Tackling workplace bullies

Bullying in the workplace is an increasing problem. Often considered to be purely a health and safety issue, a more holistic approach is needed to tackle the problem .

Bullying has moved from playground to workplace. The belligerent boss with poor management style exists in every workplace, and statistics show that employers are paying a heavy price, with a 12-fold increase in stress claims over the last two years.

The first nationwide survey of workplace bullying to be undertaken across a number of occupations and sectors in Britain was conducted in 2000.1

Its definition of bullying emphasised the negative, persistent and long-term nature of the experience.

It found that about one in 10 people had been bullied over the previous six months, split equally over gender and age groups. Bullying affects workers and managers equally. The study also found that bullying had a significant effect on physical and mental health, and the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) has identified it as a significant risk factor in work-related stress.

In the UK, we have sophisticated employment and health and safety laws. This creates a minefield of liability for any practitioner, whether in occupational health or human resources, and the need to adopt a holistic approach, pulling together both areas, is vital.

What is bullying?

Bullying is not a technical term. It covers a vast range of behaviours. A good starting point is Acas' no-nonsense guidance on bullying and harassment at work, which characterises bullying as "offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power through means intended to undermine, humiliate, denigrate or injure the recipient".

Examples of harassment and bullying from the both the Acas guide and the TUC's website on bullying include:

- Copying critical memos about someone to others who do not need to know

- Ridiculing or demeaning someone - picking on them or setting them up to fail

- Overbearing supervision

- Deliberately undermining a competent worker by overloading and constant criticism.

Bullying can also take on a corporate quality. Corporate bullying is often about presenteeism, where employees stay at work longer than necessary because (real or imagined) office culture demands it. Pressure to work excessively long hours on a regular basis can take a number of forms, including the 'carrot' of increased remuneration or the 'stick' of redundancy or other dismissal.

Legal framework

As the law currently stands, there are no specific rules dealing with workplace bullying. There are, however, numerous legal remedies available to employees who fall victim to oppressive behaviour. Liability issues explain why bullying has been on the European agenda for some time.

In 2001, the European Parliament passed a resolution on bullying. It stated that it is a serious problem at work and urged member states to review and, if appropriate, supplement their existing legislation and review and standardise the definition of bullying.

In March last year, the European Commission, as part of its 2002-2006 health and safety strategy, identified "psychosocial" problems and illnesses, including psychological harassment and violence at work, as a new risk. It has stated its intention to issue a proposal for a directive on psychological harassment and violence in the workplace.

Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974

Under section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA), every employer should ensure the health and safety of its employees, so far as is reasonably practicable and, if it fails to do so, it commits a criminal offence. Penalties range from fines of up to £20,000 and/or up to six months' imprisonment.

Senior members of a company, such as directors, company secretaries and managers, may be prosecuted if the breach of the Act was committed with their "consent or connivance" or can be attributed to their negligence.

Where an employer does not take adequate steps within the workplace to eradicate bullying, in serious cases, employer and senior management may find themselves in trouble.

Although the day when the HSE prosecutes company managers for allowing bullying to go unchecked is some way off, compliance with the very high standard set by the statutes needs to be a top priority. The reason for this is that insurance companies are increasingly requiring employers to demonstrate compliance as a precondition of ongoing insurance coverage.

Negligence

Insurance is key because of the growing incidence of negligence claims facing employers. The common law imposes a duty upon employers to take reasonable care to provide a safe system of work and competent fellow employees.

Given the ever-increasing awareness of the psychological and physical effects of sustained bullying within the workplace, such inappropriate behaviour is to be regarded as a reasonably foreseeable hazard. Therefore, employers can, and are, liable for negligence where they know, or ought to have known, of the risks but failed to take reasonable steps to prevent damage arising.

The case of Walker v Northumberland County Council, 1995, IRLR 35 established that an employer could be found liable for a stress-related illness.

It is clearly foreseeable that, where individuals are victims of campaigns of bullying, they may suffer stress-related illnesses, which, following Walker, may entitle them to receive significant compensatory awards. Many more recent stress cases, including the Sutherland v Hatton decision in 2002, have confirmed the Walker approach.

Another recent case, Young v The Post Office, 2002, EWCA Civ 661(CA), serves as a warning to employers that, where stress is foreseeable, effective management is key.

In Young, the court upheld a damages award of £94,000 for an employee who returned to work after a nervous breakdown, then suffered a second period of stress-related illness. The Post Office (PO) arranged for Young to return to work on a flexible basis but failed to ensure that its plans were carried through.

In the court's view, the PO was in breach of its duty of care as it was reasonably foreseeable that Young's illness might recur following his return to work.

The court also rejected the PO's argument that Young had been contributorily negligent by inflicting the stress on himself by taking on too much work. Young was psychiatrically vulnerable and the court recognised that it would be rare for an employee to have to take responsibility for working hard in these circumstances.

Breach of contract

A further potential remedy available to an employee who is being bullied at work is a claim for breach of contract, specifically a breach of the implied term that an employer will provide a safe system of work.

Case law - Waltons & Morse v Dorrington, 1997, IRLR 488 (EAT) - has established that an employer is under a duty to provide a reasonably tolerable working environment.

It is important to realise that where an employer breaches his duty of care or employment contract, and damage results, the employee's ability to mitigate his loss by obtaining new employment quickly is severely curtailed. This has sent the cost of claims, and the cost of settling them, rocketing.

Discrimination

If bullying is combined in any way by reason of sex or race, it may amount to unlawful direct discrimination contrary to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (SDA) or the Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA).

Similar rules exist under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), if the bullying or harassment is on the basis that the individual is disabled.

Employer's liability for employees' unlawful acts

Provisions within the SDA, RRA and DDA serve to make an employer liable for the discriminatory acts of employees where those acts are done "in the course of the employee's employment".

There is a potential defence to a discriminatory claim if the employer can prove that it took such steps as were reasonably practicable to prevent the employee from doing that act or from behaving inappropriately. However, it will only be the most proactive employer who can avoid liability, by adopting the measures set out in the box.

Unfair dismissal

An employee with one year's service may bring an unfair dismissal claim where he or she has been dismissed for a reason connected with being bullied or where the person has resigned, claiming constructive dismissal following bullying.

Where an employee successfully pursues a claim of unfair dismissal, compensation will be awarded, comprising a basic award of up to £7,800 dependent on their age, length of service and salary, together with a further compensatory award of up to £53,500, the exact amount of which will depend on the amount of any loss suffered.

Conclusion

Bullying is not new but the need to manage it is more critical than ever. Liabilities have sprung up from every conceivable quarter and over the whole range of employment and occupational health and safety law. The need for OH practitioners to get involved in territory traditionally policed by their HR counterparts has never been more pressing.

Partner Karen Seward and professional support lawyer Sheila Fahy are members of international law firm Allen & Overy's employment, pensions and incentives dept

Reference:

1. Destructive Conflict and Bullying at Work, April 2000, sponsored by the British Occupational Health Research Foundation, by Helge Hoel and Cary L Cooper

Taking precautions

Have a dignity at work policy

Effective policies and procedures should be put in place making clear that:

- Bullying on any grounds is unacceptable

- Employees found to have bullied others will be subject to disciplinary proceedings

- Employees subject to bullying have a right to complain without victimisation.

The policy should also make provision for complaints to be made to someone other than the employee's direct line manager (who may be the bully) and, ideally, to an independent person trained in harassment. There should also be provision to allow a complaint to be made to an individual of the same sex.

Investigate claims thoroughly

Following a complaint:

- A prompt and thorough investigation should be carried out in accordance with procedure

- Consideration may need to be given to suspending the alleged bully

- Consideration may need to be given to ensure the complainant is not required to work with the bully during the investigation.

If a complaint is substantiated, the bully should be disciplined in accordance with the disciplinary procedure.

This is particularly difficult, but essential, when the bully is a high performer, who others may look to as setting behavioural standards. The effectiveness of the policy statement and bullying procedure should be regularly reviewed.

Look for the warning signs

Employers must educate their line managers to act as a first line defence. There is no room for complacency. All managers, whether they are HR or a line manager, must receive training to assist them in identifying the signs of bullying. Symptoms may include poor morale, absenteeism and high staff turnover. It may also be appropriate to have exit interviews with departing employees to ascertain their reasons for leaving.

Training managers

Managers must be trained to adopt effective people skills. So often, managers are promoted because they are good at their job and they need help to manage their staff fairly, reasonably, and with dignity and respect. Legitimate performance concerns must be addressed on a regular and consistent basis.

Studies show that employees suffer the most stress when they feel their objectives and regular reporting lines are not clear and they are 'cast adrift'.

Employers must also be sensitive to the fact that pressure applied on senior management in particularly difficult economic circumstances is likely to result in that pressure being pushed down through organisations to those lower in the chain; too often to those who already feel less in control of their work than senior colleagues.