by allegations senior staff pushed for a late-term abortion for a baby later born healthy, the ABC reports.

The Royal College of Obstetricians says doctors have reported a culture of poor management and bullying as well as lack of senior medical staff at the hospital.

They'd since "voted with their feet", the college's Andrew Foote said.

The hospital and ACT Health have also been accused of trying to hide medical blunders. The most explosive claims centres around the case of an expecting mother in 2008. Just five weeks into her pregnancy, Fiona Vanderhook was told by a trainee doctor that she had lost her baby and should terminate using a drug called misoprostol.

Ms Vanderhook took misoprostol but it failed and later tests showed the baby was still alive, the ABC reported. Scans then revealed the foetus had developed fluid on the brain — most likely caused by Ms Vanderhook taking the termination drug.

Later six separate specialists told Ms Vanderhook her baby appeared to be developing normally and had every chance of being born healthy. But senior staff at Canberra Hospital continued to push for the baby to be terminated, even as late as 31 weeks into the pregnancy.

source

7 Deadly Sins of BAD MANAGERS - What Managers & Supervisors Must Avoid in the Workplace

Every supervisor has his or her flaws, some more egregious than others. Here we look at a few of the most pervasive mistakes that bosses make, plus how to avoid them.

No boss is perfect, but some are less perfect than others. While it is impossible to satisfy every employee's needs throughout their career, certain types of managerial behavior are almost guaranteed to rub workers the wrong way. Whether it's seizing undeserved credit, imposing unrealistic workloads or simply failing to listen to employees' concerns, a pattern of bad management can lead to significant declines in performance and may even cost a supervisor his or her career. This makes it vital to promptly correct such mistakes or, better yet, avoid them in the first place.

"Few things incite a frothing, wild-eyed rage like asking people to talk about bad bosses. People aren't just annoyed by poor leadership — they sputter and snarl as they describe their superiors, lusting for the chance to hit that bad boss with a perfect, withering insult," CNN.com explains. "It's a little scary, then, to realize that we're all likely to occupy a leadership role, from motherhood to mogulhood, at some point in our lives. When we blow it, our imperfections will be magnified by our authority."

A surprising number of managers display archetypal forms of bad behavior. According to a Florida State University survey last month, many employees believe their superiors embody one of the seven deadly sins:

• Wrath — 26 percent said their boss has trouble managing anger;
• Greed — 27 percent said their boss pursues undeserved rewards;
• Sloth — 41 percent said their boss lazily pushes work onto others;
• Pride — 31 percent said their boss craves undeserved admiration;
• Lust — 33 percent said their boss needs to have his or her ego stroked every day;
• Envy — 19 percent said their boss is jealous of others' successes; and
• Gluttony — 23 percent said their boss hoards resources that could be useful to others at work.

"Employees with leaders who committed these 'sins' contributed less effort (40 percent less), felt overloaded as a result of forced responsibility for their supervisor's work (33 percent more), were less likely to make creative suggestions (66 percent less) and received fewer resources to effectively do their job (60 percent less) than those without this negative type of leadership," Christian Ponder, a research associate at Florida State's College of Business who worked on the survey, said.

While the most common faults seem to be obvious, it can be surprisingly difficult to recognize bad managerial qualities in oneself. Cultivating a sense of discernment to better spot negative employee reactions is an important skill that can distinguish a good boss from a mediocre one.

"The most crucial test of a boss is self-awareness. The best bosses are in tune with how the little things they say and do impact people, and they are adept at adjusting to bolster both performance and dignity," Bob Sutton, a professor in Stanford University's department of management science and engineering, notes at AMEX OPEN Forum. "Several studies, including one by the College Board, suggest that the more incompetent a boss is, the more out of touch he or she is likely to be."

There are several signals in the workplace that can point to bad tendencies in a manager. BNET lists some of the common signs of a managerial problem, including:

• Your team is underperforming. Bad management trickles down and eventually affects the rest of the organization, causing your workers' performance to deteriorate.
• Your own boss is putting on the pressure. When a senior manager notices a subordinate manager is having trouble, he or she might start paying a lot more attention to that person. If your supervisor turns on the heat, it may be a sign that something is wrong with your management style.
• Your allies start to drift away. When your work friends or supporters start distancing themselves from you, it's a strong signal that things are not going well for you at the company and others know it.
• Your employees are miserable. A group of consistently unhappy employees usually means a bad manager is in their lives. Pay attention to how your workers are doing to get a clear gauge of your own performance.

While there's no single measure that can turn someone into a good boss, recognizing negative behaviors and working to mend them can be a crucial step in rebuilding employees' confidence in your abilities and providing a better work environment for your colleagues.

"Who you are shows up most clearly in the relationships you form with others, especially those for whom you're responsible," Harvard Business Review explains. "It's easy to get those crucial relationships wrong. Effective managers possess the self-awareness and self-management required to get them right."

This means that spotting when you're engaged in one of the "deadly sins" of bad management and paying close attention to your workers' needs, your own boss's expectations and the way others treat you within the company are necessary stages in becoming a better manager.

source

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace - A Canadian Perspective

Sexual harassment: A thing of the past. No longer a problem. Why worry about it? Took the course, heard the message, bought the T-shirt. In the States, multi-million dollar sexual harassment lawsuits hardly get notice anymore. A couple years ago, in five short paragraphs, in the less-than-prominent "Careers" section of the Vancouver Sun, here was a headline: "Dial Corp. Settles Sex Harassment Suit."

The article was so obscure and tiny, you'd think the soap-making corporation had merely received a slap on the wrist. In fact, the article noted that Dial paid $10 million dollars over allegations of sexual harassment.

Here in Canada, as most of us know, huge sexual harassment payouts don't happen. But on a per capita basis, Canada must have as many sexual harassment issues as the States, which means the issue of sexual harassment harms employee morale and retention, and an organization's bottom line. In Canada, as in the United States, sexual harassment is bad for business.

Is it difficult to imagine sexual harassment cases still taking place in Canadian workplaces in 2009? I continue to marvel at the fact that all kinds of sexual harassment cases continue to roll out on a daily basis. And I’m forced to admit that, since most people don't report sexual and other forms of harassment, it's much more prevalent than we imagine.

But is sexual harassment just about sex? In 1989, then-Chief Justice Brian Dixon of the Supreme Court of Canada, in a unanimous decision, said “sexual harassment in the workplace may be broadly defined asunwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that detrimentally affects the work environment or leads to adverse job-related consequences for the victims of the harassment. It is…an abuse of power… [that] attacks the dignity and self-respect of the victim both as an employee and as a human being." (emphasis added)

(Here is a training video for managers and supervisors to use in the workplace called: How do you define harassment, bullying and other inappropriate types of behaviour.)

Today, the italicized part of that decision serves to define sexual harassment in Canada. To prove sexual harassment, a person needs to show he or she endured unwelcome sexual attention and that it had detrimental or negative consequences. While the consequences can be the classic, “You show me some sexual attention and I'll let you keep your job,” they don't have to go that far.

Managers and supervisors can learn more about sexual harassment, and how to prevent it in the workplace, by downloading:

.mp3 audio file “Chapter Three – Harassment Headaches” of Stephen Hammond’s book Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

Paperback of Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

.pdf of Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

A person who endures provocative pictures on the wall, or sexual jokes told in the lunchroom is often a person being subjected to sexual harassment. This is often referred to as a tainted, poisoned or hostile work environment. Hence, sexual harassment isn’t just about sex

Since the courts have ruled that sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination, treating women negatively while treating men positively can constitute sexual harassment. In other words, if snide or rude comments are made to women but not to men, and they negatively impact the women's workplace comfort level, this is sexual harassment. The reverse is also true if men are the predominant targets.

My advice is to think of sexual harassment as more than the textbook case of a lecherous male boss. Non-sexual negative comments towards one particular gender, or a man harassing a man, or a woman harassing a woman all qualify. That said, it should come as no surprise that most sexual harassment still involves a man sexually harassing a woman. And you’d be surprised where sexual harassment can occur….such as even outside of work.

If an employee does something outside of work that has a negative impact back in the workplace, the employer may well find himself or herself dealing with a sexual harassment problem. Otherwise, imagine the loopholes, especially given today’s technology. Ed would just have to wait until after work to send lewd e-mails, faxes, and voice mail messages to his co-worker Tricia’s home. Or leave sexually explicit messages under her car’s windshield wipers.

Back at work, of course, Ed acts like a perfect gentleman. But if Tricia is disturbed by his actions, and we apply the definition of sexual harassment, what have we got? An employee receiving sexual attention she doesn't want, with negative consequences: a tainted work environment. Tricia is on edge all the workday wondering what Ed will pull next.

(Here is a link to a training video you can purchase and download called: Reducing discrimination of women at work.)

I investigated just such a case for a client. One night after their shift in the company parking lot, an employee asked a female colleague if she'd like a ride home. Having no reason to suspect anything except courtesy from a fellow worker, she accepted the ride. As soon as she noticed he was going in the wrong direction, she asked to be taken home or at least dropped off. He told her he just needed to pick up something from his apartment, then he'd take her home. As soon as he parked the car in his underground garage, she leapt out and escaped. She made her way back to the workplace, completely distraught.

Since she never made it to his apartment, we'll never know what his final motives were. The company hired me to investigate; in the meantime, the male employee was placed on an unpaid leave of absence. His union, protecting his interests, argued that since all of this had happened outside the workplace, it wasn’t a workplace harassment case.

The union stressed that the woman should have referred it to the police. But I knew the law said otherwise. I suggested termination of employment for the young man, because even if he’d been placed on a different shift from the woman who filed the complaint, I knew she’d never feel comfortable with the notion that she might cross paths with him again on work premises.

The company severed his employment, but stipulated that if he underwent counseling and was able to show he was no longer a threat to women in the firm, he could have his job back. He declined to pursue this option, his union's grievance was dropped, and his termination of employment was upheld.

Most sexual harassment cases off workplace property are not as severe, and do not end up with a person being fired. In my experience, most involve booze, parties or an infatuation. As comedian Phyllis Diller has said, "What I don't like about office Christmas parties is looking for a job the next day." Perhaps we should encourage employees to take that to heart. When companies hire me to train employees about sexual harassment issues, they often ask me to dwell a little on booze and company outings, thanks to unfortunate incidents in their past.

Not that employees shouldn’t socialize after hours. When problems do occur, most off-premises conflicts do not involve sexual harassment. Personality conflicts or other problems that don't fit the definition of sexual harassment do not have to be settled with a harassment policy or procedure. You might have a problem on your hands, but it won't be sexual harassment

Infatuations are particularly tricky to identify and deal with. As often as not, the person needs counseling of some kind. The role of a supervisor is simply to let the spurned employee know he needs to keep his feelings in check, while ensuring that the object of his desires feels completely comfortable bringing any problem to your attention. You can minimize the chances of off-premises issues becoming a bigger problem by letting employees know even their actions off the worksite can become a workplace concern.

Here are some training resources that Managers and Supervisors can use in the workplace relating to Sexual harassment:

Video: Dealing effectively with sexual harassment in an industrial or male-dominated environment

Video: Sexual harassment and the court’s ever-expanding interpretations

Video: Reducing discrimination of women at work

.mp3 audio file “Chapter Three – Harassment Headaches” of Stephen Hammond’s book Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

Paperback of Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

.pdf of Managing Human Rights at work: 101 practical tips to prevent human rights disasters

source

TURKEY - Workplace Bullying Lawsuits Expected To Skyrocket

The passing of a law offering expanded protection against workplace harassment is expected to create an increase in the already growing number of bullying-related lawsuits in Turkey.

For the first time, employers are obligated to protect all workers from psychological abuse under the revised Article 417 of the Debts Law that Parliament passed last week.

Previously, the law focused specifically on protecting both female and male workers from sexual abuse in the workplace.

Lawsuits related to workplace bullying, also known as “mobbing,” have already increased in Turkey due to the growing level of societal awareness on the topic. With the new law, however, the number of legal cases is expected to skyrocket.

Workplace bullying is most frequently seen in the finance, education, health and communications sectors, as well as in the military, according to Çağlar Çabuk, the founder of the Workplace Bullying Training and Support Center. She said the entire private sector has been waiting for such a law to be instituted, though further measures are still necessary.

The biggest problem in bullying-related lawsuits is proving that systematic harassment took place, Çabuk said. “There are witnesses, but nobody wants to take the stand.”

She suggested the system implemented in Germany as a solution to this issue. “In Germany, a witness [to workplace harassment] cannot be fired from work for a year,” she said. “Don’t you have the urge to help someone who is being beaten up in the street? It is the same thing. Someone is suffering before you, but you do nothing.”

If companies want to fight against workplace bullying, they should set up ethics boards, Çabuk said.

“Even small- and medium-size enterprises, which have less than 250 workers, should set up ethics boards,” she said. “In a company, we can defend our rights by sticking to an ethics law. That will be our guide. We should include mobbing in ethics, too.”

Çabuk additionally called for the disciplines of law, psychology, psychiatry, criminology, human-resources management and business science to be applied to solving the problem of workplace bullying.

Women affected more

Sixty percent of the 135 people who have sought the support of Çabuk’s Workplace Bullying Training and Support Center over the past year are women. According to psychiatrist Derya Deniz, women are more open to support and have an easier time expressing their feelings. “Men hide it; they don’t want others to say, ‘He couldn’t cope,’” she said.

The most frequent problems involved in mobbing cases examined by the center were lambasting, belittling and gossiping about the victim, as well as a general disapproval of the individual’s work. Some victims receiving support from the center decided to take their cases to court, while others were satisfied with receiving psychological support or having their stories listened to. In addition, some cases that initially seemed to be incidents of workplace bullying were ultimately determined not to be so, while some people who explained how they had been treated eventually even turned out to be the bullies themselves.

The aim of filing lawsuits is to discourage perpetrators, according to lawyer Metin İriz, who has given legal support in bullying cases to some 20 people. Before workplace bullying was defined under the law, such cases were generally filed as lawsuits for damage, libel suits and harassment cases.

One of his İriz’s clients is a vocational high school teacher in Istanbul identified only as F.İ. who has filed a lawsuit alleging cruelty by the headmaster and deputy headmasters of the school. The Bakırköy High Criminal Court accepted the indictment two weeks ago, something that could set an example for future cases. The first trial is scheduled for March.

F.İ. claims that because she is a widow, neither the headmaster nor the deputies wanted her at the school. She said they spread gossip about her with the help of other teachers and did everything they could to keep her away from the school. During the process, F.İ. had two heart attacks. When she came to İriz for legal help, the center immediately obtained a report from the psychiatry department at Istanbul University’s School of Medicine indicating that she was suffering from “major depression” and “post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Following this, İriz consulted with a criminal jurist. If F.İ. wins her case, he said, the accused could be punished with eight to 15 years in prison on charges of cruelty toward a member of the public.

More protection to come

Under the new law passed by Parliament, psychological abuse in the workplace is described as including verbal insults, belittling, leaving a person alone on purpose, excluding an employee from company activities and assigning a worker either too little or too much work. The real purpose of any of these systematic acts of bullying and intimidation is to wear a worker down until he or she quits the job. Such behavior, however, is different than job-related tension, stress or momentary outbursts.

In addition, a draft law on “The Board for Equality and Fighting against Discrimination” that gives a detailed description of harassment is pending at the Prime Ministry. If passed, it is expected to serve as a good reference to support jurists in bullying cases.

Workplace bullying is also currently being discussed in a sub-commission of the Parliamentary Commission on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men. The commission, which has consulted expert views, is expected to release a report in late February.

source

SURVEY - Bullying Rampant in the US, 35 per cent of Americans are bullied at work

The majority of bullying is same-gender harassment

Thirty-five per cent of Americans report experiencing workplace bullying firsthand, according to a 2010 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI) in Bellingham, Wash. An additional 15 per cent of survey respondents report witnessing it.

The survey defined bullying as "repeated, health harming abusive conduct committed by bosses and co-workers." The institute also issued another single-question survey in order to make the direct comparison to the 2007 survey of this nature. In this second survey, workplace bullying was defined as "repeated mistreatment: sabotage by others that prevented work from getting done, verbal abuse, threatening conduct, intimidation and humiliation." Thirty-seven per cent of Americans reported experiencing workplace bullying in the 2007 survey.

Of the two 2010 surveys, the first survey had 4,210 respondents across America and the one single-item survey had 2,092 respondents.

The majority of bullying (68 per cent) is same-gender harassment. The survey found women bullies target women in 80 per cent of cases. This harassment is mostly legal according to anti-discrimination laws and workplace policies in the United States, said the WBI. Bullying is four times more prevalent than illegal harassment, the institute found in its first workplace bullying survey in 2007.

The survey also found that 62 per cent of bullies are men and 58 per cent of targets are women.

The Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI) wrote the survey and commissioned Zogby International to collect data for this representative study of all adult Americans on the topic of workplace bullying.

source

Workplace Bullying Runs Rampant

UPDATE - IS THIS THE WORLDS MOST EXTREME SEXUAL HARASSMENT WORKPLACE? NAVY SEX RING RULED UNACCEPTABLE

"The (defence) command structure down has zero tolerance for such unacceptable behaviour."

Sex shame of HMAS Success sinks navy reputation

Ship of shame ... HMAS Success

A JUDICIAL inquiry into the navy's ship of sex shame HMAS Success uncovered a "tribal" culture of bullying, sex, drug and alcohol abuse and high-level incompetence.

The Gillard Government has refused to release the damning report by retired judge Roger Gyles QC that has so far cost taxpayers more than $4 million.

The 400-page HMAS Success Commission of Inquiry report was delivered to defence boss Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston earlier this month and passed to Defence Minister Stephen Smith on Sunday.

Mr Gyles, who is being paid $7700 a day to conduct the inquiry, was given an extra six months to produce part two of his report dealing with wider issues and recommendations.

It is understood the first part is highly critical of the navy's high command and how the allegations of sexual ledgers, bullying, drunkenness and sexual misconduct on the navy's largest ship were dealt with by senior officers.

Those allegations included public sex acts in Asian bars, intimidation, drunken attacks on private property and sexual misconduct between senior male officers and junior female officers. Both Mr Smith and ACM Houston yesterday expressed grave concerns about the contents of the report.

Mr Smith said it raised "very concerning" matters of discipline and "so-called tribal culture".

"[The report] doesn't make good reading, either about the suggestions of individual conduct or the suggestions of discipline," Mr Smith said.

"The report goes to not just individual conduct, on and off the ships, but also goes to matters of discipline, goes to matters of authority."

Mr Smith said humans weren't perfect but that bad behaviour should not become institutional.

He refused to release the Gyles Report on the grounds of due process.

Hinting at the seriousness of the findings, ACM Houston said it would take "some time" to analyse the report and to decide what to do about it.

ACM Houston will brief a Senate Committee into the HMAS Success matter when Parliament resumes.

source

UK - Health Worker Bullied by NHS for asking colleagues to consider abortion's impact gets her job back

A health worker who faced the sack after giving an NHS colleague a booklet about the potential dangers of abortion has been allowed to return to work.

Margaret Forrester, 39, claimed to have been ‘bullied’ and ‘treated like a criminal’ for expressing her religious views, but said yesterday that she has now been offered a better job at the same NHS trust.

Miss Forrester, claims she was suspended in November last year after she handed the £4 pro-life booklet called Forsaken – published by a charity – to her colleague. It detailed the physical and psychological trauma experienced by five women from Taunton, Somerset, who terminated their pregnancies.

She said she offered it to a family planning worker during a private conversation because she felt the NHS did not give enough information about the potential risks of abortion.

The mental health worker, who has been employed by the NHS for six years, said there was no sign her colleague, with whom she had discussed abortion, was offended by the booklet or by their conversation.

'Treated like a criminal': Margaret Forrester says she has now been offered a better job by the NHS

But a few days later her manager told her she was being sent home on ‘special leave with full pay’. She was ordered not to see any patients and to stay away from all NHS sites while the trust investigated.

Later, she was told she had not been suspended and could return to work, but claimed she was not allowed to do her normal job. Instead she was put on other duties, which she found ‘bullying and offensive’, adding: ‘I felt physically sickened by their bullying.’

She was eventually signed off on sick leave and has not been back to the health centre since.

Miss Forrester, who worked at the Central and North West London Mental Health Trust, in Camden, attended an internal disciplinary hearing last month where she was accused of ‘distributing materials some people may find offensive’.

Last night a spokesman for the trust said Miss Forrester had been warned not to distribute the ‘offensive’ material or anything similar again, but confirmed she had been offered a new role within the trust.

Offensive? Margaret Forrester said she offered the booklet - Forsaken - to a family planning worker during a private conversation because she felt the NHS did not give enough information about the potential risks of abortion

Miss Forrester said: ‘My employers have not given me any warnings of any kind. They have offered me a new, better role with a wider scope. If at any point they do send me a warning, I will challenge it in court.

‘It was incredible that I was suspended in the first place, just because I expressed a personal opinion. I should be able to express my opinion privately without fear and act freely in good conscience. Today is a victory for freedom of speech. I want to thank all of those who have prayed for me and supported me.’

Andrea Minichiello Williams, a barrister who runs the Christian Legal Centre which supported Miss Forrester, said: ‘The level of intolerance in the public sphere, demonstrated increasingly in public sector employment, is deeply worrying. ‘We hope that today’s decision by the NHS will help to reverse the tide of intolerance. This is a victory for freedom of conscience and freedom of speech.’

source

ADVICE FOR 2011 - Don’t Take Shit From Hyenas in the Workplace

How to become wise to office bullying

Watch your back or you may be the victim of a Workplace Hyena looking for a kill! This is the warning given by Dr Susan Steinman in her book, Don’t take shit from hyenas in the workplace. Steinman should know: she has spent 16 years studying Workplace Hyenas – bullies who use underhand and malevolent tactics to destroy rivals to gain money and power.

In the famous The Lion King film, various animals are archetypes for certain human characteristics.

The hyena is depicted as treacherous, cunning and two-faced. Similarly, Steinman uses the hyena as an archetype for the bully.

When one meets Steinman in person, she is cheerful, optimistic and down to earth, and one wonders why she involves herself in the murky world of dirty office politics.

“At first, it was a process of discovery through my research, but when I saw the dreadful impact of bullying, I had to become involved,” she explains.

Steinman has two doctorates, is founder of the Workplace Dignity Institute, and is currently director of the Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at the University of Johannesburg.

She is considered a leading expert on the subject of violence and bullying in the workplace, and assists victims all over the world. She was awarded an Ashoka fellowship in 2002 for her pioneering work in research, raising awareness and the development of programmes to tackle these issues.

We caught up with Steinman shortly before she jetted off to Cape Town, Amsterdam and then Saudi Arabia to address audiences about how to become Hyena-wise.

Her clever use of the hyena metaphor, which she finds is universally recognised, is her way of injecting lightness into a rather dark subject.

Humour, she believes, can be therapeutic and diminishes the power of the bully in the eyes of the victim.

So how does one identify a Workplace Hyena?

“They operate in overt and covert ways,” says Steinman. “Some scream, shout, throw tantrums and deliberately humiliate employees. Sometimes they resort to passive aggression, ignoring and isolating a victim, or use sarcasm and innuendo at the victim’s expense.”

Steinman describes e-mail as a terrible tool in the hands of a Workplace Hyena, who will copy an entire audience to belittle an employee. Other more covert methods are labelling, gossiping, half truths and conspiracies.

She says bullying must not be confused with normal conflict or strict discipline. Bullying is about 80% top down, is persistent and prolonged over a period of time. There is an imbalance in power. Its intention is to harm and degrade an individual.

Sometimes a subordinate will work to undermine a superior. “An example is of a personal assistant who knew exactly what her manager’s movements were, but would say that she had no idea where he was – implying he was incompetent. But Hyenas always operate in a clan, and she was under its protection,” says Steinman.

At the top of the clan are the Royal Hyenas – the Makhula Hyena and the Squeeza. They are supported by Power Hyenas (the Laughing, Quiet, Halo and Mampara Hyenas). Also in the clan are Competitive and Impimpi Hyenas (Den Creeper and Shit-Stirrer Hyenas).

Many organisations encourage a “kill or be killed” mentality. “These are Hyena Positive Enterprises, and a prime example of this was Enron where the Hyenas became untouchable,” says Steinman.

The Clan is headed by the Makula Hyena (Zulu for “great one”), usually employed in a key position. Steinman says former British prime minister Gordon Brown has allegedly been identified by his own staff as a bully; as well as Henry Kissinger.

Driven by power, the Makhula Hyena prefers to manipulate people. Being a clever strategist, the Makhula will use other Hyenas to ‘finish off’ a victim.

Every Workplace Hyena tries to get closer to the Squeeza, the protégé of the Makula. “It is almost pathetic to see a person squirm at the feet of the favourite, who may be of a lower rank than those trying to get into its good books.

“They often resemble the Makhula in many ways and keep ‘the boss’ informed at all times.

“The Squeeza can destroy careers because of its alliance with the Makula,” says Steinman.

Next in rank are Power Hyenas, who can be extrovert, dynamic and expressive. They can appear charming, intelligent and sometimes sympathetic. These traits can be very appealing to an uninformed non-Hyena. But Power Hyenas only support clan members. They are two-faced and do not like competent, dynamic non-Hyenas, and they never share their limelight.

The Quiet Hyenas are very dangerous, says Steinman. “They enjoy gaining power by intimidation and gathering intelligence for the Clan. This hyena is normally introverted, but an air of danger lurks around them.”

Even more treacherous, although lower ranking, are the Competitive Hyenas. They are ambitious, unethical and have a relentless drive to win at all costs, with an eye on displacing their superiors – even within the Clan.

When a Hyena decides to hunt, it does a risk assessment. It will only hunt someone who is vulnerable at work or in their personal life.

Steinman describes this tactic in the following case (names have been changed):

Rita, a bright and competent employee, was on her way up the corporate ladder. She worked for James, who realised her potential and was developing her into a managerial position.

Anna, another staff member, became extremely jealous of this relationship, as it threatened her career aspirations.

Rita’s general popularity was another thorn in Anna’s side. She started spreading rumours that James and Rita were having an affair, despite Rita being completely devoted to her fiancé. When Rita fell pregnant, Anna exploited the situation by insinuating that James was the father.

Rita was vulnerable, unwed and pregnant – easy prey for Anna, who used Rita’s circumstances to launch a “Hyena Attack”.

Rita went through one of the worst periods in her life. Though she survived, she has never forgotten the trauma of being attacked by a Workplace Hyena.

And then there is the Mampara Hyena. The African word mampara, meaning an “incompetent or foolish person”, ideally describes these Hyenas who resort to excessive bullying tactics and blatant lies to assert their dominance. More often than not, they get away with incompetence because the Clan protects them.

One of the more bizarre tactics Steinman has witnessed was the threat of witchcraft by a Workplace Hyena in the public sector, which resulted in high levels of absenteeism.

Impimpi is an African word for an “informer”.

The Impimpi Hyenas are exactly that – the low-ranking informers and intelligence gatherers such as the Shit-Stirrer Hyena. They thrive on gossip. These deceitful hyenas appear to side with everyone and anyone. But they feel safe in the Hyena Clan, and that is exactly where their loyalties lie.

Steinman does, however, warn against stigmatising the bully, as she believes everyone has the potential to bully. “Power and money are great tests of character. Look at some of our politicians who were once humble and idealistic, but became swollen headed and self-serving when elevated by politics. Anyone can fall under the spell of money and power and become Hyenas.”

She says certain events trigger increased Hyena behaviour. She calls them “work quakes”, for example retrenchments, mergers, changes in management and restructuring.

“Some organisations engage in serial restructuring or, to coin a word, ‘destructuring’.

“We even use violent words like ‘can’, ‘kill’ and ‘purge’. But it is an illusion that this is an effective solution.

“There seems to be a loss of creative thinking about how to improve business. Constant restructuring creates insecurity and can kill the soul of the business and its employees,” says Steinman.

“The recession has definitely triggered an upsurge in workplace bullying in both the public and private sectors.”

But surely, Hyena tactics are merely part and parcel of normal corporate politics?

Steinman does not accept this. “The trail of angst left by Workplace Hyenas has a detrimental effect on organisations. It makes employees unproductive, increases absenteeism and chases away real talent.

“It has been estimated that people who are being bullied lose 4.5 hours of productivity per week over a year (this includes the witnesses) in surveys done in the US and UK.

“It is highly counterproductive and can do reputational damage,” she adds.

Bullying is likely to seriously impact on the emotional and physical well-being of employees. Steinman says people who consult her compare being bullied to rape and physical abuse.

“There is a deep sense of hurt and betrayal. There is also a sense of shame at being bullied, that they are somehow to blame. This is exactly what the bully wants the victim to feel, so abuse continues to thrive.”

The impact can be so severe on victims that many suffer depression, anxiety, high blood pressure, migraines, ulcers, exhaustion, panic attacks
and illness. Some even have suicidal thoughts.

Research conducted by the European Union in 2000 found that many people still had symptoms of post-traumatic stress five years after being bullied.

People often label the victim a loser or deserving of their fate. But anyone can be a victim, even the most successful, popular and highly competent, if one is seen as a threat to a Hyena.

“No one deserves this, even if the person is perhaps irritating, neurotic or seen as a nerd,” says Steinman. “This is a human rights issue.

“Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect in the workplace.”

She believes that bullying has to be confronted openly and transparently. “One needs to hold up a mirror to the bully. Sometimes that person may listen because no one likes being labelled a bully. There is a name for a bully – a Hyena. It is shameful. That is why awareness programmes can successfully reduce the frequency of bullying.”

Steinman believes policies are effective deterrents for Workplace Hyenas. But a policy is only as good as the paper it is written on.

Top management must commit to and support these policies and implement them vigorously to sustain a Hyena-free corporate culture.

“A golden rule is that the ego of the most senior employee is not worth the dignity of the person lowest in the hierarchy,” she says. “Management must keep relationships in an organisation healthy in order to encourage productivity and success. We need to create a more people-centred economy, where it is the norm to treat people with dignity and respect.”

Don’t take shit from hyenas in the workplace is available online from www.thepeoplebottomline.com.

source