navigating human rights legislation, OH & S laws, and Criminal Code provisions dealing with harassment, and will address the difficult issue of identifying the appropriate forum, whether it be arbitration, the Human Rights Tribunal, the Labour Board, or the courts. The workshop will focus on such issues as: Detecting and identifying workplace bullying and harassment Investigative procedures, and disclosure of investigation reports The rights of the complainant and harasser, and the role of union representation Remedial actions (e.g. discipline, demotion, and reassignment of the harasser) Responding to the complainant: accommodation obligations and EAP options Drafting an anti-harassment policy: preventive measures, training programs, disciplinary responses, medical/psychological assessments Employer liability for harassment by supervisors and co-workers (including punitive and aggravated damages) Course tackles office bullying By Alex Frazer-Harrison We tend to think of bullies as tough kids in a schoolyard who pick on classmates. But bullying also occurs in the office, in the warehouse, and in the boardroom. For example, a manager might yell at an employee in front of his or her colleagues, or threaten their job for no good reason, or shovel so much work on the person that it becomes impossible to do satisfactory work. As part of efforts to raise awareness about workplace bullying, Continuing Education is offering a one-day Bullying in the Workplace seminar November 3 as part of its new Conflict Resolution certificate program. “ We talk about bullying in the schools all the time, and schools are teaching kids that it‟s wrong,” says program director Alison Toms (left). “But in the workplace it‟s a form of harassment, and employers should be focused on creating a respectful workplace.” Demand for the seminar is expected to be so high that it‟s open to people who may not be taking other courses in the Conflict Resolution program. Bullying is not yet covered by the same legislation that protects employees against sexual harassment or racial discrimination, says Patricia Ferris, a PhD student in the Department of Industrial Organizational Psychology, who has spent 10 years educating businesses about workplace bullying. Research has shown that as many as 70 percent of employees experience some form of “negative social behaviour. “ In the past, the employee was told to change themselves or seek counselling,” she says. “It‟s only recently that corporations are realizing they have to deal with this.” The Conflict Resolution course, including the Bullying in the Workplace seminar, is offered in partnership with the Centre for Conflict Resolution at the Justice Institute of British Columbia. Kent Highnam, coordinator of customized training, will teach the seminar. “ The seminar looks at exactly what is bullying,” says Highnam. “What are the behaviours? What might be the motivations? We look at who the victims might be. What is the impact of bullying on them?” Highnam says being able to identify bullying is a major step in a company improving the atmosphere of the workplace. “ We don‟t want to beat up on managers or administration,” he says. “It‟s difficult to formulate a response to something so insidious. Co-workers bully each other, and there can be bullying up (against management).” Toms says the seminar is open to anyone interested in creating healthy workplaces. This was on CTV Workplace Bullying This is a huge problem in Canada. There needs to be a law protecting targets from this type of physcological trauma. Rose Balis View Public Profile Send a private message to Rose Balis Send email to Rose Balis Find all posts by Rose Balis Add Rose Balis to Your Buddy List #2 08-29-2006, 10:11 AM evad54 Join Date: Feb 2005 Senior Member Posts: 2,214 Quote: Originally Posted by Rose Balis This is a huge problem in Canada. There needs to be a law protecting targets from this type of physcological trauma. There is its called harassment. __________________ Tom Selleck is Magnum not george gooney evad54 View Public Profile Send a private message to evad54 Send email to evad54 Find all posts by evad54 Add evad54 to Your Buddy List #3 08-29-2006, 01:55 PM Cosmo Join Date: May 2005 Senior Member Posts: 118 Didn't W-5 go into this a bit in that one about sociopaths? That was W-5 wasn't it? I sometimes get W-5 mixed up with the news journal show on the CBC, which is odd, because they're so different in styles. Cosmo View Public Profile Send a private message to Cosmo Find all posts by Cosmo Add Cosmo to Your Buddy List #4 08-29-2006, 04:11 PM Join Date: Jul 2006 gangstalking Location: T-dot Senior Member Posts: 137 That's a great show idea. Hi Rose Balis. I fully agree that it is a huge problem in Canada. Not just workplace bullies, but also workplace mobbing. Where a bully might be one or two individuals making your life hell. Mobbing is a much more targeted campaign designed to drive you fully out of the workplace. It's a horrible psychological attack that can leave the target scared for years and unable to work. Many people end up suffering from PTSD. (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.) That would be a great show idea. There is actually a Canadian Professor of Sociology University of Waterloo, Kenneth Westhues who has done extensive research on the subject and they could contact him. http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/%7ekwesthue/mobbing.htm Hi evad54. Maybe you know the answer to this. I understand that Quebec's law that passed a couple of years ago makes them the only province in Canada to cover the psychological harassment specifically that goes along with these types of workplace bullying. When I wrote them to confirm this, here is what they pointed to. This is from the norm de travail. It's a Quebec government website. If this is the case, then should not the rest of Canada be upgrading their standards to match. Not being a lawyer, it's my understanding that we do not have anything in the rest of Canada to match or equal it. This law that they passed, similar to the ones in Europe covers and is geared towards the psychological aspects of the harassment. Quote: Sect. 81.18 (IN FORCE ON JUNE 1, 2004) For the purposes of this Act, "psychological harassment" means any vexatious behaviour in the form of repeated and hostile or unwanted conduct, verbal comments, actions or gestures, that affects an employee's dignity or psychological or physical integrity and that results in a harmful work environment for the employee. A single serious incidence of such behaviour that has a lasting harmful effect on an employee may also constitute psychological harassment. "The employer is bound not only to allow the performance of the work agreed upon and to pay the remuneration fixed, but also to take any measures consistent with the nature of the work to protect the health, safety and dignity of the employee." Sect. 81.19 Every employee has a right to a work environment free from psychological harassment. Employers must take reasonable action to prevent psychological harassment and, whenever they become aware of such behaviour, to put a stop to it.This responsibility falls on the employer and not on the person presumed responsible for the psychological harassment. It is the employer who has the responsibility of providing his employees with fair and reasonable conditions of employment and of respecting their health, safety, dignity and psychological and physical integrity. Consequently, as soon as a harassment situation is brought to his knowledge, the employer is under the obligation to take the appropriate steps and impose the necessary sanctions to put a stop to such behaviour. This implies the existence and implementation of a procedure that is known, effective and adapted to the reality of each undertaking to permit the disclosure of cases of harassment and a rapid and objective response. In his capacity as the person having the prime responsibility for the organization of work, only the employer can exercise the necessary authority to ensure a work environment that is healthy and free from harassment. The fact that the employer is unaware of a harassment situation cannot relieve him of his responsibility. On the contrary, the employer's negligence or decision to turn a blind eye to a harassment situation engages his responsibility. Sect. 81.20 The provisions of sections 81.18, 81.19, 123.7, 123.15 and 123.16, with the necessary modifications, are deemed to be an integral part of every collective agreement. An employee covered by such an agreement must exercise the recourses provided for in the agreement, insofar as any such recourse is available to employees under the agreement. At any time before the case is taken under advisement, a joint application may be made by the parties to such an agreement to the Minister for the appointment of a person to act as a mediator. The provisions referred to in the first paragraph are deemed to form part of the conditions of employment of every employee appointed under the Public Service Act (chapter F-3.1.1) who is not governed by a collective agreement. Such an employee must exercise the applicable recourse before the Commission de la fonction publique according to the rules of procedure established pursuant to that Act. The Commission de la fonction publique exercises for that purpose the powers provided for in sections 123.15 and 123.16 of this Act. The third paragraph also applies to the members and officers of bodies. Sect. 123.6 An employee who believes he has been the victim of psychological harassment may file a complaint in writing with the Commission. Such a complaint may also be filed by a non-profit organization dedicated to the defence of employees' rights on behalf of one or more employees who consent thereto in writing. Sect. 123.7 Any complaint concerning psychological harassment must be filed within 90 days of the last incidence of the offending behaviour. Sect. 123.15 If the Commission des relations du travail considers that the employee has been the victim of psychological harassment and that the employer has failed to fulfil the obligations imposed on employers under section 81.19, it may render any decision it believes fair and reasonable, taking into account all the circumstances of the matter, including (1) ordering the employer to reinstate the employee; (2) ordering the employer to pay the employee an indemnity up to a maximum equivalent to wages lost; (3) ordering the employer to take reasonable action to put a stop to the harassment; (4) ordering the employer to pay punitive and moral damages to the employee; (5) ordering the employer to pay the employee an indemnity for loss of employment; (6) ordering the employer to pay for the psychological support needed by the employee for a reasonable period of time determined by the Commission; (7) ordering the modification of the disciplinary record of the employee. Hi Cosmo. I am not sure if they have covered this or not? Although corporate sociopaths would also be another good topic idea. Maybe a series on the various workplace issues. From what I have been reading and researching it's a huge problem in Canada. Where many European nations have caught up with this, we are far more behind than we should be. There are people that are becoming emotionally crippled do to workplace bullying, and there are even people killing themselves about this. I would love to see more focus given to this topic. They should also specifically focus on how using the proper channels to get help for bullying and mobbing do not work. They should also cover the fact that it is often the target who is blamed and made to look like the problem. A less well know aspect they should cover is the fact that harassers are often given promotions to make them look like more credible employess vs the target they are going after. Finally they could even cover the aspect of make a stink go see a shrink. How psychiatry is being used against the workers who make complaints. http://www.Harassment101.com/Article5.html There are even better articles on this topic at Brian Martin's website suppression of dissent. http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/ This is such a wide an varied topic they could we do more than 1 show and never cover all the material, and since it does affect more and more people every year, I think people would watch the episode(s). Last edited by gangstalking : 08-29-2006 at 04:17 PM. Reason: grammer gangstalking View Public Profile Send a private message to gangstalking Send email to gangstalking Visit gangstalking's homepage! Find all posts by gangstalking Add gangstalking to Your Buddy List #5 08-30-2006, 12:23 AM botswana Join Date: Oct 2005 Senior Member Posts: 660 Quote: Originally Posted by Cosmo Didn't W-5 go into this a bit in that one about sociopaths? That was W-5 wasn't it? I sometimes get W-5 mixed up with the news journal show on the CBC, which is odd, because they're so different in styles. W5 did a show about corporate psychopaths. 2 of my co-workers & I watched it (not together) & we all thought the description sounded like a certain upper management type at work. botswana View Public Profile Send a private message to botswana Send email to botswana Find all posts by botswana Add botswana to Your Buddy List #6 08-30-2006, 08:41 AM evad54 Join Date: Feb 2005 Senior Member Posts: 2,214 Quote: Originally Posted by botswana W5 did a show about corporate psychopaths. 2 of my co-workers & I watched it (not together) & we all thought the description sounded like a certain upper management type at work. All senior managers are "psychopaths" __________________ Tom Selleck is Magnum not george gooney evad54 View Public Profile Send a private message to evad54 Send email to evad54 Find all posts by evad54 Add evad54 to Your Buddy List #7 08-30-2006, 04:35 PM Join Date: Dec 2005 CncrndCaine Location: New Minas, Kings County, Nova Scotia, Canada Senior Member Posts: 270 Work Place Bullying-How To Prove-Impossible To Prove! Ahhhhh now we are talking, but sadly nobody in Canada can proved Work Place Harrassment nor Bullying. My case in particular is an example; it is expected that WORK PLACE BULLY LOWER LEVEL FOREMEN-MIDLEVELERS should rise to the top of most work places. Whom do you think gets promoted? Ahhhhhh the bully- harrassers inyourfacers of course, that is how most people get promoted to high management. Unfortunately if you speakout about this to any management either higher or lower with out backing you are reported by the harrasser to the bosses then to HRDC and then more than likely WRONGFULLY DISMISSED. But of course there is a myrid of lawyers defending most mediumsized and big business management from this "supposed harrassment" yet the SCAB-4 MONTH Parttime workers that is hired so that the fulltime workers can take their vacations, and come back to work 2-4 months later get the full brunt of psychological torture.......from THE HIGHER EMPLOYEE OR MANAGER FROM HELL. W-5 had mentioned a while ago that my situation might make a good story, indeed, they were the ones that had did an documentary on this subject; in Nova Scotia this form of harrassment goes on too much in employment circles, in all sorts of businesses. Sadly no one wants legislation because it would taint the Tory and NDP Unionist Workplaces, when first time workers signup to their first nights or days on the job.....in signing the workplace contract forms they sign clauses that allow this psychological torture to be allowed to happen.........that is why this situation will never be dealt with by our own HRDC in Ottawa, I waited from 1988 till 2000 with proof I had had this done to me, however HRDC never wanted to deal with this problem and dumped me on Community Services, they claimed the Statues Of Limitations had run out. . So tell me what sorts of laws that The Labour Standards Codes are supposed to be protecting me against, First Time Workers are viewed as Scabs by Fulltime Workers, the NDP and Tories have made a tradition of this in the workplace in Nova Scotia.........are any of you going to go up against them if you have been WRONGFULLY DISMISSED? CncrndCaine View Public Profile Send a private message to CncrndCaine Send email to CncrndCaine Find all posts by CncrndCaine Add CncrndCaine to Your Buddy List #8 08-30-2006, 08:28 PM botswana Join Date: Oct 2005 Senior Member Posts: 660 Quote: Originally Posted by evad54 All senior managers are "psychopaths" HEE! I guess it's a prerequisite for the job! botswana View Public Profile Send a private message to botswana Send email to botswana Find all posts by botswana Add botswana to Your Buddy List #9 08-30-2006, 08:49 PM gerryduffett Join Date: Apr 2005 Senior Member Posts: 102 Workplace Bullies Workplace Bullies Some information located here : http://www.goliathboards.com/users5...ffett/index.cgi Gerry Duffett gerryduffett View Public Profile Send a private message to gerryduffett Find all posts by gerryduffett Add gerryduffett to Your Buddy List #10 08-30-2006, 09:36 PM Join Date: Dec 2005 CncrndCaine Location: New Minas, Kings County, Nova Scotia, Canada Senior Member Posts: 270 Show Idea - Workplace Bullying Quote: Originally Posted by botswana HEE! I guess it's a prerequisite for the job! Yessss botswana, sometimes it is; what is supposed to be for the First Time Working SCAB-BOTTOMFEEDER......NEWBIE***KISSER his or her prequisits for signing their contracts without having to read what they are siging? And this is to work the first night on the job at what ever business they put in an application for? gangstalking, I read some of your links, especially the one that the university professor researched. They almost are all the psychological tortures that I faced working at the Oxford Frozen Foods Plant in Hilton NS. Had I not been through the same thing in 1988 and had to face this again in 1990 then I could not have lasted a week there. I had lasted 3 months there before the company was taken over by Oxford Foods and had another 3 months there in 1992; I was not some stugie after that. It was in August of 1988 that the final report evaluation of my psychological assessment was reviewed and HRDC Kentville, Kings County NS, chose to do nothing about it and only got me a few interviews with employers that never lead me to an full time job. I had to find all my jobs myself, my job councilor was proud I had found my own jobs.........that was untill 1993 when I found him at an Liberal Nomination Convention where he was in a conflict of interest in supporting my former employers in their efforts to elect an MLA in the NS Election, inwhich afterward would have seen this corrupt political offical rubber stamping monies to my former employers's company.........ESPECIALLY AFTER THEY WRONGFULLY DISMISSED ME. I had proof of it in an psychological accessment that I was forced to do by my former job councilor at HRDC. Tell me, gangstalker and others here; is this how the HRDC of Canada is supposed to act, letting their employees have conflicts of interests, supporting employers that wrongfully dismiss employees that have been only standing up for themselves and speaking out for themselves against unfair lower management? CncrndCaine View Public Profile Send a private message to CncrndCaine Send email to CncrndCaine Find all posts by CncrndCaine Add CncrndCaine to Your Buddy List Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > « Previous Thread | Next Thread » Forum Jump W-FIVE Go “Bullybusters” to speak at Victoria harassment conference by Valerie Shore Mention the word ―bully‖ and most of us think back to childhood and that jerk who liked to push other kids around in the schoolyard. But as Drs. Gary and Ruth Namie will tell you, bullies aren’t confined to schoolyards. They’re in the workplace, too, intimidating, humiliating, abusing, threatening and even assaulting their co-workers. In fact, a new study has shown that bullying in the workplace is more common than sexual harassment and racial discrimination. “Workplace bullies are driven by a need to control and are threatened Bullying affects up to one in six by strong, capable people.” employees, according to the Campaign Against Workplace Bullying, a U.S. advocacy and education organization founded and run by the Namies. It’s a problem on the rise everywhere, including Canada, says Gary Namie. ―It’s happening because businesses and organizations are using the mantra of global competitiveness to make productivity their number one goal,‖ he says.―When managers are told to squeeze more productivity out of fewer people without regard to the human consequences, that sets the stage for bullying.‖ Universities in particular are fertile ground for bullies, says Namie, because they use ―the most antiquated‖ model of management — command and control. ―It seems so unthinkable,‖ he says, ―because it’s such a violation of the mission and values of an educational institution, which is supposed to be about enlightenment, best practices and tolerance.‖ Namie, a social psychologist, and wife Ruth, a psychotherapist, will bring their ―bullybusting‖ message to Victoria Nov. 1-3 when they address the annual conference of the Canadian Association Against Harassment in Higher Education (CAASHHE), hosted by UVic. More than 130 university, college, government and corporate advisors on human rights, harassment and discrimination are expected to attend the event, which takes place in the Victoria Conference Centre. The Namies — authors of the books The Bully at Work and Bullyproof Yourself at Work, and popular lecturers on the topic — will present research on the extent of bullying in the workplace and its consequences, give an overview of anti-bullying efforts worldwide, and discuss organizational solutions. The topic is very timely, says Susan Shaw, director of UVic’s office for prevention of discrimination and harassment, and president of CAASHHE. ―Universities and colleges with policies that include personal harassment are currently struggling with definitions, how to best deal with a complaint and how to improve the work environment so that bullying behaviour is unacceptable.‖ The Namies define workplace bullying as ―the deliberate, repeated, hurtful mistreatment‖ of another person. Their research shows that the vast majority of bullies (81 per cent) are bosses, some are peers (14 per cent) and a few bully up the ladder. A bully is just as likely to be a man or a woman, but when a target is female, 84 per cent of the time her bully is also a female. ―Workplace bullies are driven by a need to control and are threatened by strong, capable people,‖ explains Namie. The top three reasons for being singled out by a bully, he says, are refusal to be subservient, competence, and social skill (being liked by others). Typically, bullies use ridicule, unjust criticism and fault-finding in front of others to try to isolate and exclude their target. The victims, says Namie, may suffer everything from anxiety and depression to sleep disruption and post-traumatic stress disorders. They waste much of their time at work defending themselves, thinking about the situation or networking for support. Many are eventually fired, others quit or go on wage-reduced disability leave. For the employer, bullying results in reduced productivity, lost efficiency, absenteeism, high staff turnover and hefty severance packages and lawsuits, as well as potential violence. In 1999, a former transit employee in Ottawa — the victim of repeated workplace harassment — shot four employees dead and then took his own life. To put workplace bullies out of business, says Namie, individuals must stand up for themselves, society must push for legal reform, and employers must acknowledge the problem and develop broader harassment policies to protect their employees. ―With or without the law, employers can deliberately prohibit bullying and send the message that this behaviour will no longer be tolerated.‖ http://www.bullybusters.org/ A good site Workplace bullying harms both employees and employers Susan has been feeling de-motivated and under appreciated at work since, for reasons as yet unexplained, her boss took away several of her duties. She wonders if her sudden loss of responsibility is related to her refusal to make her boss coffee and pick up his dry cleaning. Debbie was surprised how much she was shaking; that customer had really unnerved her. She knew she had provided the best service possible but nothing reasonable was going to make him happy. He didn‟t need to hurl profanities and tell her she didn‟t know what she was doing. She wondered if she should tell her boss. Meanwhile, John has been seeking psychological help, unbeknownst to any of his colleagues. He wonders why he has become so stressed and sleep- deprived. Surely, he thinks, it can‟t all be because of the coworker who sits in the next workstation, who seems determined to insult and ridicule him and judge his every move. These are snapshots of workplaces where bullying - a common problem that has only been recognized in recent years - is having a negative impact on individual employees and their organizations. Fortunately, there are positive, proactive steps that can be taken by management and employees to reduce the potential for or eliminate workplace bullying. If Susan, Debbie or John worked in an organization that had a policy against workplace bullying, they would have a clear understanding of what behaviours are considered as “bullying” and would know what resources were available to help them resolve the problems they are having. According to a July 2004 report by The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions on “Violence, bullying and harassment in the workplace,” there has been an increase in reported incidents of bullying. Twelve million people, representing nine percent of workers in Europe, say they have been subject to bullying over a 12-month period in 2000. The foundation and its partners see this as a serious concern. What is bullying? Bullying is a term often used to describe any aggressive misuse or abuse of power. Not to be confused with mere differences of opinion or ordinary conflicts, bullying comprises anything that a reasonable person would consider as victimizing, humiliating, intimidating, undermining or threatening. It can range from gossip and rumours to unwarranted punishment, and from obviously offensive jokes to yelling or profanity. The consequences are more costly to individuals and organizations than once believed. The victims of bullying can experience stress, depression, reduced self-esteem, self-blame, phobias, sleep disturbances, digestive and musculoskeletal problems, or even post- traumatic stress disorder. The problem, if not dealt with, may cause social isolation, family problems, and financial problems due to absence or discharge from work. Bullying also affects the organization, by increasing absenteeism and staff turnover, reducing productivity, and overall upsetting the peace. What can be done? Until very recently Canadian legislation did not specifically address workplace bullying. However, Quebec has introduced legislation to prevent and respond to psychological harassment, including bullying, in the workplace. In other Canadian jurisdictions, the principles outlined in occupational health and safety legislation clearly state that employers have a general duty to protect employees from risks at work, both physical and mental. Some Canadian jurisdictions (British Columbia and Saskatchewan) have enacted specific workplace violence prevention regulations, which may include workplace bullying. Alberta has established a code and Nova Scotia has guidelines on workplace violence prevention. Organizations can help prevent workplace bullying by stating their commitment to a healthy work culture in a written policy, with clear guidelines of what behaviours are considered unacceptable; by developing an organizational culture with standards and values against bullying; and by dealing with incidents promptly, consistently and with authority. If you think you are being bullied, discriminated against, victimized or otherwise harassed at work, the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS) advises that you NOT retaliate, but firmly tell the bully that the behaviour is unacceptable and must stop. Keep a factual journal of events, including names and dates. Keep documentation (including e-mails and memos) that shows the number, the frequency, and especially the pattern of incidents. Report the bullying to your supervisor or the person in your organization responsible for investigating and addressing incidents of workplace bullying. If you feel your health is being affected, seek medical assistance and/or make use of your company's Employee Assistance Program A Workplace Hazard Like Any Other By Maureen Shaw Violence in Ontario’s workplace is on the rise. In 2004, Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board received 2,089 claims for lost-time injuries that resulted from assaults and violent acts. That’s up from 1,926 claims in 2003 and 1,747 in 2002. The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines workplace violence as, "any incident in which a person is abused, threatened or assaulted in circumstances relating to their work." This definition covers all forms of harassment, bullying, intimidation, physical threats/assaults, robbery and ―other intrusive behaviours.‖ Outside Sources It’s easier for employers to deal with outside sources of violence that may involve clients verbally or physically assaulting an employee, an intruder in the staff parking lot, incidents involving contractors or estranged family members involved in domestic disputes. Specific controls are relatively simple: improve building security, control visitor access, improve natural surveillance so employees can observe interactions with outside sources, make use of electronic devices and surveillance to discourage violent behaviour, and improve parking lot design. Inside Sources Dealing with inside sources is not so easy. They arise out of disputes between co- workers, supervisors or managers. In most cases, the physical violence is preceded by a verbal conflict that escalates. Triggers are all by-products of an unhealthy workplace: absenteeism, illness, internal politics, bad decision-making, indifference and apathy, and lack of motivation or creativity. The two primary forms of violence are bullying and harassment, which are not as easy to recognize, assess, and control. Canadian workplace statistics on bullying and harassment are hard to come by. Incidents often go unreported and documented cases aren’t formally tracked. Statistics that are available paint an alarming picture. According to the results of a 2000 survey of Canadian labour unions, more than 75% of respondents reported incidents of bullying and harassment. A North American study found that one in five employees had been a victim of bullying. Furthermore, a 2002 Public Service of Canada study reported 21% of employees were victims of workplace harassment over a two-year period. Bullies and harassers of both sexes materialize. They’re found in supervisory roles and at peer levels, operating singly or in groups and they target anyone. Victims are subjected to: requests of a verbal or physical nature that are inappropriate; behaviour intended to intimidate, offend, degrade and humiliate such as name-calling, fault-finding, false accusations and trivial criticisms; and isolation through attempts to undermine their position, status, work, value and potential in the workplace. Being proactive In many instances, the victim tolerates the abuse, being fearful of retaliation and believing nothing can be done or hoping the situation will eventually resolve itself. This leads to low productivity, absenteeism, high staff turnover, severance packages and lawsuits, and in some cases, a physically violent and tragic outcome. Most employers tend to be reactive when dealing with these issues. They should be proactive and creating a respectful workplace policy is a good first step. It outlines how the employer views workplace violence and how a respectful workplace will be enforced. Equally important is employee training on how to recognize the symptoms of violence in the workplace. Providing a resolution process that allows employees to comfortably report situations is key. This is a safety problem. It’s a hazard for every company, and it needs to be recognized, assessed, and controlled. Find out more about how to prevent violence in the workplace by reading Violence in the Workplace: A Prevention Guide by the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health & Safety, and Human Resources Guide to Preventing Workplace Violence by Norman Keith. Visit www.ilo.org Maureen Shaw is President and CEO of IAPA. This article appeared in Plant, Canada’s industry newspaper, on July 17, 2006. Additional Resources IAPA has many resources to help you learn more about workplace violence: Training Creating a Healthy Workplace Psychosocial Risk Management Controlling Violence in the Workplace Video-Based Training Free downloads Creating Healthy Workplaces Healthy Workplaces: What? Why? How? The Leadership Factor Mental Health at Work ... From Defining to Solving the Problem Psychosocial Risk Management: What Every Business Manager Should Know The Psychosocial Side of RSIs Stress at Work - Taking Control Understanding Stress at Work Work-Life Balance: A Strategic Business Issue! Work Organisation and Stress Harassment and Bullying - What is Covered Harassment under Human Rights Law Harassment can range from unwelcome comments and offensive jokes or pictures, to unwelcome physical contact and assault. Most human rights laws, including the PEI Human Rights Act, only cover harassment if the unwelcome behaviour can be linked to a prohibited ground of discrimination. The most common form of harassment that is covered under human rights law is sexual harassment. Under human rights law, sexual harassment is considered discrimination based on sex. Harassment can also be based on the other grounds of discrimination, such as sexual orientation, race, age, and physical or mental disability. Harassment may involve threats of adverse consequences, such as job loss, if the victim attempts to end the harassment. The more common type of harassment involves jokes or attitudes that are sexist, racist, homophobic or derogatory towards other groups. This type of harassment can cause a “poisoned work environment” that discriminates against certain groups, even if they are not included in the jokes or conversations. Consider these scenarios on Sexual Harassment: Scenario 1: Marie and Sally work in an office setting. They are the administrative staff for six males. Over the years, Marie has exchanged crude jokes and viewed pornographic materials with the men in the office. Marie enjoys viewing the photos and listening to the jokes. She mentions to Sally that the office would be a boring place if it were not for the men. Sally does not enjoy this type of entertainment. She does not know what to do as her boss is one of the men involved. She is not included in the jesting but is forced to listen because of the positioning of her desk. Scenario 2: Rob works at a call centre as a customer service representative. The majority of his shifts are spent with the same group of six co-workers of which he is the only man. When calls are slow, the conversation has often turned to the women‟s personal lives and their relationships. At first, Rob just ignored the conversations. Lately though, a couple of the women have been making comments such as “all men are pigs,” “men just don‟t have a sweet clue,” and “men are really only good for one thing.” Sally and Rob could be experiencing sexual harassment, or discrimination on the basis of sex in the area of employment. Although they are not participating in the sexual talk, they are uncomfortable because the jesting is going on around them and creating a poisoned work environment. According to the law, Sally and Rob do not have to endure this type of behaviour. Marie, on the other hand, is not experiencing sexual harassment if she is enjoying the jesting. As in the scenarios above, both women and men can be victims as well as perpetrators of sexual harassment. Women and men can also be sexually harassed by individuals of the same gender. Sexual harassment can occur in all types of workplaces, and at all levels of any company, institution or organization. Bullying or Personal Harassment Bullying, sometimes called psychological or personal harassment, is harassment that cannot be tied to a prohibited ground of discrimination. Since there is no prohibited ground of discrimination, bullying is not covered under the PEI Human Rights Act. Consider this scenario on Bullying: Jill and Mike work as servers in a busy bar and restaurant that employs a total of fifteen servers, six men and nine women. Jill and Mike feel that the new manager has been treating them differently from the rest of the staff. Even though they seem to make the same number of mistakes as the other staff, she is constantly pointing out their mistakes or criticizing them while mostly leaving the other servers alone. On more than one occasion, the manager has yelled profanities at Mike and Jill in front of customers and other staff. The other servers have even noticed that they have been treated differently. Mike and Jill are not sure what the manager‟s problem is with them. Mike and Jill could be experiencing workplace bullying. Everyone notices that Mike and Jill are being treated differently, but there is no related ground of discrimination. Although the PEI Human Rights Act does not deal with workplace bullying, this type of behaviour has the same devastating effects as harassment based on a ground of discrimination. Some of the effects of harassment and bullying include: low employee morale high turnover and training costs low productivity increase in absenteeism damage to public image violence Women targeted by workplace bullying While most of the discussion about bullying is centred on vulnerable young people, there is a growing realization that it's also a serious problem in the workplace. More employers are starting to implement anti-bullying measures, aimed at protecting people from personal harassment by bosses and co-workers. That harassment includes verbal abuse and ostracization of employees, most of them women. Victims speak out Ann McQueen says she was bullied out of her last job at a Vancouver pre-school, driven to suicidal thoughts by her female supervisor. "I still feel so shaken. Initially when I was fired and I went home and I thought that's it, I have to be dead, I have to find a way to kill myself because I can't do this job." McQueen says she didn't know why she was targeted, as her boss routinely berated her over her job performance but never offered specifics. "She said everyone in the office is annoyed with you and I said, 'Why are they annoyed?' And she said, 'You should know.'" Woman was 'screamed at' Jacqueline Langlois, who used to work as a computer operator at a Vancouver law firm, was also bullied by other women. She says when her company changed to a new computer system, her female boss refused to train her. Langlois was also accused of having a bad attitude, but her boss could never cite a specific incident. And she says the woman turned her co-workers against her. "The women were seeking my demise quite actively." "It's quite amazing – (I was) accused, screamed at, insulted, warned." And she says there were lots of dirty looks and peers refusing to help with tasks. Langlois says the bullying went on for more than a year, and took a toll on her mental health. "I flirted with idea of suicide, and I knew better than to just make this idea grow, so I went to the hospital and was eventually on a sick leave." Langlois now works part time for another company. But she says her health is still affected by her last job and she's fighting for workers' compensation benefits. "I'm extremely jumpy all the time, I'm reacting as if it's danger. It's very difficult to concentrate, to learn and memorize and remember. It has affected my social life, my working life. I work only part time." Victim starts support group Karen Learmonth says she was bullied out of her job with a large corporation in Vancouver where she'd worked for eight years. She says she was sexually harassed, threatened and ostracized by bosses and co-workers. Learmonth says the bullying robbed her of any joy in living – and she knew it was time to quit her job the day she threw up in the parking lot on the way to work. She now leads a support group for other bulling victims – No Bully For Me. "The support group helps educate people, helps support them. A lot of the problem with bullying is that the people in your life don't understand. They develop compassion fatigue." Learmonth says thoughts of suicide are common. "About 60 per cent pf people who go through it, who I've talked to, have at least thought of it, and out of all our cases, about 10 per cent actually try." Other common effects of bullying are depression, anxiety, insomnia and loss of appetite and concentration. Learmonth is self employed now. Women bully women: study The women's stories are typical, says Bellingham, Wash.-based social psychologist Dr. Gary Namie of the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute. A 2003 survey conducted by Namie found that 58 per cent of the cases involved women targeting women. Namie found that while male bullies enlist higher level managers to help them, women bullies employ the same tactics they've been using since they were school girls – turning other women against the target. "You get complete social misery when your co-workers no longer associate with you. The bully has no problem getting allies and women will use that divide-and-conquer more than men." Namie notes that bullying involves a powerful person targeting a less powerful one, and women tend to have the least power in the workplace. He also says the bully is most often the boss and someone who wants to control another person. What makes women targets? Dr. Namie has created a profile of the female personality type most often bullied, breaking it down into four factors. "Number one is independence – independent and feisty – a refusal to be subservient. "Factors two and three are they're technically more skilled, they have more social intelligence, better liked, they're better with people and bullies can be quite anti- social. "The fourth reason is that they are ethical whistle-blowers. Not all bully targets are whistle-blowers, but clearly all whistle blowers are bullied." Dr. Namie says other effects of bullying are depression, insomnia, headaches, racing heart and suicidal thoughts. He also notes that bullying damages morale, causes absenteeism and employee turnover – hurting a company's bottom line. And that's why Namie says companies need to take the issue seriously when incidents occur. At this point, only one province – Quebec – has an anti-bullying law. Some B.C. companies dealing with bullying More companies are realizing this is a problem and they're drafting anti-bullying policies. One program that's been praised by anti-bullying groups is Skytrain's. The idea came from Human Resources manager Gary May, who worked with other SkyTrain managers, employees and the union for two years to develop a policy. "Top down approaches don't work. People will be cynical and if you can involve employees, they've had input into the design, they're going to be more accepting of it." But he says he knew SkyTrain needed a policy. "Grown adults have to go home, and I've heard it said, break down in tears and had to come to work with a knot in their stomach." All SkyTrain staff receive education about bullying. And employees who think they're being bullied are offered a range of possible solutions – using outside advisors rather than company managers. May says the program has been well-received. "From the individuals that do come forward, for the most part they're pleased with what has occurred." SkyTrain is now using its expertise to help other organizations develop their own policies. Directory of Information and Resources on the Prevention and Resolution of Workplace Harassment 1. Introduction 2. Programs o Shared Mediators Program o Non-represented Employee Advisors Program 3. Courses o “People to People Communication” course o Managing Harassment Complaints (T704) o Investigating Harassment Complaints (T703) o Creating a Respectful Workplace (T916) o Ethics, the Code and Decision Making (P011) 4. Workplace Harassment Experts and Services o Investigators approved by Public Works and Government Services Canada to investigate harassment o Experts in workplace harassment 5. Bibliography on Wordplace Harassment o “Bullying” o Harassment investigations o Harassment guides o Harassment based on disability o Criminal harassment o Psychological harassment o Racial harassment o Sexual harassment o Harassment policy and legislation o Harassment videos (to be completed) DIRECTORY OF INFOR In the context of its mandate to support departments in effectively applying policies and its commitment to the professio Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace. The directory contains basic information on p experts who offer lectures and training on the subject. The directory ends with a bibliography of recent articles, books a This part of the directory provides a description of two major programs that support the Policy on the Prevention and R 1. Shared Mediators Program The main objective of this program is to provide federal departments and participating agencies with the services of ind 2. Non-represented Employee Advisors Program The objective of this program is to have in-house experts from participating agencies provide unrepresented and exclud organizations. For more information, go to the following site: http://www.hrma-agrh.gc.ca/hr-rh/ve/nreap-pcenr_e.asp This part of the directory lists descriptions of courses on the prevention and resolution of workplace harassment. The fi Canada School of Public Service. “People to People Communication” The People to People Communication: Preventing and Resolving Harassment for a Healthy Work Environment course healthy work environment. It includes scenarios, situations, information on pertinent topics (such as communication, co The course is available on line at: http://www.hrma-agrh.gc.ca/hr-rh/ve/ppc-ff/toc-tdm_e.asp. 1. Managing Harassment Complaints (T704) This course provides the knowledge and skills needed to manage a harassment complaint process in accordance with the progress of a harassment complaint and become familiar with the various steps in the complaint process. For more information, go to the following site: http://www.myschool-monecole.gc.ca/corporate/list_e.asp?value=all&lang=E&loid=313 2. Investigating Harassment Complaints (T703) This course enables employees to become familiar with the Policy, understand the dynamics of harassment, recognize course provides the sensitivity and skills needed to handle investigations properly. For more information, go to the following site: http://www.myschool-monecole.gc.ca/corporate/list_e.asp?lang=E&loid=312 3. Creating a Respectful Workplace This one-day course is designed not only to broaden understanding of the issue of harassment, but also to provide par For more information, go to the following site: http://www.ccmd-ccg.gc.ca/corporate/list_e.asp?loid=329&theme=6&choice=t 4. Ethics, the Code and Decision Making (P011) This is an introductory course in ethics for public servants who wish to understand the evolution of ethics in their work e For more information, go to the following site: http://www.myschool-monecole.gc.ca/corporate/list_e.asp?lang=E&loid=259 This part provides information on workplace harassment services and experts. It includes the following lists: 1. a list of investigators approved by Public Works and Government Services Canada to investigate harassment c 2. a list of university experts in workplace harassment. INV National INVESTIGATIVE CAMILLE SERVICES- NMSO G HILL http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ HARASSMENT 030002/024/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE TEXTUS SERVICES- NMSO INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB__ HARASSMENT 030002/029/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE WORKGROUP SERVICES- NMSO DESIGNS INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_ HARASSMENT 030002/030/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE DELSEC SERVICES- NMSO INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ HARASSMENT 030002/005/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE AUDREY SERVICES- NMSO DEVLIN http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ HARASSMENT 030002/021/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE JEAN SERVICES- NMSO M. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL& HARASSMENT FILION SOCO_TMB__DOC_NMBR=E60ZG- 030002/007/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE 2916258 SERVICES- NMSO CANADA HARASSMENT INC http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ 030002/025/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE MARIE- SERVICES- NMSO PIERRE HARASSMENT RENAUD http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ 030002/027/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE 4278801 SERVICES- NMSO CANADA HARASSMENT INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ 030002/028/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e THE National INVESTIGATIVE ANCIEN SERVICES- NMSO GROUP http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB__ HARASSMENT INC. 030002/016/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE GLENCASTLE SERVICES- NMSO SECURITY HARASSMENT INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_T 030002/023/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE ARTEMIS SERVICES- NMSO CONSULTANTS HARASSMENT INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO 030002/001/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e CHARRON HUMAN RESOURCES INC. INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES- NMSO HARASSMENT http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB__DOC_NM 030002/003/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE CAROL SERVICES- NMSO ROBERTS LAW HARASSMENT CORPORATION http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO 030002/020/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e L-J National INVESTIGATIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES- NMSO CONSULTANTS http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO HARASSMENT LTD. 030002/026/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e INVESTIGATIVE D&A National SERVICES- NMSO CARMICHAEL HARASSMENT CONSULTING http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_T INC. 030002/004/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e ANPER National INVESTIGATIVE MANAGEMENT SERVICES- NMSO CONSULTANTS http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO HARASSMENT INC. 030002/019/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e LYNDA National INVESTIGATIVE ACKROYD, SERVICES- NMSO HUMAN HARASSMENT RIGHTS http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_ CONSULTANT 030002/018/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e DUNPHY & National INVESTIGATIVE ASSOCIATES SERVICES- NMSO HR HARASSMENT CONSULTING, http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_ INC. 030002/022/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE QUINTET SERVICES- NMSO CONSULTING HARASSMENT CORPORATION http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO 030002/013/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e BEVERLY National INVESTIGATIVE SUEK, SERVICES- NMSO MATTHEW http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TM HARASSMENT LAWRENCE 030002/017/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE LINDA SERVICES- NMSO S HARASSMENT FOY http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB__D 030002/008/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE ROBERT SERVICES- NMSO CAIRNS http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB_ HARASSMENT 030002/014/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE CAROL- SERVICES- NMSO ANN HARASSMENT HART http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TMB__ 030002/002/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE DIANE SERVICES- NMSO NESRALLAH http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TM HARASSMENT 030002/011/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE RANDOLPH SERVICES- NMSO MATTERN http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TM HARASSMENT 030002/012/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE MARGARET SERVICES- NMSO MICHAELS http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TM HARASSMENT 030002/010/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE SYNERGY SERVICES- NMSO OUTCOMES HARASSMENT INC http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_TM 030002/015/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e National INVESTIGATIVE EARLY SERVICES- NMSO RESOLUTION HARASSMENT INC. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOCO_T 030002/006/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e LES National INVESTIGATIVE CONSULTATIONS SERVICES- NMSO LUCIE A. http://soi.pwgsc.gc.ca/app/index.cfm?Fuseaction=sim.soi_DETAIL&SOC HARASSMENT SAVAGE INC. 030002/009/ZG&srch=bc&altlang=-e 1. Name: Angelo Soares Title: Professor, Department of Organization and Human Resources, School of Management Sciences, University of Q Address: P.O. Box 6192, Downtown Station Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3C 4R2 Telephone: (514) 987-3000, extension 2089 Fax: (514) 987-0407 Web site: http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r13566 E-mail: email@example.com Areas of research His areas of research are psychological harassment, workplace violence, new forms of organization of work (especially Services provided Dr. Soares gives lectures and provides training on psychological harassment in the workplace and other forms of workp 2. Name: Céleste Grimard-Brotheridge Title: Professor, Department of Organization and Human Resources, School of Management Sciences, University of Q Telephone: (514) 987-3000, extension 6540 Fax: (514) 987-0407 Web site: http://www.orh.uqam.ca/framesets/fs_perso_prof.html E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Areas of research Emotions and work, burnout, psychological harassment in the workplace, and marketing of university education Services provided Dr. Grimard-Brotheridge provides custom training, training in managerial skills, and training in strategic human resource 3. Name: Vincent Rousseau Title: Professor, School of Industrial Relations, University of Montreal Address: School of Industrial Relations University of Montreal Vincent Rousseau, professor P.O. Box 6128, Downtown Station Montreal, Quebec H3C 3J7 Telephone: (514) 343-6111, extension 1286 Fax: (514) 343-5764 Web sites: 1) http://www.eri.umontreal.ca/personnel/RousseauVincent.htm 2) http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca/rousseav/index.htm E-mail: email@example.com Areas of research His research themes include the operation and effectiveness of work teams, psychological health in the workplace, and Services provided Dr. Rousseau gives lectures and provides consulting services in the area of workplace harassment. 4. Name: Jennifer L. Berdahl Title: Assistant Professor, Department of Organizational Behaviour, St. George Campus, University of Toronto Address: University of Toronto 105 George Street Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6 Telephone: (416) 978-4273 Fax: (416) 978-4629 Web site: http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/facBios/viewFac.asp?facultyID=jberdahl E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Areas of research Her areas of research include workplace harassment, social power, and diversity in groups and organizations. Services provided Dr. Berdahl gives presentations on workplace harassment. 5. Name: Jana Raver Title: Assistant Professor, Department of Organizational Behaviour, Queen‟s University Address: Queen‟s School of Management Goodes Hall Queen‟s University Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Telephone: (613) 533-3253, extension 33253 Fax: (613) 533-6847 Web site: http://business.queensu.ca/faculty/by_subject.php?subject=4 E-mail: email@example.com Areas of research Her areas of research include interpersonal conflict and aggression, diversity in the workplace and cultural behaviour in Services provided Dr. Raver gives presentations on workplace harassment. 6. Name: Erick Chamberland Title: Professor, Department of Economics and Administration, University of Quebec at Chicoutimi Address: University of Quebec at Chicoutimi 555 Boulevard de l‟Université Chicoutimi, Quebec G7H 2B1 Telephone: 545-5011, extension 5603 Fax: Not available Web site: http://www.uqac.ca/administration_services/dsea/repertoire_pdf/chamberland_eric.pdf E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Areas of research His areas of research include strategic human resources management, occupational safety and health, psychological h Services provided Dr. Chamberland gives lectures on workplace harassment. 7. Name: Laurent Lapierre Title: Assistant Professor, Department of Organizational Behaviour and Human Resources Management, University of Address: 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5 Telephone: (613) 562-5800, extension 4914 Fax: (613) 562-5164 Web site: 1) http://business.admin.uottawa.ca/~lapierre 2)http://www3.management.uottawa.ca/index.php?option=com_peoplebook&Itemid=196&func=fullview&staffid=100000 E-mail: email@example.com Areas of research His areas of research include employee health and well-being, effective leadership, attitudes toward work (commitmen Services provided Dr. Lapierre gives lectures on workplace harassment. This part of the directory is a bibliography of harassment material based on ten themes: 1. Bullying 2. Harassment investigations 3. Harassment guides 4. Harassment based on disability 5. Criminal harassment 6. Psychological harassment 7. Racial harassment 8. Sexual harassment 9. Harassment policy and legislation 10. Videos Note that the materials are listed in their original language. Bullying 1. “Building a Culture of Respect: Managing Bullying at Work” in IRS Employment Review, Issue 744, 2002, pp. 4 2. COUZINS, Martin, and Kevin FRIERY. “Expert's View: Kevin Friery on Dealing with Bullying in The workplace” 3. “The Bully Employee: A Survival Guide for Supervisors” in Supervision, Vol. 65, No. 3, March 2004, p. 6. http:// 4. COYNE, Lain, and al. “Self and Peer Nominations of Bullying: An Analysis of Incident Rates, Individual Differen 5. HOOD, Sarah B. “Workplace Bullying” in Canadian Business Vol. 77, no. 18 (9/13), 2004, p. 87. http://search.e 6. LEE, Deborah. “Gendered Workplace Bullying in the Restructured UK Civil Service” in Personnel Review Vol. 3 7. MIKKELSEN, Eva Gemzøe, and Stale EINARSEN. “Basic Assumptions and Symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stre 8. SEWARD, Karen, and Sheila FAHY. “Tackling Workplace Bullies” in Occupational Health, Vol. 55, No. 5, May 9. SHEENAN, Michael, and al. “Analyzing Metaphors used by Victims of Workplace Bullying” in International Jour 10. VEGA, Gina, and Debra R. COMER. “Sticks and Stones may Break Your Bones, but Words can Break Your Sp 11. WHITE, Sheila. “Lies in Truth and Truth in Lies: An in-Depth Study of a Workplace Bullying Scenario” in Busine Investigations 12. AGGARWAL, Arjun P. Sexual Harassment Investigations: How to Limit Your Liability and More: A Practical Gu 13. BERNARDI, Lauren M. “Investigating Harassment Complaints”, in Canadian Manager, Vol. 27, no. 2, Summer 14. GUPTNA, Neena. Sexual Harassment: A Guide to Conducting Investigations. Toronto, Lexis Nexis Butterworth 15. KASANOVICH, Wendy and al. “Preventing and Correcting Sexual Harassment: A Guide to the Ellerth/Faraghe 16. MACKILLOP, Malcolm. “Workplace Harassment” in HR Professional, Vol. 21, no. 5, Oct/Nov, 2004, 30 p. http:/ 17. NEUSON, Bridget A. “Properly Investigate Harassment Complaints” in Nursing Management, Vol. 36, no. 6, Ju 18. OPPENHEIMER, Amy. “Investigating Workplace Harassment and Discrimination” in Employee Relations Law J 19. PANARO, Gerard P. “Investigation of Harassment can Give Rise to Negligence Claim” in Fair Employment Pra Guides 20. AGGARWAL, Arjun P. Sexual Harassment Investigations: How to Limit Your Liability and More: A Practical Gu 21. COMMISSION DES NORMES DU TRAVAIL. Preventing Psychological Harassment Is Everyone’s Business!: P 22. GUPTNA, Neena. Sexual Harassment: A Guide to Conducting Investigations. Toronto, Lexis Nexis Butterworth 23. KASANOVICH, Wendy and al. “Preventing and Correcting Sexual Harassment: A Guide to the Ellerth/Faraghe 24. KURETZKY, Barry, and Jennifer MACKENZIE. Human Resources Guide to Managing Workplace Harassment 25. LAFOND, Reine. Le Harcèlement Psychologique: Tout Ce Que l'Employeur Doit Savoir, Cowansville, Québec, 26. Preventing harassment in the workplace: A guide for employees, Victoria B. C., British Columbia human Rights 27. “Supervisor can be Individually Liable for Sexual Harassment Under State Law” in Fair Employment Practices 28. THORNBORYT, Greta. “Resource Guide” in Occupational Health, Vol. 56, No. 5, May 2004, p. 31. http://searc 29. WILSON, Penny, and Michael MCCARTNEY. “Legal Q & A HR Guide to Harassment” in Personnel Today, Vo Harassment based on disability 30. “Inappropriate Remarks Amounted to Disability Harassment” in Equal Opportunities Review, Issue 103, 2002, 31. MITCHELL, Dominic D. “New Rulings Concerning on-the-Job Harassment and Discrimination” in Employee Rig Criminal harassment 32. DEMPSEY, Karen. “Case Round-Up” in Personnel Today, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2005, p. 12. http://search.epnet.com/lo 33. L. M. “The Red Flags of Violence” in HR Professional, Vol. 22, No. 3, June/July 2005, p. 13. http://search.epne 34. Stalking is a Crime Called Criminal Harassment. Rev. ed. Ottawa: Dept. of Justice Canada, 2003. Psychological harassment 35. BINETTE, Nicole. Victime Au Travail: L'Enfer Du Harcèlement Psychologique, Montréal, Éditions de l'Homme, 36. COMMISSION DES NORMES DU TRAVAIL. Preventing Psychological Harassment Is Everyone’s Business!: P 37. CORDEAU, Marie Josée. Le Harcèlement Psychologique Au Travail: Témoignage, Définition, Législation, Coll 38. LAFOND, Reine. Le Harcèlement Psychologique: Tout Ce Que l'Employeur Doit Savoir, Cowansville, Québec, 39. Le Harcèlement Et Les Lésions Psychologiques, Cowansville, Québec, Éditions Y. Blais, 2005. 40. MOREAU, Nicole. Violence ou harcèlement psychologique au travail ? Problématique, Québec, Gouvernemen 41. POLI, Pascal, and Damien MERLLIÉ. “Psychological Harassment at the Workplace: Part One” in European Ind 42. POLI, Pascal, and Damien MERLLIÉ. “Psychological Harassment at the Workplace: Part Two” in European Ind 43. POLI, Pascal, and Damien MERLLIÉ. “Psychological Harassment at the Workplace: Part Three” in European I 44. POIRIER, Guy. The New Standards for Protection against Psychological Harassment in the Workplace: A Mod 45. POIRIER, Guy. The New Standards for Protection Against Psychological Harassment in the Workplace: A Mod Racial harassment 46. BERDAHL, J. L., and C. MOORE. "Workplace harassment: Double jeopardy for minority women", in Journal of 47. PANARO, Gerard P. „„Dealing with Racial Harassment‟‟ in Fair Employment Practices Guidelines, Issue 570, 2 48. SCHOFIELD, Peter. „„Embarrassed by Harassment‟‟ in Works Management , Vol. 56, no. 5, May, 2003, 17 p. h Sexual harassment 49. AGGARWAL, Arjun P. Sexual Harassment Investigations: How to Limit Your Liability and More: A Practical Gu 50. GILBERT, Jacqueline A. “Sexual Harassment and Demographic Diversity: Implications for Organizational Puni 51. KASANOVICH, Wendy and al. “Preventing and Correcting Sexual Harassment: A Guide to the Ellerth/Faraghe 52. MORGAN, James F., and al. “The California Spin on Harassment by Supervisors: Avoidable Consequences an 53. “Supervisor can be Individually Liable for Sexual Harassment Under State Law” in Fair Employment Practices Harassment policy and legislation 54. Anti-Harassment Policies for the Workplace : Last revision, Dec. 2001 ed. Ottawa: The Commission, 2001. http 55. CANTIN, Isabelle. Politiques Contre Le Harcèlement Au Travail Et Réflexions Sur Le Harcèlement Psychologiq 56. MORGAN, James F., and al. “The California Spin on Harassment by Supervisors: Avoidable Consequences an 57. “New Harassment Legislation Working Well” in European Industrial Relations Review, Issue 364, 2004, pp. 4-8 58. POHL, Louise. How to Write a Policy to Prevent Harassment: The Silent Killer of Workplace Harmony, Vancou 59. Anti-Harassment Policies for the Workplace , Last revision, December 2001, Ottawa: The Commission, 2001. h 60. “Supervisor can be Individually Liable for Sexual Harassment Under State Law” in Fair Employment Practices Treatment of Harassment Bullying in the workplace Harassment in the workplace is recognized increasingly as a major problem that affects negatively employee productivity, morale, and mental health. Recently, the Province of Quebec became the first province in Canada to pass legislation making psychological harassment an indictable offence. No doubt other provinces including B.C. will follow this precedent. I will describe a three-step model for treating harassment in the workplace, and illustrate this model with the clinical case of a woman experiencing harassment in the form of public criticism by her manager. Approach to Treating Harassment Within the framework of my primary approach, Voice Therapy, I subscribe to a step model of treating harassment therapeutically, which involves three steps or levels of intervention. In Step 1, the person experiencing the unwanted behavior confronts the person exhibiting the unwanted behavior in an assertive, responsible manner regarding stopping the unwanted behavior. If this does not resolve the problem, in Step 2, other resources are involved in stopping the unwanted behavior. If the problem remains unresolved, in Step 3, the person experiencing the unwanted behavior engages in a process of grieving to achieve resolution and to move on. This may or may not involve seeking employment elsewhere. In the step model, there is a strong emphasis on resolving the harassment in Step 1. Resolving the issue at this level has the advantage of the person experiencing the unwanted behavior feeling a sense of efficacy by confronting and stopping the unwanted behavior. In Step 2, where other resources - such as a union, human resources department, or senior management - are involved, there is the possibility that the person experiencing the unwanted behavior will feel passive and dependent, while waiting for these resources to resolve the problem. If these resources respond inadequately, there is also the possibility that the person experiencing the unwanted behavior will under go a "secondary wounding", an injury compounding the original harassment. My working definition of harassment is any behavior that is experienced as unwanted and psychologically distressing. This definition gives priority to the inner experience of the person experiencing the unwanted behavior rather than on the correctness or incorrectness of the unwanted behavior. If an individual does not like a certain behavior, this therapeutic approach stresses that the individual is entitled fully to not like this behavior and to want it to stop. Rather than the individual focusing on whether the unwanted behavior is correct or incorrect, appropriate or inappropriate, this approach emphasizes the validity of the individual's experience of the behavior as unwanted and distressing. In this way, an individual can hold on to his or her experience that the behavior is unwanted and distressing even if the other party rationalizes that the behavior is correct and appropriate. To see a clinical case that describes my model of treating harassment, click on the the following heading: Clinical Case: Woman Experiencing Public Belittlement and Criticism Nancy, an administrative assistant in a private financial services company, called indicating that she was having difficulty with her manager. Nancy reported that her manager was making critical comments to her in front of colleagues that she experienced as belittling and upsetting. She indicated that she had thought about resigning, but liked the position. As the single parent of two teenagers, Nancy felt reluctant to give up the financial security that this position afforded her family. She indicated a willingness to explore her feelings about this situation further and booked an appointment. Step 1: Confronting the person exhibiting the unwanted behavior directly in an assertive and responsible manner regarding stopping the behavior. In Step 1, the person experiencing the unwanted behavior communicates directly in an assertive, responsible manner about wanting the unwanted behavior to stop. Often the person exhibiting the unwanted behavior is unaware that the other person is feeling distressed by this behavior. Communicating in a responsible manner not only informs the person exhibiting the unwanted behavior of this, but also increases the likelihood that this person will respond in a positive manner by stopping the unwanted behavior rather than becoming defensive. Often an assertive, responsible discussion will be sufficient to resolve the problem. As the clinical case that follows illustrates, considerable work is often necessary to prepare the person experiencing the unwanted behavior to not only feel strong enough to confront the other party directly, but also to know how to do this in an assertive, responsible manner.In the first session, Nancy explained that the problem with her manager had started about one year previously, while she was being trained in her new position. She noticed that her manager would make comments that she experienced as critical and belittling that could be heard by colleagues. The manager would make statements such as: "You did this wrong again .... How many times do I have to tell you .... What's taking you so long." Nancy thought that these comments would stop once she had completed her training and probationary period, but they did not. Her manager continued to make comments publicly that she experienced as belittling about her performance, leaving her feeling embarrassed and self-conscious. Although Nancy thought of herself as a good employee, she had started to doubt herself at work. The more she doubted herself, the more mistakes she made. The more mistakes she made, the more she doubted herself. In an effort to make fewer mistakes, she had started to double check all her work. She was aware that she was being less productive as a result, which left her feeling more anxious. She reported feeling constantly on edge at work, dreading the next time she felt belittled publicly. Recently, she had noticed that she was having a hard time motivating herself to go to work. On several occasions, she had called in sick because she couldn't face another incident. By the time Nancy came to see me, she was feeling demoralized and inadequate. I suggested that it wasn't surprising that Nancy was feeling this way, given what was happening at work. Nancy seemed relieved to hear that her response was understandable and valid. When I asked Nancy what if anything she had said to her manager about these comments, Nancy stated that she had said nothing, largely because she was afraid of being seen as insubordinate and too sensitive. Although Nancy did not like the critical comments, there was a part of her that believed she deserved these comments and that she should be less sensitive. At this point, I introduced Nancy to the notion of the negative thought process, or negative inner voice. I explained that we all listen to a critical thought process toward ourselves, which is like an enemy within or alien point of view toward ourselves. I noted that we internalize this negative thought process when we are very young as the result of our parents critical attitudes toward us (see the link " Counselling Approach" for more information about the negative voice). I then asked Nancy what thoughts she had toward herself when she thought about her manager's comments. Nancy stated, "I'm too sensitive. I should be able to take correction better. I shouldn't be making mistakes." I then asked Nancy if she would be willing to engage in an experiment that would likely be uncomfortable because it was unfamiliar, but which could be helpful to her. When Nancy agreed, I suggested that she say these thoughts in the second person, "You", as if someone else was addressing her. With my prompting, Nancy stated: "You're so sensitive. You don't take criticism well. You shouldn't be making mistakes. You're lousy at you're job. You're pathetic." When I asked Nancy to repeat the last statement in a louder voice, she did so and began to tear. When I enquired about what was happening for her inside, she stated, "I'm so hard on myself. I'm sad about that." I then asked what emotional tone this inner voice had in her head, and she stated, "It's critical and judgemental." When I asked her if this tone was familiar to her, she nodded, indicating that this tone reminded her of her mother's critical attitude toward her. In the ensuing discussion, Nancy realized that her manager's comments had given ammunition to her own negative voice that she had internalized toward herself as a child. When I asked Nancy what it would be like to tell her manager that she didn't like the critical comments and wanted them to stop, she indicated she was afraid she would embarrass herself and make matters worse. When I suggested that she express these thoughts in the 2nd person format, she stated, "You'll make a fool of yourself if you say anything. You'll make matters worse. You shouldn't complain. Just do your job and shut up." As Nancy reflected on this experience, she realized that it was her own negative inner voice that immobilized her in the face of her manager's unwanted comments. With the awareness that it was her own negative voice that blocked her from "finding her voice" and standing up for herself with her manager, I suggested that she answer back to the voice from her own healty point of view about herself in the 1st person, "I". Nancy remarked, "I can't feel any worse or more embarrassed than I do now. I've been quiet for too long." When I explored what it was like to receive her manager's critical comments passively, Nancy stated that she felt angry. When I asked how she felt about feeling angry, Nancy noted that she felt uncomfortable with her anger. Further exploration indicated that she had grown up in a family where her parents had fought a lot, yelling and screaming in a way that frighted her. She had internalized that anger was destructive and to be avoided. Nancy was curious when I introduced a distinction between primary anger, and reactive, secondary anger. I explained that primary anger is biologically adaptive anger, that helps us to stand up for ourselves when we are feeling violated in some way. In contrast, I suggested that secondary anger is not adaptive, but rather a reactive or defensive response that masks deeper feelings such as sadness and fear. I also suggested that expressing secondary anger tends to pull hostility from other people. I indicated it was important for her to own her primary anger, and to use this anger-energy to help her confront her manager in an assertive, responsible way. Nancy liked the idea that it was okay to feel angry about her manager's comments, and to use her anger-energy to confront her manager in a responsible manner. When Nancy enquired about what I meant by her confronting her manager in a responsible way, I introduced the notion of responsible communication. I explained that we communicate more responsibly when what we say is expressed as our own experience or perception rather than as the "truth" or objective reality. I then gave her an example: Less responsible statement: "You are criticizing me in front of my colleagues and embarrassing me." More responsible: "My experience of how you correct me in front of colleagues is that I feel criticized and embarrassed." The former communication lacks responsibility because it suggests that Nancy's perception or experience is objective reality. This statement also implies blame and is likely to evoke a defensive response. The latter statement is more responsible because Nancy owns her experience as her own perception. This statement implies that someone else in her position might have a different response to the manager's comments - such as feeling indifferent or even neutral. Having introduced responsible communication, I stressed that Nancy was fully entitled to her experience of her manager. If she felt not only belittled and embarrassed but also angered by how her manager addressed her, she was entitled fully to these feelings. It was important to "find her voice" and convery how she felt to her manager directly. The next step was to assist Nancy in preparing to confront her manager. First, Nancy wrote out what she would like to say to her manager in the form of a responsible communication. She wrote: "What you may not know, is that I feel criticized and embarrassed when you point out my mistakes in a way that I think others over hear. I am happy to receive feedback about my performance, but would like this done in private. To repeat, I don't like how I perceive you are correcting me in front of others, and want it to stop. If it doesn't, I will deal with it." Second, Nancy rehearsed this statement using a two chair technique, in which she alternated between stating her position in one chair and answering back as she imagined her manager might respond from the other chair, until she could say it with confidence in an assertive manner. As she did this, I encouraged her to draw upon her healthy anger in order to speak with firm conviction. Third, I prepared Nancy for how to respond to the eventuality of a less than favourable response from her manager. I suggested that if her manager did not take her seriously or tried to dismiss her feelings, that she hold on to her own experience and what she wanted. If she did not get the response she wanted, at least she would feel good about finding her voice. Finally, I used a guided visualization, in which Nancy, while in a relaxed state, visualized herself confronting her manager successfully. This technique honed her readiness to confront her manager. As it turned out, the manager did not respond favourably. Nancy described how the manager had said, "You're too sensitive. You need to toughen up and learn to take criticism. I don't have time to take you aside when I have to correct you." To this, Nancy had replied, "I may or may not be sensitive. I don't like how you are correcting me in front of my colleagues. I want this to stop. If it doesn't, I will deal with it." Nancy left this meeting feeling somewhat shaken by her manager's response, but her dominant feeling was empowerment because she had found her voice and held her position, which was based on the validity of her own feelings and needs.Although Nancy did not attain the resolution she had wanted to in Step 1, more often than not a resolution is reached at the completion of Step 1. In this case, Step 1 was insufficient for a resolution, and treatment progressed to Step 2 of the model. Step 2: Involving other resources in stopping the unwanted behavior. In this step, other resources are evaluated and involved in stopping the unwanted behavior. These resources may be inside the workplace - such as human resources, union, and higher levels of management, or outside the workplace - such as the Human Rights Commission (in cases of discrimination), Workers' Compensation Board, and the legal community. For a brief period after Nancy confronted her manager, she noticed an improvement in the manager's behavior. The manager took a "hands off" approach to supervising her, which she liked. Soon, however, the manager reverted to the old supervisory style. Nancy confronted the manager directly a second time, reiterating her original message, but to no avail. At my suggestion, Nancy started to document in detail each of the incidents of unwanted behavior, citing specifics such as dates, places, what happened, and witnesses present. In keeping this record, she attempted to be as descriptive as possible, sticking closely to "the facts" as she perceived them. Keeping this record helped to validate Nancy's experience of her manager's unwanted behavior. Next, Nancy assessed the resources within her firm in terms of which she thought would be the most helpful to her in stopping the harassment. Because there was no union, Nancy's only options were human resources and upper management. Because she knew that the manager and and the manager's boss were friends, she decided that her best option was to approach the human resources officer. In preparation for this meeting, she organized her documentation and rehearsed her message using responsible communication as she had done previously. I suggested as before that she might not get the response she wanted, and that it would be important to validate herself if this occurred. The human resouces officer listened to her statement, which included how the manager's behavior was affecting her motivation and performance adversely. The officer stated that he would get back to her after consulting the manager. Several days later, the officer reported back to her. It was clear that the officer was siding with and defending the manager. The officer indicated that the manager was just doing her job, and didn't have time to take her aside whenever she needed to give her corrective feedback. The officer thought that she was over-reacting and too sensitive. Nancy responded by reiterating that whether or not she was sensitive, she didn't like how the manager was talking to her in front of colleagues and that she wanted this behavior to stop. At this point, the officer looked at his watch and stated that he had another meeting to go to. Nancy felt disappointed but not crushed by this outcome. On the one hand, not getting the response she wanted felt like a "secondary wounding", an injury compounding the original experience of harassment. On the other hand, she felt proud of herself because she had again "found her voice" and held on to her experience in the face of opposition. Nancy was receptive to my suggestion to attend an anti-harassment/bullying support group (see www.nobullyforme.org). Nancy found it helpful to discover that she was not alone in facing harassment in the workplace. She drew strength from the support she both received and gave to others. It is likely that without the "holding environment" of the anti-harassment support group and counselling, Nancy would have felt progressively more depressed and eventually taken a health leave. This would have then placed her in a passive and dependent position as she looked to outside agencies - such as an insurance company or the Workers' Compensation Board - for financial assistance. Such assistance may or may not have been forthcoming, and may have involved delays. In Nancy's case however, she did not go on a health leave. Instead, she began to think about finding a healthier workplace. Step 3: Achieving resolution and moving on Achieving resolution involves coming to an acceptance of the experience of harassment. This requires a grieving process. In situations where the experience of harassment has been highly distressing, this may require EMDR, a technique used for reprocessing trauma. Achieving resolution also involves adopting a healthy point of view toward self and others. This enables people to move on emotionally and in some cases literally, by finding a healthier workplace. In helping Nancy to achieve resolution, I encouraged her to begin by grieving the lack of a positive outcome with her employer. Given how hard Nancy had worked to communicate responsibly, it was a real disappointment that she had not received a positive response from her company. It was also a loss to be in the process of leaving a job that she had liked. I encouraged Nancy to feel her loss fully, and suggested she write an "Open Letter" for her own benefit to her company in which she expressed all her feelings of sadness, anger, and fear. I explained that the idea of such a letter is to sit down each day, even if only for a few minutes, and to write whatever thoughts and feelings one has. This idea appealed to Nancy because she liked to write. Because Nancy had experienced ongoing validation of her feelings in counselling, and felt positive about how she had stood up for herself, at this point she did not struggle to any extent with a negative thought process toward herself. Generally, when people experience an unsatisfactory outcome regarding harassment, this stirs up a strong negative thought process toward the self in which people blame themselves for the outcome (e.g., "If only I'd conducted myself differently, I would have been believed"). The negative thought process that Nancy "listened to" pertained to feeling sorry for herself. Occasionally, she would think, "I didn't deserve this unwanted behavior. This shouldn't have happened to me. I'm a good person." Although these thoughts were understandable, I suggested it was not in her best interest to listen to these voices. Rather, I suggested that she separate these voices out and counter with her healthy point of view in the first person, "I", focusing on the core cognition of being a "proud survivor" of harassment. Nancy countered by telling herself, "I know that bad things happen to good people. I'm not going to feel sorry for myself. I choose to see myself as a proud survivor. I will not let this experience limit me. I will live fully." Nancy's greater struggle was with a negative thought process toward others. She experienced strong negative thoughts, particularly toward her manager. She found herself thinking, "She's a critical bitch. She wants to destroy me". Even though there was some validity to these thoughts, I suggested it was not in Nancy's best interest to go with these thoughts. Rather, I suggested she separate out these thoughts in the second person, "You", and counter from her healthy point of view in the first person, "I". From her healthy point of view Nancy said, "I don't like my manager. I think she lacks the skills to be an effective manager." Countering her voice attacks against the manager and the human resources officer helped Nancy to maintain a healthy attitude toward people in management positions. Had she not done this, she would have tended toward a cynical, untrusting view of managers in general. As Nancy felt more resolved emotionally, she focused more energy on finding a new job. She was clear that she did not want to be associated with an organization that disrespected her feelings. Had the organization been large enough, she would have considered a transfer, but this was not an option. Although she knew there was no guarantee she would find a healthier workplace, this was her intent. She trusted her feelings during interviews, and ultimately chose a position that paid a bit less but which felt like a healthier environment. Conclusion Harassment is a serious problem in the workplace. By confronting the unwanted behavior in an assertive, responsible manner (Step 1), by involving other resources in stopping the unwanted behavior (Step 2), and by achieving resolution and moving on (Step 3), people may experience themselves as "proud survivors" of harassment. Treatment of Harassment Bullying in the workplace Harassment in the workplace is recognized increasingly as a major problem that affects negatively employee productivity, morale, and mental health. Recently, the Province of Quebec became the first province in Canada to pass legislation making psychological harassment an indictable offence. No doubt other provinces including B.C. will follow this precedent. I will describe a three-step model for treating harassment in the workplace, and illustrate this model with the clinical case of a woman experiencing harassment in the form of public criticism by her manager. Approach to Treating Harassment Within the framework of my primary approach, Voice Therapy, I subscribe to a step model of treating harassment therapeutically, which involves three steps or levels of intervention. In Step 1, the person experiencing the unwanted behavior confronts the person exhibiting the unwanted behavior in an assertive, responsible manner regarding stopping the unwanted behavior. If this does not resolve the problem, in Step 2, other resources are involved in stopping the unwanted behavior. If the problem remains unresolved, in Step 3, the person experiencing the unwanted behavior engages in a process of grieving to achieve resolution and to move on. This may or may not involve seeking employment elsewhere. In the step model, there is a strong emphasis on resolving the harassment in Step 1. Resolving the issue at this level has the advantage of the person experiencing the unwanted behavior feeling a sense of efficacy by confronting and stopping the unwanted behavior. In Step 2, where other resources - such as a union, human resources department, or senior management - are involved, there is the possibility that the person experiencing the unwanted behavior will feel passive and dependent, while waiting for these resources to resolve the problem. If these resources respond inadequately, there is also the possibility that the person experiencing the unwanted behavior will under go a "secondary wounding", an injury compounding the original harassment. My working definition of harassment is any behavior that is experienced as unwanted and psychologically distressing. This definition gives priority to the inner experience of the person experiencing the unwanted behavior rather than on the correctness or incorrectness of the unwanted behavior. If an individual does not like a certain behavior, this therapeutic approach stresses that the individual is entitled fully to not like this behavior and to want it to stop. Rather than the individual focusing on whether the unwanted behavior is correct or incorrect, appropriate or inappropriate, this approach emphasizes the validity of the individual's experience of the behavior as unwanted and distressing. In this way, an individual can hold on to his or her experience that the behavior is unwanted and distressing even if the other party rationalizes that the behavior is correct and appropriate. To see a clinical case that describes my model of treating harassment, click on the the following heading: Women Discrimination in the Workplace Workplace Bullying – Womens Forums MSBITCH.COM’s goal is to provide womens forums to discuss womens issues freely and without fear of backlash. Professional business women can feel free to discuss any issue regarding female empowerment and women‟s rights today on our website. We offer support to take charge of your own empowerment by dealing with womens issues like womens discrimination in the workplace, workplace bullying and other gender discrimination issues. Our goal is female empowerment through seeking and discovering the positive within the negative of today‟s workplace. Women Discrimination in the Workplace Websites for Women – Womens Message Boards MSBITCH.COM is unique among websites for women in that we provide an avenue of support for females who represent all levels in the workplace. Our goal is to offer support for dealing with women‟s discrimination in the workplace. MSBITCH.COM‟s website for women includes womens message boards and discussion forums that center around women‟s rights today, women‟s discrimination in the workplace, workplace bullying, gender discrimination, and sexual harassment. As a website for women, MSBITCH.COM‟s goal is to provide womens forums and womens message boards for exchanging thoughts and ideas about women‟s rights today, and female empowerment. Womens Issues - Women Discrimination in the Workplace Women’s Rights Today MSBITCH.COM’s goal is to support women in the workplace by providing a forum for discussing womens issues and women‟s rights today. Professional business women can feel free to discuss any issue on regarding female empowerment and women‟s rights today without fear of backlash. We encourage you to start taking charge of your issues – womens discrimination in the workplace, workplace bullying, sexual harassment, or gender discrimination are among the many womens issues MSBITCH.COM aims to offer support. Our goal is to encourage female empowerment through seeking and discovering the positive within the negative of today‟s workplace. Start dealing with womens discrimination in the workplace, and take charge of the womens issues that affect you. As a website for womens issues, MSBITCH.COM is designed to offer female empowerment and support for womens rights in today‟s workplace. Listing of Workplace Abuse, Bullying, Harassment, Mobbing, and Violence Links HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 001 Australia ACT Griffith AIC Australian Institute of Occupational Criminology Violence 002 Australia Queensland Brisbane Workplace Mobbing MOBBING Australia HARASSMENT BULLYING Whatever you call it - it hurts. Workplace bullies hurt HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME everyone. 003 Australia South Australia Salisbury SAEBOW South Australian Employees Bullies Down Australia and New Bullied Out of Work Under Zealand 004 Australia Victoria Malvern Duty of Care 005 Canada AB Cochrane Cyberbullying Always On? Always Aware! 006 Canada BC North Duncan The Work Doctor America Wide 007 Canada ON Ottawa Coalition contre le Coalition harcèlement au against gouvernement fédéral harassment by the Federal Government 008 Canada ON Toronto Equality Rules Campaign to Encourage Healthy, Equal Relationships Between Boys and Girls 009 Canada ON Toronto It's A Girl's World A Documentary About Social Bullying HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 010 Canada ON Toronto It's A Girl's World The 3 part radio series 011 Canada ON Asia Toronto CARM Counter Aggression PDI Passmore Duff Pacific / Response Model International North America COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL CALL NAME HQ EXTRA EXTRA NAME LOCAL ENGLISH LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 012 Canada ON Toronto CIWV Canadian Initiative on Workplace Violence 013 Canada QC Nationwide Montreal mobbing.ca Helping to make 'mobbing' a household word in Canada 014 Canada QC Montreal Prévenir la violence au Prevent travail Violence at Work 015 Canada Quebec Quebec City Gouvernement du Québec - Harcèlement Government Commission des normes du psychologique of Quebec - travail au travail / Labour Psychological Standards harrasment at Commission work 016 England Greater Worldwide London jfo The jfo Project just fight on London HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 017 France Bas-Rhin Alsace Strasbourg Association Mots pour Maux Words for au Travail harm at work 018 France Paris Ile-de- Paris ACHP Association Contre le France Harcèlement Professionnel 019 France Paris Ile-de- Paris SST Association Solidarité France Souffrances au Travail 020 France Val-de- Ile-de- Rungis HMS Harcèlement Moral Stop Marne France 021 Germany Bayern München ver.di Vereinte ZibU Zivilcourage im Civil Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft beruflichen courage in Umfeld the vocational surrounding field 022 Italy Lombardia Milan Mobbing-Sisu: Il caso Nigris, Inner strength, Mobbing = Multi dipendente impiegata determination, Bullying, dell'Ospedale perseverance Sisu = Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico in the face of Finnish for di Milano the adversity of stamina, bullying hardiness and fearlessness COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL CALL NAME HQ EXTRA EXTRA NAME LOCAL ENGLISH LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 023 New New beyond bullying advocating Zealand Plymouth zero tolerance to workplace bullying in New Zealand 024 Northern Belfast Equality Commission for Ireland Northern Ireland HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 025 South Johannesburg Work Trauma Africa 026 UK The Workplace Bullying Site The Premier UK Web site Working Against Harassment in the Workplace 027 UK Devon Tavistock Workplace Bullying, Stress, Employment Law and You 028 UK GTM Manchester USDAW Union of Shop, Distributive Freedom From and Allied Workers Fear Campaign 029 UK Oxfordshire Didcot The Field Foundation Bully Online 030 UK Oxfordshire Oxford Bully OnLine HQ 031 US AL Montgomery Tolerance.org Fight Hate, and Promote Tolerance 032 US CA Antioch Hofesh - Freedom From To provide Bullying validation and support of targets of workplace bullying. HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 033 US CA North Benicia Bully Busters CAWB Campaign America Against Wide Workplace Bullying COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL CALL NAME HQ EXTRA EXTRA NAME LOCAL ENGLISH LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 034 US CA Beverly Hills STAND UP - Stand Up for A campaign to women's rights and equality end Sexual Harrassment and Domestic Violence - Inspired by the film North Country 035 US CA Lake Forest National Institute For The Workplace Prevention Of Workplace Violence 911 Violence 036 US CA Los Osos Sam Horn Take the Bully by the Horns 037 US CA Newport KickBully.com Where Your Beach Fight Begins 038 US CA Palm Springs Workplace Violence Research Institute 039 US CA Santa Cruz Deal Consulting 040 US CA Sunnyvale Nineveh HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 041 US CA Nation Tarzana Sexual Harassment- wide Discrimination Hotline 042 US DC Washington The Empower Program Because violence shouldn't be a rite of passage 043 US DC Washington Women Abused, Inhumanely Mistreated In the US Postal Service 044 US DC Washington AFGE American Federation of AFGE Local Local Government Employees 12's Proposal 12 to Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao on Workplace Bullying and Psychological Harassment of February 2006 COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL CALL NAME HQ EXTRA EXTRA NAME LOCAL ENGLISH LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 045 US IA Ames Mobbing-U.S.A MOBBING: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace - A book about Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace 046 US IL Lake Forest CCA Cuss Control Academy 047 US IL Wilmette Stopping School Violence Immediately learn skills to keep your child safe from bullying and school violence. 048 US NY Staten Island From Bullies to Buddies Empowering the world's victims of teasing and bullying 049 US WA Auburn Nurse Advocate HEALTH & SAFETY ABUSE AND HARASSMENT LINKS CALL EXTRA LOCAL ENGLISH NO COUNTRY STATE REGION TOWN CALL NAME HQ EXTRA NAME LANG LETTERS LETTERS NAME NAME 050 US WA Nation Bainbridge WW Working Wounded Adding insight Wide Island to injury 051 US WA North Bellingham The Workplace Bullying & America Trauma Institute Wide Institute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Addiction (INMHA) Bullying and Mental Health in Academic Workplaces: The Problem and the Solution - Michael Wm. MacGregor Michael Wm. MaGregor*, Elizabeth Quinlan*, Glenis Joyce*, and Ailsa Watkinson** * University of Saskatchewan, ** University of Regina Workplaces are common sites of bullying. The sense of shame that most victims experience leads to low self-reporting rates, which further reinforces the unspoken sanctioning of bullying within a workplace. Prevalence rates of workplace bullying range from as low as 2% when self-reported to 25% when operationally measured. A wide range of health outcomes from bullying has been identified, including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, headaches, chronic fatigue syndrome, etc. Moreover, workplace bullying has also been found to be a factor in purposeful damaging of employer property, squandering of materials, and counterproductive behaviours which result in considerable costs. Physical violence and sexual harassment are violations that have historically been considered in Occupational, Health and Safety, and Human Rights legislation while workplace bullying has not. The introduction of clauses pertaining to the prevention of compensation for 'psychological harassment' in Quebec's Labour Standards Act marks the first legislative initiatives in Canada to deal with workplace bullying. As public sector organizations, universities face increased pressure to conform to a 'business ethic' and many of the consequences are likely contributory factors of workplace bullying: The loss of middle managers and other personnel trained in conflict resolution, reduction of internal job ladders and other mechanisms providing job security, a tendency towards autocratic managerial styles, etc. Universities in Australia have researched and taken significant steps to combat workplace bullying, however, to our knowledge there is no research on bullying in Canadian academic workplaces This research project has objectives: 1) to identify the dimensions of bullying in the academic workplace, 2) to design and implement a staged intervention protocol aimed at mitigating the mental health outcomes from workplace bullying, to be administered to three broad occupational groups represented in the academic workplace - professional, administrative/technical, and clerical/service, 3) to measure the effects of the employee-driven interventions upon their mental health using both qualitative and quantitative analyses, and 4), to promote progressive change in the organizational culture of the intervention sites and other workplaces through multiple knowledge translation activities. We will accomplish these objectives through three studies. The first study will consist of focus groups to qualitatively understand the nature and extent of academic workplace bullying. The second study will quantitatively assess the extent of workplace bullying experienced by participants, provide them with information on workplace bullying (as a psychoeducational intervention) and measure their physical and mental health both before and after they are provided with information on workplace bullying. The third study will be an extension of study two but rather than using a psychoeducational approach we will incorporate individual and group meetings to discuss strategies to deal with and counteract workplace bullying. Again, physical and mental health will be measured both before and after the intervention. As we have collaborators from both the University of Saskatchewan and Regina we will be running these studies at each university to assess the generalizability of our findings. To accomplish these objectives we have Jim Turk, Executive Director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, Larry Hubich, President of the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, and the presidents of all three unions at the University of Saskatchewan as collaborators. As well, discussions are underway to gain the same union support from the University of Regina. It is our intention to extend the team to other jurisdictions (e.g., University of Waterloo, McMaster University, etc.) and ultimately use the Saskatchewan-based project as a model to direct subsequent projects in other jurisdictions by other team members. From Club Fed. Anti-Harassment Policies for the Workplace: An Employer's Guide Best Practices for Workplace Promotion of Violence Prevention - Prince Edward Island Bullying in the Workplace Checklist for an Anti-Harassment Policy: Medium and Large Organizations Checklist for an Anti-Harassment Policy: Small Organizations Government of Nova Scotia Sexual Harrassment Policy - Nova Scotia Harassment - Employer's Responsibility Preventing Violence and Harassment in the Workplace - Alberta Sexual Harassment in the Workplace - An Information Guide for Employees and Employers - Newfoundland and Labrador Workplace Safety Program - Prince Edward Island http://www.safecanada.ca/link_e.asp?category=12&topic=209 Bullied in the Boardroom Vol. 08 Issue 08 With the office as their playground, these mean, aggressive, dominating personalities are poisoning the workplace. by Neil Parmar Buried deep in paperwork, a nurse completes a patient's chart on a New Brunswick hospital ward. A resident surgeon, stressed out and volatile, bursts in to berate the nurse. He throws verbal punches left, right and centre until finally another nurse on the ward overhears and calls out "Code Pink." "At this point, any nurse who was available on the ward would come and stand as a silent witness to what was going on," recounts Marilyn Noble, a professor from the University of New Brunswick who studies workplace bullying. "Suddenly [the surgeon] would look up and there would be a circle of people watching him and ready to report him if he said anything else." Noble's real-life account, though inspiring, is a far cry from what typically happens when someone is bullied on the job. According to experts, bullies plough through office floors and push more than 75% of their victims out the company door. The problem became so widespread during the last decade that the International Labour Office identified Canada as one of the world's worst countries when it came to preventing violence in the workplace. What's more, that bullying has now become four times more common than either workplace discrimination or sexual harassment. "Thankfully," says Noble, "we're at the same place with workplace bullying that the family violence issue was 20 years ago - we've suddenly made it discussable." Noble is working with a team of researchers to better understand what makes workplace bullies tick and where they infiltrate. So far she has discovered them in corporations, small businesses, hospitals, public schools, churches and even museums. What surprised her was that many of these organizations already had anti-bullying rules in place, yet nothing was done to stop the aggressive behaviour. According to the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute, bullies control their targets through both acts of commission (hostile verbal, non-verbal communication and interfering action) and omission (withholding company resources to guarantee failure). Many companies in Alberta boast "zero tolerance" policies for workplace bullying. Yet, "In many cases, we're too polite and accept inappropriate behaviour [because] we don't want to inflame the situation," says Jessie Callaghan, a workplace bullying expert from the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety in Hamilton, Ont. This is, in part, why catching bullies is a tricky business. Experts also contend that many targets - new employees especially - don't even realize they're being bullied because they have a newfound dedication to the company and are busy trying to be good team players. After a while, however, a target may begin second-guessing his or her workmanship, perhaps not noticing that a peer or supervisor is purposefully making workloads unbearable by demanding too much. As the surrounding work environment becomes stressfully toxic, sick days increase and a conniving co-worker or boss can make it look as though the target is a poor performer - when, in fact, the workplace bully is using up company time and resources and setting up the target for inevitable failure. "The bully may be very high in the food chain," acknowledges Noble. "If the CEO is the bully, then most likely the victims have been isolated, silenced and discredited." But even if the bully is someone lower in the ranks, like a mid-level manager, office supervisors may not know what to do unless they've been properly trained. Noble admits that office supervisors and low-level managers might be afraid of being sued if they ignore the complaint or fire the bully, so there's a deadlock. She says the important thing for employers to understand is that bullying can change the culture of a company, making the workplace toxic. In the 1980s, Heinz Leymann, a Swedish researcher, coined the term "mobbing" to describe the systematic destruction of an individual's identity, self-respect and self-esteem through the repeated violation of their dignity in private and in front of others. Researchers have since found that bullying may lead victims to alcoholism, substance abuse and even suicide. But it wasn't until April 6, 1999, that Canadians really started paying attention to the severity of workplace bullying. On that day, a former employee of Ottawa's public transport authority went on a shooting rampage that left four co-workers dead before he took his own life. The man had been a victim of workplace bullying. Following a coroner's inquiry, a recommendation was made to include psychological violence such as teasing and ridiculing under the definition of workplace violence. Since then, a number of provinces have set up guidelines to address on-the-job bullying. Indeed, adopting preventative measures has become the key to curbing bullying before it steamrolls into violence. On June 1, 2004, Quebec enacted North America's first anti-workplace bullying law, which could see bullies paying fines of up to $10,000 for hostile or inappropriate comments, gestures, intimidation, threats, blackmail or coercion. Known as the Workplace Psychological Harassment Prevention Act, this law also makes employers in Quebec liable for the cost of psychological support and any lost wages that victims of bullying incur. In this province, Alberta's Occupational Health and Safety Code has specific policies to prevent workplace violence - which it defines broadly as any act in which a person is abused, threatened, intimidated or assaulted in the course of his or her employment. It requires Alberta businesses to implement a workplace violence policy and communicate it to employees, conduct a hazard assessment of risk factors and create a method of documenting and investigating incidents. Callaghan suggests that employers foster mutual respect between ranks and among employees, regardless of how competitive a company is. She also recommends employers take a holistic approach by instituting a workplace bullying intervention program and "having a reporting and investigative process where employees can report any potential violence or harassment. Employers can then investigate and see whether it was a legitimate incident or not and take remedial measures," she says. Employers also have an obligation to outline the confidential process employees can rely on and ensure that victims know that no reprisals will be made against them. Certain claims are hard to prove, however. Sona Chavda, who worked for eight months in an upscale clothing boutique in Edmonton, says, "Retail has some of the major bullies, especially in commission-based incomes." The most vicious co-workers, according to her, were "the ones who stole customers and claimed that they didn't know I was already helping them." Chavda claims that she and fellow co-workers were victims of malicious gossip - which became a major source of stress and turmoil for her. Bullied employees waste 52% of their time at work networking for support, defending their position and dwelling on their situation, according to the Canada Safety Council. Then there's the damaging spillover effect that occurs when employees' marriages break down as a result of daily stress and their friendships dissolve as they obsess over their situation. If the bullying is serious enough, the provincial health care system ends up footing the bill for stress-related visits to the doctor, and antidepressants. There's no doubt employers also incur high costs for having to cover for lost efficiency, absenteeism, staff turnovers and severance packages. Ironically, though, more than 80% of bullies are managers or people in power says the Safety Council. Most form allies up the corporate ladder in a bid for protection, but a faction are known as serial bullies who target one employee - until that person is forced to quit - then bring down another. Though rarely psychopathic, bullying bosses are opportunistic and cognizant of those who can be easily drummed out of competitive workplaces. They sift through their underlings and weed out the ones who may threaten their jobs. "There's a big cluster of bullies in supervisory positions because they have a certain amount of autonomy and are in the best position to create situations where they can dominate," says Heather Gray, president of the Edmonton-based consulting firm Threat Assessment and Management Associates Inc. "It's all manipulation and most often it's done under the guise of discipline." She adds that "bully auditors" - outside agencies hired to help manage workplace violence - sometimes discover third party bullies, where an employee convinces a manager to push around another employee. Contrary to popular belief, up to half of all bullies are women, according to the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute. But women are still targets in the workplace the majority of the time, as female bullies go after women 84% of the time and male bullies go after them 69% of the time. But there's a huge difference in how each sex approaches their target, notes Gray. "Women are typically more subtle, manipulative behind-the-scenes and influential in ways that aren't as noticeable. Men are a little more in your face." Bullies aren't always lurking around the company water cooler though. Many clients harass and demean employees, especially in retail outlets, health care offices and advertising agencies. That's why Callaghan asserts, "I don't think the client is always right. If you adopt that kind of attitude, anyone who complains about anything may expect something. And that may be setting up employees for the potential of workplace violence or abuse." Documentation is crucial for catching either clients or co-workers who go from being helpful to harmful. This includes logging incidents with dates and times, saving verbally abusive e-mails and voicemail messages, keeping a list of co- workers who are willing to come forward as witnesses and accumulating reference letters from other supervisors who can vouch for your work. Unions may be able to help, though experts note targets should exercise care about who knows what information as it may trickle back to the bully. Once abuse has been recorded, it can usually be easily reported. "Now, the flip side of that is that the bully is likely also documenting because they're setting up [their own] scenario," warns Gray. "Bullies are very, very good at doing things that are witnessed and can be construed in a positive - or not in a negative - way. They may even praise targets in a meeting to look like they're generous, but behind their back they're poisoning the environment. Document anyway and there may be another forum to use that documentation, whether it's a worker's compensation claim or a civil lawsuit." We can’t make people like each other But in the workplace, we can make sure no one is treated differently because of their racial or ethnic origin, or because of gender, ability or sexual orientation. We can‟t make people like each other. But we can encourage workers who are sexually and/or racially harassed to speak out with the support of their union. We can‟t make people like each other. But we can state clearly that our union will fight at all levels to eliminate discrimination and harassment. We can‟t make people like each other. But we can create a workplace free from sexism, discrimination, racism and bigotry. We can‟t make people like each other. But we can through concrete action, promote tolerance and mutual respect in our union. That‟s why we have adopted policies to prohibit and prevent harassment in the workplace. And that‟s why we have produced this workbook to help local union members address these issues step-by-step, incident by incident, with fairness and respect for all individuals. We can‟t make people like each other. But we can make it clear that our union is, indeed, Everybody’s Union. Preventing Sexual Harassment in the Workplace At the Steelworkers 1989 National Policy Conference, the union adopted a Policy to Prohibit and Prevent Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. This policy adopts the definition of sexual harassment recommended by the York University Presidential Advisory Committee on Sexual Harassment. Sexual Harassment is: unwanted sexual attention of a persistent or abusive nature, made by a person who knows or ought reasonably to know that such attention is unwanted; or implied or expressed promise of reward for complying with a sexually oriented request; or implied or expressed threat or reprisal, in the form either of actual reprisal or the denial of opportunity, for refusal to comply with a sexually oriented request; or Sexually oriented remarks and behaviour, which may reasonably be perceived to create a negative psychological and emotional environment for work and study. Just what does this mean? Does this mean that one person may no longer whistle at another to indicate appreciation for that person‟s looks? Yes. Does this mean that one person may no longer touch another person without permission? Yes. Does this mean that sexual jokes, slurs and gestures are not acceptable in the workplace? Yes. Does this mean that pin-ups and sexual graffiti can no longer be put up in the workplace? Yes. Does this mean that promises of promotion in return for sexual "favours" are illegal? Yes. Does this mean that we are to treat each other with mutual respect? Yes. Mutual respect. That‟s what it‟s all about. We work better when we work with people we respect and who respect us. Our workplace is a healthier and safer place to be when we can concentrate on the task at hand and not have to worry about harassment. And we are better members of our union because we can concentrate on helping each other out on the job rather than trying to always protect ourselves. Preventing Racial Harassment in the Workplace Human Rights legislation in Canada defines harassment as "engaging in a course of vexatious comments or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome." At the 1989 National Policy Conference, the United Steelworkers adopted the Policy to Prevent and Deal with Racial Harassment in the Workplace. Racial Harassment is: Words or actions which show disrespect or cause humiliation to another person because of his or her race, colour, language, religion, creed, ancestry, place of origin or ethnic origin. Disguised as a joke, subtle or overt, these acts of harassment are offensive, demeaning, embarrassing and hurtful. Just what does this mean? Does this mean that ethnic, religious or racial jokes are no longer acceptable in the workplace? Yes. Does this mean that racist graffiti and pictures cannot be put up in the workplace? Yes. Does this mean that people may no longer "tease" a co-worker or make comments that are racially insulting or present stereotypes of racial, religious or ethnic groups? Yes. Does this mean that it is illegal to refuse to work with a person because of her or his ethnic background? Yes Does this mean that intimidating or threatening a person because of her or his skin colour, language, religion or ethnic background is racial harassment? Yes Does this mean that we are to treat each other with mutual respect? Yes Mutual respect. That‟s what it‟s all about. We work better when we work with people with people we respect and who respect us. Our workplace is a healthier and safer place to be when we can concentrate on the task at and not have to worry about harassment. And we are better members of our union because we can concentrate on helping each other out on the job rather than trying to always protect ourselves. Preventing harassment based on sexual orientation in the workplace Most Human Rights Codes in Canada prohibit harassment and discrimination based on sexual orientation. Yet, many union members who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered do not feel safe "coming out" in the workplace or in the union. Steelworker members need to take a strong stand against the harassment and violence faced by workers who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered. Just what does this mean? Does this mean that intimidating or bullying a person because of their sexual orientation is harassment? Yes Does this mean that isolating a person because of their sexual orientation or gender identity may be harassment? Yes Does this mean that it is no longer acceptable to deny benefits to same-sex spouses? Yes Does this mean that refusing to work next to someone because of their sexual orientation is harassment? Yes Does this mean that denying the gender identity of a transgendered worker may be harassment? Yes Does this mean that we are to treat each other with mutual respect? Yes Mutual respect. That‟s what it‟s all about. We work better when we work with people with people we respect and who respect us. Our workplace is a healthier and safer place to be when we can concentrate on the task at and not have to worry about harassment. And we are better members of our union because we can concentrate on helping each other out on the job rather than trying to always protect ourselves. Preventing harassment based on disability in the workplace Changes in Human Rights Law over the last number of years have resulted in positive changes for workers with disabilities. Employers and unions need to look at how changes can be made to workplaces and the design of work to help accommodate injured workers and workers with disabilities in the workplace. Just what does this mean? Does this mean that injured workers and workers with disabilities have a right to good, safe jobs? Yes Does this mean that jokes or gestures about people with disabilities are not acceptable in the workplace? Yes Does this mean that it is not acceptable to isolate injured workers or workers with disabilities? Yes Does this mean that we are to treat each other with mutual respect? Yes Mutual respect. That‟s what it‟s all about. We work better when we work with people with people we respect and who respect us. Our workplace is a healthier and safer place to be when we can concentrate on the task at and not have to worry about harassment. And we are better members of our union because we can concentrate on helping each other out on the job rather than trying to always protect ourselves. What is the Union Doing? In the Workplace The Steelworkers Anti-Harassment Workplace Training Program has reached over 40,000 front-line workers, supervisors and managers across the country. Sessions are delivered in the workplace during work hours by trained Steelworker facilitators. Video clips, a quiz and small group discussions help people to recognize and deal with harassment and discrimination in the workplace. Negotiated with employers, the program is one of the most effective steps local unions can take to prevent harassment and discrimination in the workplace. In more and more workplaces, employers and unions are setting up joint human rights committees to help investigate and resolve harassment complaints and conflict. Steelworkers provide training of the joint committees in conducting investigations and facilitating informal conflict mediation. Many Steelworker collective agreements now include anti-harassment policies and procedures. Negotiated mechanisms help to ensure a role for the union in the investigation and resolution of complaints. Steelworker Anti-Harassment Complaints Counsellors are available across the country to assist in the investigation and resolution of workplace incidents. Working along side local activists, counsellors support workplace efforts to challenge and stop harassment. Workplace Bullying Bullying is about power. The schoolyard or workplace bully controls and overpowers people with their size, status or privilege. Bullying is an act of aggression. While bullying may not be illegal, it is wrong. Any behaviour that intimidates, threatens and humiliates another should not be tolerated – in a schoolyard, a workplace or in the union. Checklist of things to do in your workplace: 1. Negotiate the Steelworkers Anti-Harassment Workplace Training sessions to be delivered to all workers in the workplace. Call your Area, District or National office for more information. 2. Negotiate strong workplace policies and procedures to deal with harassment. See checklist for policies and procedures. . 3. Appoint someone in your local union to deal with issues of harassment. Training and support are available through the union or a labour council supported union-counselling program. Make sure the membership knows who the person is to discuss harassment problems in the workplace. Contact your Area, District or National office for more information. 4. Copy and post on the union bulletin board the definition of harassment in this workbook or the Steelworkers Anti-harassment Policy, the "Yellow Sheet". 5. Create a supportive atmosphere in the workplace to encourage harassment victims to come forward so the union can help them deal with the issues. Model "respect" and "tolerance" at work, local union meetings and events. Poisoned Work Environment When harassment or conflict isn‟t handled well, the work environment can become "poisoned". Often negative or disrespectful behaviour increases. People find ways of avoiding work and may actually feel sick from the stress and tension in the workplace. What can start as a problem between a couple of co-workers, spreads like poison when left unchallenged. Workers need to develop skills and confidence to deal with incidents of harassment quickly and effectively. WHAT TO DO if you think you are being harassed in the workplace: Document the time, date, and names of any witnesses and detailed information about the nature of the incident. No means no. If possible, tell the harasser to stop the unwelcome behaviour. If you are uncomfortable about doing that on your own, contact the member of the local union who has been identified as the harassment complaints person. WHAT TO DO if you believe that a co-worker is being harassed in the workplace: Let your co-worker know that you‟re there to help. Offer to act as a witness if needed. Help them to document what has happened and support them in putting the harasser on notice that the behaviour is unwelcome and to stop immediately. If needed; assist them in contacting the correct local union executive member, steward, human rights committee person, staff representative or a Harassment Complaints Counsellor. Treat your fellow workers with respect. It is surprising how much faster and easier the job gets done when we work together as a team. Remember to keep things confidential. Dealing with complaints of harassment: Tips for Local Union Activists 1. Assure the person that you take their complaint seriously. Let them know that you are aware how difficult it is to come forward with a complaint. Be a listener not a judge. If the situation was bothering her or him, it is the right thing to come forward. 2. Ask if the person is comfortable discussing the problem with you. Assist them in contacting one of the union‟s designated counsellors. 3. If applicable, provide them with a copy of the union and company policy. 4. Let the person know the options available in pursuing a complaint. These options include: a. union to investigate and attempt to mediate a resolution b. union to approach management to investigate c. filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission d. criminal or civil charges with police investigation 5. Confidentiality: Reassure the person that your discussions and their comments will not be shared with the alleged harasser or any witnesses. If the complaint becomes a formal grievance or complaint, some parts of the case may become public. 6. Ask the person to document the incident(s) in writing. The documentation needs to include: a. time and place of the incidents(s) b. names of witnesses (if any) c. what the harasser did and said (word for word if possible) d. what they did or said and how she/he felt about it 7. Make sure that there are some union members or community counsellors who can provide emotional support to the person. 8. In some cases, the victim may need to take sick leave or file a workers‟ compensation claim or, if absolutely necessary, a temporary re-assignment could be made. After discussing this with the victim, make sure that you obtain help to facilitate this process as quickly as possible. What is the role of Harassment Complaints Counsellors in dealing with Workplace Complaints? Co-worker Harassment: 1. With the victim‟s permission, the counsellor will investigate the complaint by confidentially interviewing the victim, alleged harasser and any witnesses. 2. Counsellors attempt to mediate a satisfactory resolution. This mediation may result in an apology or a written agreement between the victim and the respondent. The agreement could include a promise that the offending behaviour not recur. Most complaints can be resolved in this way without any further intervention. 3. If attempts at mediation do not succeed, the counsellor, with the permission of the victim, will advise the alleged harasser in writing that the victim may file a formal complaint with the employer and/or human rights commission in the appropriate jurisdiction. 4. If the alleged harasser still does not respond to mediation or no solution is possible and/or incidents of harassment continue, the counsellor will assist the victim in writing a letter to the employer. 5. Once this letter is sent to the employer, the employer has a legal responsibility to investigate. Negotiated collective agreement provisions, where applicable, will be set in operation perhaps involving an outside Harassment investigator. Management/Worker Harassment: 1. With the victim‟s permission, harassment complaint counsellor(s) will speak confidentially with the employer to determine whether the matter can be resolved. 2. If not resolution is possible, the counsellor may approach the local union to assist the victim in filing a grievance. 3. In the event the grievance proceeds to arbitration, the victim will be required to give evidence of the harassment. If an arbitrator allows the grievance she/he in accordance with collective agreement provisions, may direct the griever not be required to work with any supervisor or foreperson found to have engaged in harassing conduct. In the Union The United Steelworkers Anti-harassment Policy or "Yellow Sheet" is read out at the beginning of all union events. Printed on bright yellow paper, the policy defines harassment and how harassment can undermine union solidarity and respect for human rights, principles fundamental to the labour movement. At union schools and conferences, harassment complaints counselors are identified in the event someone has an incident they need to be investigated confidentially. Issues of harassment and discrimination are now included in the union‟s education courses so stewards, health and safety activists, workers‟ compensation advocates, local union officers and negotiating teams can better handle and prevent incidents. Human Rights are Workers’ Rights is a course offered by the union to human rights activists and union leadership. The program helps activists deal with incidents of harassment and discrimination and work with leadership and human rights committees to challenge inequality and racism inside and outside of our workplaces. Challenging harassment and bullying does not mean shutting down respectful and constructive debate. Disagreements and differences of opinion can help us to find new and better solutions in an atmosphere of respect. Steelworkers offer support to officers and chairpeople who need some assistance in building and maintaining a healthy "atmosphere" at all union meetings and events. While it may not be easy, it is really important for officers to quickly deal with negative behaviour. „We can‟t make people like each other." But we can help to create an environment at our meetings and events where harassment and bullying will not be tolerated. Members of the Steelworkers are "governed" by the Constitution of the United Steelworkers. The constitution clearly states that no member should treat another in a way that is hurtful or disrespectful. In the event that a member feels they have been treated in a "non-union" like way, they can use the procedures outlined in the constitution to try and resolve the situation. In Canada, where an issue of harassment is at the root of a conflict between two members, the union‟s anti- harassment counsellors may help to resolve the situation in a confidential and timely manner. The constitution process can not be used by a member who may be "retaliating" for a grievance or complaint that may have been filed in the workplace. Checklist for union activities and events: 1. Conduct harassment awareness campaigns through local union meetings, local union newsletters, forums, and guest speakers. Read out the Steelworkers Anti-Harassment Policy at meetings and if there are questions or incidents deal with them as quickly as possible. Set the tone for meetings to ensure there is an opportunity to educate members and field questions or concerns raised at the meeting. If there are questions or incidents it is important to act on them as quickly as possible. 2. Amend the local union by-laws to include policy and procedures to prevent and deal with harassment to ensure the elimination of harassment wherever it exits. Locals and units need to accept responsibility to implement the "yellow sheet". 3. Provide training and support to chairpeople of meetings and local union officers to prevent and deal with harassment. Points to remember: Harassment is illegal Harassment devalues workers; it destroys their self worth and confidence inside and outside the workplace. Harassment is one person‟s attempt to demonstrate power over another person. People in lower paying and less secure positions - often women, visible minorities, people with disabilities and aboriginal people - are most likely to be targets of harassment. Harassment can "poison" the work environment, affecting work performance and endangering the safety of the work and his or her co-workers. Undermining someone‟s personal dignity and pride, harassment, if unchallenged, can lead to accidents and prolonged illness. Our goal is to achieve harassment free workplaces, union schools, and conferences. You may be uncomfortable when someone comes to you with a complaint, especially if you haven‟t dealt with such situations before. Listening to accounts of hostile, frightening interactions, which are hard to sort out, can be stressful for you as well. This is normal. Ask another activist to give you the support and information you need or call to "brainstorm" with one of the union‟s harassment complaint counsellors. The situation will not just go away no matter how badly you may want it to. The member is looking to you for help, support, and advice. When discussing cases of harassment, be careful to protect confidentiality. The Steelworkers anti- harassment policy applies to all members and officers of the union. Do not mention names when discussing cases. Use the term‟s "victim", "alleged harasser" and "witness". We do not have a right to identify someone and make him or her feel unsafe in the workplace. We need to try to keep discussions to those individuals who must be involved in a case and ask that conversations be kept confidential. If there is more than one member of the bargaining unit involved, the union has a responsibility to represent the interests of each of them. Checklist for workplace policies and procedures Purpose of policy –This section may state that the employer and the union are committed to a workplace free from discrimination and harassment, and that immediate steps will be taken to address complaints. A clear statement of this sort can help prevent harassment and help people come forward if there is an incident. The Law – A brief overview of the law related to harassment. Definition of harassment – Employees need to know what is meant by harassment and the prohibited grounds such as sexual or racial harassment, harassment because of sexual orientation, disability, etc. Confidentiality – The policy should clearly state the importance of confidentiality in handling complaints. Complaint Procedures – Sets out the steps for responding to a complaint of harassment as well as the roles and responsibilities of the people involved. It should identify any direct action that the individual who is harassed needs to take to put the harasser "on notice". Any informal and formal procedures need to be described and the relationship of the policy to the grievance procedure. Time Limits – Members need to know how soon an investigation will begin, how long it will take and when they will be informed of the results. The sooner the investigation starts, the less damage will be done and the sooner people can move on from the experience. Retaliation – The policy should make it very clear that retaliation against an individual or individuals for having filed a complaint will not be tolerated. All of the good work done by the policy will be undone if people are allowed to retaliate against someone who has filed a complaint or who has cooperated in an investigation. Education - A policy is only words on a sheet of paper unless people know who to make it work to correct a problem. Include the Steelworkers Anti-Harassment Workplace Training Program as part of the policy as well as ensuring there is training for the individuals or committee that will be handling complaints. Monitoring – Review the policy every couple of years and make changes based on the feedback from employees and the human rights committee or anti-harassment counsellors. Video’s from the Alberta Government Library Discrimination/Sexual Harassment Videos HRV 007 Beyond the Open Door 29 min. 1990 1/2" VHS This interesting production focuses on employment equity as it affects women, aboriginal people, visible minorities and the physically challenged. Designed to increase awareness of the need for fair treatment in the workplace regardless of gender, race or disability. HRV 075 Discrimination in the Workplace 25 min. 1992 1/2" VHS This video shows you and your staff how to recognize and avoid discrimination and harassment of fellow employees on the basis of: sex, age, race, religion, disabilities and sexual orientation. HRV 160 Diversity - Making It Work 14 min. 1/2" VHS Diversity is something that you don't have to go out and get B you already have it at work. But to be effective, it has to be managed. This program shows which diversity programs work and which ones don't. It shows how to link diversity with the core business strategy and how to measure bottom line results. Resistance is usually due to a lack of understanding. Too many people think that it is a race and gender related, but diversity is process B not a program. By bringing it home to yourself first, you will then be able to bring it to the workplace and value it. HRV 213 Eliminating Workplace Bullying 14 min. 2001 1/2" VHS Workplace bullying is ongoing repeated aggressive behavior that humiliates, intimidates and degrades. Today all organizations need to act to eliminate bullying, which can have serious consequences both for the individual and the organization. This video covers such issues as: who are the victims, what are the effects on the victims, what can a victim do, how do I know if I am a bully, and more. VRV 205 Getting Along with Your Co-Workers 13 min. 1998 1/2" VHS This program helps new and re-entry workers understand why it is important to behave responsibly on the job. Safety on the job and why it’s in everyone’s best interest to follow safety rules is discussed. Other topics covered include substance abuse and diversity in the workplace. HRV 253 In This Together 18 min. 2000 1/2" VHS Seven front line employees from a variety of businesses speak directly to their peers as they lay out the issues of respect and harassment head on. From dealing with gossip to being in a bad mood, this entertaining program uses a non-threatening opinion survey to create a safe environment where viewers can re-evaluate their beliefs and their actions. There is no heavy corporate message, but rather insightful looks at real situations that will lead employees to make better choices. HRV 098 Sexual Harassment - How to Protect Yourself And ... (3 Volumes) 1993 1/2" VHS Volume I This video series will help you and your staff understand the surprisingly complex and expensive problem of sexual harassment. It shows you how to spot warning signs of trouble, so you'll be able to resolve problems before they get out of hand. You'll watch realistic enactments and evaluate them. Volume II In this volume, you'll find out what steps to take to get help, if you are unable to handle a problem on your own. Volume III This volume demonstrates the right way to receive a complaint, how to investigate a complaint and what to consider in determining if a charge is valid. HRV 059 Sexual Harassment in the Workplace 19:08 min. 1988 1/2" VHS Hosted by Hanna Gartner, this video defines sexual harassment with the use of dramatized sequences. Under the Canada Labour Code employers have a legal responsibility to provide a sexual harassment policy, to ensure that disciplinary action is taken in the event of a complaint, to provide a confidential complaints process, and to provide a work environment free of sexual harassment. HRV 071 Word in Edgewise (A) 26 min. 1986 1/2" VHS The use of sexism in our everyday language is an unconscious act - one that most of us should be more aware of. This documentary is a humorous look at our daily language use, the history of the English Language, and how this affects our vision of the world around us. Any move toward equality is hindered by the sex bias entrenched in our language. HRV 193 You Can Stop Harrassment 1999 1/2" VHS Part I - 26 min. Part II - 25 min. This program is intended to encourage employees, supervisors, team leaders and managers in the public and private sector organizations to take responsibility to help en all forms of harassment in their workplaces. Workplace bullying…different from the schoolyard variety more analogous to domestic violence (and we want to hear from you!) John Atkins (North Bay ON) (Based on The New York Times piece by Benedict Carey, reprinted in The Star, July 2, 2004 Whereas schoolyard bullies tend to pick on the smaller or weaker children, adult bullies in the workplace are just as likely to pick on a strong subordinate, according to Dr. Gary Namie, director of the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute in Bellingham WA. Researchers and policy makers from several countries met recently in Bergen Norway to discuss the issue of workplace bullying. One researcher, Dr. Calvin Morrill of the University of California at Irvine, who studies corporate culture puts it this way, “We’re finding that some of the behaviors that we think most protect us are what in fact allow the behavior to continue. Workers become desensitized, tacitly complicit and don’t always act rationally. While taking the lead in aggressive behaviors may be appropriate on the football or battle fields, the rules of the factory floor and office are very different, requiring a very different approach. And this bullying approach has often more to do with the boss’s desires than with the employees needs. Dr. Harvey Hornstein suggests a supervisor may use bullying to swat down a threatening subordinate, or a manager may be looking for a scapegoat to carry the department’s or the boss’s frustrations. But most often, Hornstein argues, bullies bully subordinates for the sheer pleasure of exercising power. Hornstein, the author of Brutal Bosses and their Prey, says further, “It was a kind of low grade sadism, that was the most common reason; they’d start on one person and then move on to someone else. Nevertheless, researchers find little evidence to suggest that worker productivity suffers in the face of boss-bullying. Even in the most hostile workplace, workers are still doing the work for which they are being paid. Some workers even give a little extra, in the hope that they might make themselves look good and others look much worse. (The Workplace Doctor website cites evidence that questions this, later in this piece.) Bullying bosses are often very good at “managing up,” meaning that their reverence for power is extended to those above them who are even more powerful. Dr. Mark Levey, a Chicago psychotherapist, say that nasty bosses often elicit from their subordinates defensive habits that they first developed as children, such as reflexive submission and explosive rage. “Once these defensive positions lock in, it‟s like people are transported to a different reality and can no longer see what‟s actually happening to them and cannot adapt,” according to Levey. When a boss is bullying a co-worker, there is often clear evidence that others do nothing to support the target. (Namie prefers „target‟ to „victim‟ since it more accurately names the situation.) Ambition (of co-workers) is the most insidious ally of the bully, given that their self-interest motivates their passive stance. There is some empirical evidence that workers in a nasty work environment, caused in part by the bullying manager, tend to become less sensitive with others at work. This dynamic researchers call “moral disengagement,” a measure of people‟s sensitivity to others, their views on the appropriateness of jokes, put-downs, coldness toward colleagues. Workers who work for supportive and fair bosses show a maintenance of their sensitivity or an increase in it. Frequently, when workers witness a boss humiliating a colleague, they are relieved that they are not the target, and they begin to wonder if the colleague did not deserve the treatment. In that case, in the words of Benedict, “The brutal behavior goes unchallenged, and the target feels a sudden chill of isolation that is all too real. By doing nothing, even people who abhor the bullying become complicit in the behavior and find themselves supplying reasons to justify it.” According to Dr. Morrill (UCal, Irvine), “It is those who are not part of a tight group (of co-workers) who feel truly desperate and in danger of losing their jobs, who appear most likely to speak up. Most others learn to perform an elaborate dance, trying to preserve their status while being careful not to forfeit their sense of decency all the while looking for an escape hatch.” Some notes from the website www.theworkdoctor.com linked to the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute: Based on U.S. figures from 2003, 58% of bullies in the workplace are female, and 42% are male. Woman-on-woman bullying represents 50% of all workplace bullying. Man-on-Woman bullying represents 30% of all workplace bullying Man-on-Man: 12% Woman-on-Man: 8% Probability for women targets to be bullied by a woman bully is 63% Probability for men targets to be bullied by a man is 62%. (Note: Bullying is same-sex harassment, most of the time, and therefore invisible when seen through the lens of anti-discrimination laws. Existing civil rights laws in the U.S., believed by the general public to prohibit harassment, do not apply to same-sex cases (except when unwanted sexual overtures are involved.) Only 23% of bullies chose to do the bullying themselves; 73% enlisted other to help- by alternately bullying the target alone (32%) and at other times having help from others (45%) The target‟s co-workers frequently became the bully‟s allies (48%). Women bullies recruited co-workers a bit more than did men bullies (53% and 42%, respectively.) Men bullies tend to rely upon management (57%) supporters as frequently as women bullies enlist the help of the target‟s co-workers (53%). (Note: Men bullies use the organization‟s hierarchy; women bullies use the social network of peers to accomplish the bullying.) A recent reliable study estimates that approximately 1 in 6 U.S. workers has directly experienced destructive bullying in the past year. Bullies are rarely psychopathic; the majority are opportunistic intelligently reading the pattern of who gets promoted and who gets drummed out of our competition- worshipping workplaces. The Bullies terrorize with impunity. The only skill deficiencies bullies have are those of empathy, compassion and loyalty to anyone except themselves. They are masterful communicators, albeit used solely to harm others. Half of all bullies are women. Women bullies target women 84% of the time; men bullies target women 69% of the time, making women the majority of targets in the workplace. The vast majority of bullies (81%) are bosses, some are co-workers and a few bully up the ladder. Bullying poses a serious health hazard to targets by compromising their psychological and physical health, disassembling their social network and risking economic devastation through the loss of their jobs because “employment at will” encourages the bully‟s misuse of power. Targets who are most surprised by the baseless cruelty inflicted on them suffer the most severe effects (PTSD) and take the longest time to heal afterwards. Silent frozen workers worsen the problem often by choosing to cut off support, to tacitly or directly join the bully‟s personal vendetta against the target. Eventually the workplace is paralyzed by fear, incapable of productive work, and susceptible to costly downtime with an unhealthy workforce and an increased liability for destructive employment practices. Bullying costs your firm too much? Victims are often better skilled View Larger Image Workplace victims often more skilled than their attackers, expert says. Photograph by : Getty Canadian Press Article tools Printer friendly E-mail Font: * * * * Businesses that want to improve their bottom line would do well to purge the bullies on the payroll who are repeatedly ridiculing and humiliating others in the workplace, says a psychologist. Gary Namie told an overflow audience in Vancouver that people who are targeted at the office by a supervisor or co-worker may think they're alone, but their numbers are growing to epidemic proportions. Namie, who co-founded the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute in Bellingham, Wash., was speaking at the Western Conference on Safety. He said a Michigan study found about one in six employees is bullied at work in any given year. Best places to live: UN How to grow a franchise Best places for your retirement More business news headlines In Britain, about 11 per cent of people say they face psychological harassment in the workplace, while in Australia the number is 18 per cent, he said. But when people are asked if they've ever been bullied at work, 40 to 50 per cent of them say they have, Namie said. "People are getting fed up with bullying and it's got to be addressed," Namie said before he spoke. Quebec is the only jurisdiction in North America with legislation to deal with workplace psychological harassment, but Namie said the law that came into effect in 2004 is too weak. "I think it's imprecise," he said, adding complainants must face a huge government labyrinth. Those who are psychologically harassed at work are often better skilled at their jobs than the bullies who target them but are forced to quit their jobs because they're non- confrontational, he said. "It's a talent flight. The best and the brightest are driven out. The slugs, the slow-minded, dimwitted sycophants are the bully's allies." Thirty per cent of women who are targeted experience post-traumatic stress disorder, Namie said. "Bullies are too expensive to keep. It's smart business to purge these guys and gals -- and 58 per cent are women." Stephen Hill, who runs a support group called No Bully For Me, said he worked for a non-profit organization at a British Columbia university when he was the target of workplace bullying by supervisors and co-workers. "You know, monkey see, monkey do," said Hill, who finally quit his job when he started having health problems. Hill said he would be asked to provide reports but was denied the information, was given the cold shoulder at meetings and was repeatedly isolated. "It's the fact that it's continuous, that's what does the damage." Four years ago, Hill co-founded a website that became a huge hit with people across Canada and also spawned support groups in various cities. People often say they can't afford to leave their jobs but Hill's advice is: "Get out." A national survey on the group's website (www.nobullyforme.org) appears to suggest that most bullies are women and co-workers, not bosses, Hill said, who took two years off from work to recover. He now helps the unemployed on the Downtown Eastside find jobs. Renzo Bertolini, a health and safety specialist with the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, said it's hard to track the number of people who are bullied. Bullying costs your firm too much? Victims are often better skilled Canadian Press Article tools Printer friendly E-mail Font: * * * * "Not every single bullying incidence is reported because often bullying does not result in an accident or injury and there is no compensation claim," Bertolini said from Hamilton. The Quebec law, modelled after those in Sweden, France and Belgium, gives the province's labour standards board the authority to order fines and the reinstatement of employees. The agency handles complaints from non-union employees. Unionized workers must file complaints through their union. Nathalie Bejin, a spokeswoman for the Quebec Labour Standards Board, said 4,700 complaints have been filed since the law was enacted. Bejin said the board encourages businesses to prevent psychological harassment by stepping in when conflicts arise between employees. Ethel Archard, spokeswoman for the Canada Safety Council, said workplace bullying is a huge issue that isn't getting enough attention, except in Quebec. "I think the interest in the topic is shown by the fact that it is the single-most visited web page on our entire website, so we know that people are looking for information. They're desperately looking for information." © Canadian Press 2006 Supportive Workplace Policies, Practices and Programs The purpose of this fact sheet is to explain the value of policies, practices and programs that are supportive to workers experiencing the impacts of family violence in the workplace. It also provides examples of supportive policies and practices. The Value of Family Violence Sensitive Policies The most valuable asset of any organization is its people. Policies and practices that create a positive workplace incorporate the concepts of wellness, safety, social responsibility and community involvement. A positive workplace can be created through the development of policies, practices and programs that foster and support these concepts. Wellness and safety policies and programs that include information on family violence not only support employees who are experiencing family violence, but they also enable other employees to develop an increased understanding of their co- workers who are in this situation. Understanding increases for managers and supervisors as they learn more about how they can help employees deal with the impact of family violence and improve safety in the workplace as a whole. Supportive Policies and Practices Consider implementing family violence sensitive policies and practices throughout your workplace. Some programs require more planning than others; many are long- term, while others provide immediate short-term support. For example, share safety plan tips with your employees. (See Model Policy, Safety Plans and Messages.) Here are some policies or programs you might consider. Family Violence Policy Every business and workplace, to the fullest extent possible without violating existing collective bargaining agreements, rules or statutory requirements, should implement a policy to deal with family violence when it spills over into the workplace. There are many such policies available on the web. To assist New Brunswick employers, we have adapted, and included in this Toolkit, a “Model Family Violence Policy” that incorporates the key elements of a good policy. Try adapting it to your workplace. (See Model Policy, Safety Plans and Messages.) Employee Assistance Programs Studies show that family violence prevention programs in the workplace that become part of an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) are an excellent way to support employees and co-workers who are impacted by family violence that is entering the workplace. Your EAP may offer additional support for those living with family violence and may include counselling, legal, medical, and financial services. Sometimes existing EAPs do not specifically state that they offer assistance to employees who are living with family violence at home, or workers who are affected by it at the work site. It is important to spell out “family violence” in the policy, train your human resources and management staff, and ensure that employees know that their EAP can help them with this problem. (see: www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/eap.html) (French language site available) Assaulted Staff Action Program Some workplaces have developed a response program called Assaulted Staff Action Program (ASAP). It is viewed as an effective response to family violence after it occurs in the workplace. ASAPs treat the individual in the workplace where the violent action occurred. ASAPs rely on both trained volunteer staff as well as paid professionals. They are particularly useful in situations where a physical or sexual assault has occurred. Threat Assessment Teams Employers can establish a Threat Assessment Team. TATs work with staff and business supervisors to identify and assist staff who are experiencing family violence. Designated trained staff contact individuals who are in daily contact with the person who is experiencing family violence and attempt to address the problem. Safe Walk Program Employers can establish a safe walk program. Small groups are put together to help walk individuals home or simply to their cars after work. A safe walk program can help to reduce fear in the workplace as well as build personal relationships among co-workers. (see: www.mtroyal.ab.ca/security/safewalk.shtml for an example of a safe walk program) Privacy Policies Privacy issues are more apparent with increased technology use. The employer can implement policies that mutually benefit all. Keeping confidential information from getting out helps keep the environment safe as well as the business. Certainly complete privacy is not obtainable with the internet and e-mail but monitoring policies can help to avoid workplace violence and discrimination within the workplace. Supportive Benefit and Leave Policies Flexible and supportive benefit and leave policies may go a long way toward assisting a victim of family violence. For example, allowing a paid or unpaid leave to someone leaving an abusive relationship, such as woman who must spend some time at transition house, can help that individual to become a more productive person and employee. Sexual Harassment Policy Sexual harassment within the workplace can be costly in terms of morale, productivity and turnover. Policies should help instill respect, and promote positive response to incidents of sexual harassment, while increasing awareness and educating employees about prevention. Moreover, employers can reduce their liability for acts of harassment through the implementation of these policies. (see: www.gnb.ca/hrc-cdp/e/sexharas.htm) (French language site available) Workplace Bullying Policy Bullying policies can help everyone in the work place understand the unique characteristics of bullying. Bullying falls into a category of psychological abuse and can be classified apart from harassment and discrimination because the focus and the causes are different. Workplace bullying policies show a broader understanding and help to ensure a healthy and productive work environment. (see: www.safety- council.org/info/OSH/bullies.html) (French Language site link) Child Care Policies Employers can establish a number of childcare policies. For example, a daycare facility can be created on-site or near the work place or emergency daycare can be made available in the absence of a full time facility. Having a place for the children to go can reduce the stress on employees and give them a sense of security. (see: www.nationalchildbenefit.ca/home_e.html) (French language site available) Legalities Given relatively recent attention given to bullying within the Canada, the legal remedies for the victim are underdeveloped and not at all clear. Although the legal landscape may be difficult navigate, there remain some legal avenues worth exploring, until such time as the law catches up to the issue of bullying. Legal Redress Broadly speaking there may be legal redress on civil grounds, or on a demonstration that legislation has been willfully breached. In considering or taking such action, individuals are strongly encouraged to consult with qualified legal counsel. On the regulatory side, victims should consider their rights and responsibilities under the prevailing Human Rights Code or Occupational Health & Safety Act. The Human Rights Code The Canadian and Provincial Human Rights Codes protect each of us from harassment which is discriminatory on selected grounds. The "Code" as it is commonly referred, protects us from discrimination resulting from race, national/ethnic origin, color, religion, age, sex (including pregnancy and child birth), marital status, family status, pardoned conviction, physical or mental disability (including dependence on alcohol and drugs), and sexual orientation. Under the Code, Harassment is a prohibited activity in the context of employment. By way of example, the following sections of the Ontario Code state: Section 5(2) - "Every person who is an employee has a right to freedom from harassment in the workplace by employer or agent of the employer or by any other employee because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or handicap" Section 7(2) - "Every person who is an employee has a right to freedom from harassment in the workplace because of sex by his or her employer or agent of the employer or by another employee" Harassment is defined in the Code as "engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known as unwelcome". When considered in the context of behaviour known as "bullying" there may well be some recourse providing that the offensive behaviour can be linked to the prohibitive actions specified in the Code. If an individual can demonstrate that bullying is motivated by one of the prohibited grounds the Code may apply. If you suspect that this is the case, a call to your Human Rights Commission in your province may provide you with valuable information in making a determination as to your rights. In addition, a consultation with a lawyer proficient in both Human Rights Legislation and Labour Law may be of benefit. Many provincial Law Societies have a "lawyer referral service" that can provide you with the names and numbers of qualified lawyers in your area. Occupational Health & Safety Act Each province has an Occupational Health & Safety Act which applies to employers within the province to ensure that they provide their employees with a "safe" workplace. Federally regulated employers are governed by the Canada Labour Code, of which Part II is the Federal Occupational Health & Safety Act. Part II of Canada's Labour Code which applies to federally-regulated employees was amended and received Royal Assent in June 2000 with the intent of improving occupational health and safety in the federal workplace. It strives to create a better balance between the role of government and that of employers and employees, and reflects changes in the workplace such as advances in technology that have a bearing on employees' health and safety. Although, Regulations have yet to be issued, the legislation is law and should be heeded by Federally-Regulated employers. Of particular importance is a new clause which has been added allowing for regulations which deal with the establishment of anti-violence initiatives. The regulations as of March 2003, have yet to be issued, however, there is reason to believe that indirect or psychological acts of "violence" may be covered. In the interim, victimized employees should be aware of their governing Occupational Health & Safety Act to determine if there has been a breach of this legislation within their own province. We suspect that once the Federal Government tables its regulations regarding workplace violence, many provinces will follow suit. Employers have a responsibility to take reasonable care to provide their employees with a safe workplace. Provinces currently differ in their approach to the issue of workplace violence. B.C. and Saskatewan have clauses entrenched in their Occupational, Health & Safety Acts which focus specifically on violence, although they differ in terms of definitions and remedy. Other provinces are either considering this issue, or have decided to refrain from taking such action. Recently Bill 70, a Private Members Bill , was tabled in the Ontario Legislature addressing workplace violence, however, there is disappointing speculation that it will not and/or has not advanced beyond first reading. Regrettably, one might reasonably suspect that when regulations for Federally Regulated employees are implemented the issue of workplace violence as a bonafide "health & safety" concern will have more urgency. Although an individual may wish to press the issue of bullying under the prevailing Occupational Health & Safety Act of their province, one can see that there may be differing outcomes resulting from the province's track record on this issue. In is not uncommon for such complaints to be deferred to the Human Rights Commission for action (Au v. Lyndhurst Hospital , Meridian Magnesium Products Limited ). If one were to launch a compliant under the Act, or refuse unsafe work because of bullying behaviour, one should reasonably expect protection from reprisal under the Occupational Health & Safety Act providing that their action is not trivial or malicious. Before considering this as a route of compliant, legal consultation should be sought to ensure your rights and responsibilities. Constructive Dismissal There is a suggestion that Bullying could, in certain circumstances, constitute "wrongful dismissal". Generally speaking, this is defined by circumstances in which an employer, although not acting explicitly to terminate a person's employment, acts unilaterally to alter the employment terms and conditions such that the employee is entitled to regard the employer's conduct as a termination. The case of Shah v. Xerox Canada is noted in this regard when focusing on the "conduct" of the employer. Here an individual was deemed to be "constructively" dismissed because the conduct of the employer made continued employment "intolerable". Again, the application of constructive dismissal varies depending on the situation and on the conduct of the employer in question. Given the complexities of this issue, legal counsel is most certainly required. Intentional Infliction of Nervous Shock Although on the surface, this concept appears an appropriate argument for seeking redress from the workplace bully, legal guidance is require to ensure that your situation meets the legal test of such acts. It must be demonstrated that the behaviour in question is "outrageous", "calculated to produce the effect that was actually produced" and that the "conduct produced actual harm by way of a visible illness". As one can quickly see, there is a challenge in demonstrating any one of these conditions. Although the task may appear daunting on the surface, some individuals have been successful in advancing this argument. Prinzo v. Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care describes a circumstance in which the actions of a supervisor and other employees were deemed to be deliberate and resulted in emotional upset, increased blood pressure, weight gain and an increase in the employee's diabetes symptoms. Likewise, in the case of Boothman v. Canada the employee was awarded damages for intentional infliction of nervous shock because her supervisor subjected her to numerous and continuous acts of assault and intimidation. In addition, the court upheld a judgment of "nervous shock" in the case of Bogden v. Purolator Courier Ltd sighting a confrontational and brash management style. These are but a few of the legal initiatives that victims have or can consider when seeking redress in the case of workplace bullying. However, individuals should remain cognizant that Canadian law in this arena is fluid and in a developmental phase. Prevailing law is built on the judgments rendered in each successive case which finds its way into court. This means that unless there are legal challenges there is little hope for change. If you are in doubt and feel that you have exhausted all other avenues, consideration should be made to seek the appropriate legal counsel, out of responsibility for yourself and others. This is not the time to be a spectator when bullying and intimidation is affecting your life or those you care about. In many instances organizations have policies and procedures to protect employees against harassment and other forms of abuse. One should exhaust these avenues before considering legal action unless in severe circumstances. Whatever route a victimize employee takes to stop the abuse and prevent the circumstances form happening to others; ensure you take very detailed and easily retrievable notes of all instances and efforts to defend yourself. These documents will prove invaluable in whatever route you take to remedy the situation, whether it is through internal channels or through the courts. Even a Magazine http://www.yourworkplace.ca/absolutenm//templates/Vol7No5.asp?articleid=248&zonei d=30 Chapter Six—Rights and Respect 1. THE VALUES ―Work,‖ observed Chief Justice Dickson, ―is one of the most fundamental aspects of a person’s life…A person’s employment is an essential component of his or her sense of identity, self-worth and well-being. Accordingly, the conditions in which a person works are highly significant in shaping the whole compendium of psychological, emotional and physical elements of a person’s dignity and self-respect.‖ In this perspective, the workplace is not just a marketplace — a place where services are exchanged for money. It is also a social setting, a place where the quality of our personal and civic lives is defined. But defining the quality of our lives has become a very complicated business. ―We‖ have changed, and so too have our lives and our workplaces, in ways outlined in Chapter Two. So too have some of our expectations of how people ought to relate at work. We now accept that workers have rights, which are defined not only by their contract of employment but also by laws such as the Canada Labour Code. Under Part III, those rights include entitlements to pay, leaves, vacations and holidays — generally expressed as minimum rather than ―best possible‖ standards — as well as the right not to be unjustly dismissed. Of course, these minimum entitlements may be enhanced by employers on the basis of additional terms agreed to by workers or their unions; and they generally are.But ultimately, it is the law — not the employer’s enlightened self-interest or generosity — that grounds the claim of workers to decent minimum employment conditions, and it is the right to be protected from arbitrary or unjust dismissal that gives the law force and effect. It is widely understood that people who are poor and insecure tend to suffer more violations of their rights than those who are not, and that such people are at a disadvantage when they have to claim or defend their legal rights in general, and their human rights in particular. Because Part III has to do with improving material conditions and reducing insecurity in the workplace, in a sense the overall effect of Part III is to enhance the human rights of workers. However, the human rights of workers are not simply those enumerated in Part III. Because everyone has an even more fundamental claim to be treated with due regard for their ―dignity and self-respect,‖ all Canadian jurisdictions have enacted human rights legislation to ensure that no one suffers discrimination at work based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, disability or other invidious grounds. They have also enacted collective bargaining, privacy, health and safety and other legislation designed to protect workers’ ―dignity and self-respect‖ in the broadest sense. However, I have no mandate to conduct a general review of all such legislation. Accordingly, the prime focus of this chapter is the intersection of human rights and labour standards. This involves three separate issues. First, while the human rights of workers are greatly advanced by the protection against unjust dismissal that Part III provides, problems may arise when human rights and labour standards enforcement procedures overlap. Second, there may be a need to harmonize certain substantive provisions of Part III with the requirements of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHR Act). Third, one particular work-related issue of ―dignity and self-respect‖ — bullying in the workplace — has so far not been addressed either by the CHR Act or by other federal legislation. These issues are covered in succeeding sections of this chapter. 2. HUMAN RIGHTS AND UNJUST DISMISSAL: THE PROBLEM OF JURISDICTIONAL OVERLAP Workers have long enjoyed the right — in principle — to sue civilly if they are unjustly or wrongfully dismissed. However, for reasons explored in Chapter Eight, they were left without practical recourse unless they worked under collective agreements that authorized their union to carry their grievance to arbitration. In 1978, the situation changed dramatically for unorganized workers in the federal domain when they gained the right to challenge their dismissal before an adjudicator appointed and paid for by the state — a right enjoyed even now by unorganized workers in only two other Canadian jurisdictions. This innovation was not only a significant enhancement of workers’ employment of their rights under Part III but, I argue, also a contribution to their human rights. First and foremost, the very fact that federal domain workers have access to an effective means of challenging their dismissal enables them to assert all of their statutory and contractual rights — including their human rights — with greater self-confidence. Now, under Part III, they actually have access to remedies that are equal, or in certain respects superior, to those they might invoke in conventional court proceedings. Not only can they recover greater damages than courts usually award ordinary workers, they can also seek reinstatement, a remedy denied them altogether in civil litigation. Second, as the jurisprudence has been developed by adjudicators under Part III, employers seeking to justify the dismissal of employees must generally demonstrate that they have adhered to the principles of progressive discipline. That is, they must show that they have attempted to deal with disciplinary or performance problems by pointing them out to the employee, working with the employee to rectify them, and imposing a graduated repertoire of sanctions before resorting to the ultimate sanction of dismissal. The evolution of this jurisprudence coincided with, reinforced and arguably brought about a significant change in the thinking of human resource and industrial relations (HR/IR) professionals who now commonly adhere to similar principles even when not subject to external scrutiny. Both the adjudication jurisprudence and the new HR/IR philosophy have enhanced the likelihood that workers will be treated more respectfully and fairly. Third, the introduction in 1978 of procedures for the adjudication of complaints against unjust dismissal made available to non-unionized workers rights that had long been available to their unionized counterparts. Because large numbers of women and members of minority groups work in non-union federal enterprises, such as banks, this legislation contributed in an important way to achieving greater overall equality among Canadian workers. Recommendation 6.1 The present provisions of Part III that permit workers to challenge their unjust dismissal and to receive effective remedies if they have been wrongly dismissed should be retained. Recommendation 6.2 All employers in the federal domain should adopt procedures and practices for dealing with employee discipline that are based on the principles of respect for the individual, are corrective rather than punitive in character, and are fair. Despite these very positive contributions of Part III unjust dismissal proceedings to the human rights of workers, difficult issues remain at the interface between the two legal regimes. Employees may believe, or at least allege, that they have been unjustly dismissed or denied other rights under Part III, and that they have also been the victims of a human rights violation. They may therefore wish to bring proceedings under both Part III and the CHR Act. There are obvious reasons to prevent workers from bringing multiple proceedings, whether they are concurrent or consecutive: the cost and inconvenience for the employer, the possibility of using the first proceedings as a dress rehearsal for the second, the risk of inconsistent results, and especially dissipation of the scarce public resources available to both labour standards and human rights agencies. At present, it is difficult, if not impossible, for an employee to bring two proceedings. On the one hand, Part III denies employees the right to complain of unjust dismissal if an alternative remedy is available under some other federal statute, even if that alternative is not as beneficial from the employee’s point of view. This statutory rule has been complemented by the refusal of adjudicators in unjust dismissal cases to permit multiple proceedings. On the other hand, the CHR Commission and CHR Tribunal have committed themselves to legal doctrines and administrative practices that largely deny access to complainants who have chosen to litigate the same matter in another forum. However, the present arrangements may be unfair to employees. After all, most workers do not have and cannot afford lawyers, and if forced to elect between proceeding under one statute and the other, may be unable to make an informed choice. Moreover, while the Part III and human rights complaints may each have something in common with the other, each may also be somewhat distinctive in certain crucial respects. Because the legal or factual issues that are ―distinctive‖ can be resolved only in the particular forum empowered to deal with them, if forced to make a choice between Part III and human rights remedies, the employee may never be able to secure a full and fair hearing of their claim. I believe that a more nuanced approach ought to be taken under both statutes,one that would prevent multiple proceedings, but would still ensure that legitimate claims are fully considered one way or another. This can be accomplished only by way of a cooperative effort by the Labour Program, the CHR Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Recommendation 6.3 The Labour Program, on the one hand, and the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on the other, should enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to deal with complaints that may involve concurrent or consecutive proceedings under Part III and the CHR Act. The MOU would define a common approach to such proceedings, and would: a. provide simple, clearly written advice to complainants concerning the limits and possibilities of each type of proceeding; b. require that complainants make an election in writing to proceed either under Part III or under the CRH Act, and be advised of the consequences of doing so; c. confer discretion on decision-makers in all three agencies to transfer evidence and documents from one to the other, and confer the power to use such evidence and documents in a subsequent proceeding; d. confer power on each agency to deny complainants access to the others if it finds that no reasonable grounds of complaint exist or that the complaint is frivolous or vexatious; and e. confer power on each agency to transfer the case to the other if it finds that reasonable grounds of complaint do exist that lie within the jurisdiction of the agency to which the case is transferred. If necessary, power to enter into such an MOU should be conferred on the Minister responsible for Part III and the Minister responsible for the CHR Act, and appropriate amendments should be made in Part III and in the CHR Act to enable an MOU to be given effect. 3. HUMAN RIGHTS AND LABOUR STANDARDS Part III makes only a few explicit references to matters covered by human rights legislation. It protects the right of workers to take and return from maternity leave and job-related sick leave, and to have their special physical needs accommodated. Under the CHR Act, denial of these rights might be construed as discrimination on grounds of gender or disability. Part III requires employers to adopt a plan to deal with sexual harassment in the workplace — conduct that is also dealt with under the CHR Act. And Part III permits (but does not require) Labour Program inspectors to notify the CHR Commission if they uncover apparent violations of pay equity legislation. Under the CHR Act, the CHR Commission can recommend that an order-in-council be enacted assigning duties and functions of the Commission ―in relation to discriminatory practices in employment‖ to persons administering Part III. No such order-in-council has been made to date. This provides some indication that the people who know the human rights field best feel that out-sourcing of responsibility to the Labour Program would not be desirable.In short, a relatively clear line has been maintained between the administration of labour standards legislation on the one hand, and the administration of human rights legislation on the other. A number of briefs presented to me argued that human rights concerns should occupy a much more prominent place in the scheme of Part III than they do at present. Several urged, for example, that human rights should constitute a specific labour standard violation that would give rise to remedies under Part III. The integration of human rights and labour rights regimes has also been endorsed by the Supreme Court of Canada, and by both federal and provincial legislation. Nonetheless, I am not persuaded that the wholesale importation of substantive and procedural rights from one regulatory regime into the domain of another is in the best interests of either. The CHR Commission and the CHR Tribunal possess a wealth of expertise in the human rights field. They have statutory powers to deal with discrimination and related issues, with appropriate policies and procedures in place to handle them. If different complaints-handling procedures were introduced and authoritative interpretations of legislation were issued by a different group of officials, the outcomes would likely be quite different and possibly less appropriate. Second,the resources presently available to the Labour Program are at best barely sufficient to enable it to properly discharge its existing responsibilities under Part III. Unless substantial new resources were provided, the labour standards regime would be seriously undermined if Labour Program staff were obliged to perform additional duties under human rights legislation. That said, it makes little sense for the two regimes — human rights and labour standards — to operate in complete isolation, much less in opposition. On the contrary, with proper preparation, the cause of human rights in the workplace might well be advanced by the participation of Labour Program staff who are familiar with employment practices and relations and who understand the challenges of securing compliance in the workplace environment. Recommendation 6.4 The Labour Program and the Canadian Human Rights Commission should discuss possible cooperative strategies to advance the cause of human rights in the workplace. Their discussions should address: (1) the need to respect the prime mandates of both agencies, (2) the importance for any joint initiative of personnel with expertise in both workplace relations and human rights, and (3) the need to ensure that all cooperative strategies are supported by adequate resources. Pending the outcome of such discussions, three issues require attention. The first relates to the existing provisions of Part III requiring all employers to adopt a plan to deal with sexual harassment. This requirement obviously advances an important public policy that I would not wish to undermine in any way. However, the provision in its present form is somewhat problematic. It seems odd that employers should be required to adopt policies that address only sexual harassment and not racial or religious harassment, not harassment on grounds of sexual orientation and not, for that matter, other forms of workplace discrimination forbidden under the CHR Act. Moreover, the Federal Jurisdiction Workplace Survey revealed that some 80% of employers in the federal domain — most of them small enterprises, but some much larger — are operating in contravention of the law and are without a sexual harassment policy. This discouraging statistic raises for me the awkward question of why a seemingly sensible strategy for advancing important human rights concerns has been ignored by so many employers. Perhaps part of the explanation is the somewhat anomalous location in Part III of the requirement, where its implementation depends on staff that have no special training in human rights. As recently as 2000, the La Forest Report, Promoting Equality: A New Vision, recommended establishing committees in every workplace with a broad mandate to promote human rights including, presumably, sexual, racial and other forms of harassment. However, the primary custodians of human rights— the CHR Commission and the Minister of Justice (who is responsible for the CHR Act and its administration) — have not yet seen fit to adopt this recommendation. Had they done so, I would have had to consider whether the Part III provisions requiring sexual harassment plans ought to be replaced by new, more comprehensive arrangements, either in the CHR Act or in Part III itself. However, given the lack of government action on the La Forest Report, it seems sensible on balance to leave the present provisions in place pending the outcome of the Labour Program–CHR Commission discussions recommended below. Recommendation 6.5 The Labour Program and the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and the Ministers responsible for both, should discuss whether to leave in place the present Part III provisions dealing with sexual harassment, to expand these provisions to include harassment on other grounds forbidden by the Canadian Human Rights Act and/or other discriminatory employment practices, or to consolidate and administer all such provisions under the CHR Act. They should also address the La Forest Commission’s proposal for workplace human rights committees, either under Part III or under the CHR Act. Appropriate legislative or administrative action should follow. A second set of human rights issues flows from the premise that Part III ought not to permit or, worse yet, require, conduct that transgresses the CHR Act or the principles it embodies. This implies that Part III ought to encourage employers to accommodate the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce. For example, workers may need a day off in order to participate in religious or cultural observances that do not fall on existing statutory holidays, many of which have their origins in the Christian religious calendar. Aboriginal workers or immigrants from distant lands may need longer bereavement leave than Part III now allows. New mothers may need special breaks to facilitate the breast-feeding of their infant. Changes along these lines are recommended in Chapter Seven. Additional changes may be necessary, as well. For example, Part III requires employers to accommodate pregnant women or those who have recently given birth by reassigning them to work that does not threaten their health or that of their foetus or child, if it is ―reasonably practicable‖ to do so. This may be a somewhat lesser requirement than that established by the CHR Act, which imposes on the employer a duty to accommodate the employee’s needs up to the point where doing so would involve ―undue hardship.‖ Similar considerations apply to workers returning to their jobs following a work-related illness or injury or following sick leave. In all these cases, only detailed technical analysis will reveal whether Part III actually does impose a lesser standard of accommodation than human rights legislation — but if it does, Part III will have to be amended. To set the stage for this analysis, I recommend adopting the following principle: Recommendation 6.6 The Labour Program should ensure that Part III is drafted, interpreted and administered in such as way as to advance the principles embodied in the Canadian Human Rights Act as well as to comply with its specific requirements. Of course, formal workplace arrangements or informal practices established by the parties may also provide something less than the standard of accommodation for women, disabled persons and other groups mandated by the CHR Act. They should be analysed by the parties and revised, if necessary. Recommendation 6.7 Employers and workers should respect the principles of the Canadian Human Rights Act and adjust their workplace agreements and practices accordingly. Furthermore, the successful harmonization of human rights with labour standards legislation requires a detailed review not only of Part III and the CHR Act, but also of legislation that provides workers with income replacement or equivalent financial support. For example, while childbearing women and disabled persons are entitled to leave under Part III, many are able to take full advantage of that entitlement only because they receive income support under the Employment Insurance Act. Similarly, in Chapter Seven I recommend the introduction of new categories of unpaid leave; and in Chapter Eleven I discuss the possible introduction of unpaid educational or training leave. However, unless Employment Insurance is amended to provide income support for workers who take leave under these new provisions, few are likely to do so. Recommendation 6.8 The federal government should review the extent to which existing programs of income support are consistent with provisions designed to protect new and prospective mothers, ill and disabled workers and other categories of workers protected by the Canadian Human Rights Act. A final issue relating to human rights has to do with an existing provision under the Act that permits Labour inspectors to report violations of the pay equity provisions of the CHR Act. For example, while reviewing an employer’s records to determine whether employees were paid less than the minimum wage or improperly denied overtime, an inspector may discover that women have been paid less than men for work of equal value. Rather than disregarding the information, the inspector ―may‖ notify the CHR Commission (the body responsible for pay equity legislation). Arguably, unless authorized to do so by such a provision, inspectors would be restricted to using information they obtain only to enforce the statute under which they are appointed. The logic of this provision is clear but it is also truncated. Several submissions and research studies suggest that employers who are tempted or driven to deliberately disregard Part III might be tempted or driven to disregard other legislation as well. For example, we were told that some employers fail to remit statutory Employment Insurance premiums or withholding tax to the Canada Revenue Agency, despite making deductions for this purpose from employees’ pay. But employers may be encouraged to comply with all work-related statutes if they knew that such violations were likely to be detected and reported as a result of regular Part III inspections or audits. However, given the small cadre of personnel available to conduct Part III inspections in thousands of federal business premises spread across a huge country, I hesitate to suggest that Labour inspectors be required to audit the employer’s overall record of compliance each time they respond to a complaint or conduct a routine inspection of records. On the other hand, if apparent work-related illegalities do come to their attention, inspectors should be authorized to pass the information along to the appropriate regulatory agencies. This approach requires that the current permissive statutory language be broadened. However, this broader approach raises an issue of considerable sensitivity. In the course of their regular duties, inspectors may also learn that an employer has hired illegal or undocumented immigrant workers. Such workers are notoriously vulnerable to exploitation because their fear of discovery and deportation leads them not to complain if their workplaces are dangerous, their pay falls below the minimum or their vacation or overtime pay is withheld. Nonetheless, at one point U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) inspectors routinely reported them to the immigration authorities. However, in 1998, following a complaint under the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation, the U.S. DOL announced that its duty to protect vulnerable workers took priority over all other considerations, and it ceased to report illegal immigrants. Recommendation 6.9 Part III should be amended to provide that inspectors who have reasonable grounds to believe that an employer is violating the Canadian Human Rights Act or other work-related federal legislation be given discretion to notify the relevant authorities. 4. INTERFERENCE WITH DIGNITY: HARASSMENT, BULLYING AND ABUSE IN THE WORKPLACE Human rights violations are not the only assaults on their dignity that workers may encounter on the job. In fact, the workplace is an especially likely venue for unpleasant and hurtful encounters. Employment relations, after all, are typically hierarchical. Workers have to obey orders and rules that they sometimes find distasteful, but seldom have any way to challenge their content or the manner in which they are conveyed and enforced. Moreover, people often work under stressful conditions which, from time to time, give rise to conflicts among workers, between workers and employers, or between workers and third persons, such as customers. In this context, things may be said or done that are highly inappropriate and hurtful. In general, these difficulties have a way of resolving themselves. People will work best, will work most cooperatively, when they are treated respectfully. Employers know this; co-workers know this; customers and other third parties know this. They also know that if people feel themselves abused they will find overt or subtle ways to resist or to strike back, often with negative consequences for the enterprise, for other people and even for themselves. Consequently, most managers try to avoid being overly ―bossy,‖ with a view to minimizing the resentment of subordinates; and most workers or third parties try to negotiate inevitable disagreements without giving offence, and to apologize if they become abusive in the heat of the moment. However, in some cases, sensible behaviour does not prevail; bullying, harassment and abuse do occur; and workers suffer injuries to their dignity and, sometimes, to their physical and psychological well-being. Quebec has recently adopted legislation that requires employers to take measures to prevent such behaviour and provides remedies for victims. A research study undertaken for the Commission by Prof. Colleen Shepard suggests that this legislation is having a positive effect, although employers from Quebec and elsewhere maintained during our hearings that it was having, or would have, unintended and deleterious consequences. Time will tell which of these positions is correct. For the present, it seems to me that a different approach is more appropriate. Assaults on a worker’s dignity add stress to the victim’s working life, impair their capacity to function effectively, damage their future prospects at work, and — as Chief Justice Dickson noted — potentially injure them in all aspects of their life. Sometimes abusive behaviour gives rise to a reasonable fear of injury. In extreme cases, it may trigger a series of actions that result in actual injury to the victim or, in retaliation, to the harasser. Recognizing these dangers, the federal government is already in the process of introducing regulations that will deal with actual or apprehended violence in the workplace. With appropriate modifications of language, these regulations could cover harassment, bullying and abuse. Recommendation 6.10 The federal government should modify the language in its pending regulations on actual or apprehended workplace violence to include serious harassment, bullying and abuse. While it is not inappropriate for these regulations to be adopted under Part III,I feel, for reasons that follow, that they should probably be associated with Part II, which deals with occupational health and safety. Given their potential psychological and physical effects on the victim, harassment, bullying and abuse are closely analogous to other stress- or injury-causing agents, such as toxic substances, unsafe machinery or dangerous work practices — all of which are dealt with under Part II. Of course, the analogy is not a perfect one, and appropriate adjustments in legislative language may be necessary if the approach of Part II is to be successfully adapted to protecting workers against these newly acknowledged workplace hazards. For example, it may be necessary to ensure that Part II deals with serious or repeated abuse in the workplace rather than isolated incidents of incivility. Moreover, like other occupational hazards, harassment or bullying should be the subject not only of remedial or punitive action after the fact but also — and more importantly — of appropriate prophylactic measures. Part II places prime responsibility on the employer to anticipate workplace hazards, if possible, and to remove them, if necessary. However, it also ensures that workers have a role to play in developing an appropriate workplace environment that reduces hazards and promotes health and safety. Having in place a system of internal responsibility involving both workers and employers is an appropriate means to deal with workplace abuse, bullying and harassment, any of which may emanate from members of either group. Finally, Part II establishes the right of the employee to refuse unsafe work, ensures that such refusals are dealt with promptly and objectively, and deters false allegations of unsafe work for ulterior motives. It makes sense to adopt similar measures relating to abuse, bullying or harassment. No one should be forced to choose between living in constant fear of such behaviour and quitting their job. Recommendation 6.11 Part II of the Canada Labour Code should be amended to define abuse, bullying or harassment in the workplace as an occupational hazard, and to establish appropriate procedures for forestalling and responding to such conduct. http://www.fls-ntf.gc.ca/en/fin-rpt-chap06.asp Ask an expert Key considerations in implementing workplace harassment policies • The federal privacy legislation and its impact for third-party administrators By Peter Israel Key considerations in implementing workplace harassment policies Question: We would like to institute a workplace harassment policy in our organization. What are some of the key considerations in implementing such a policy? Answer: The Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act recognize harassment as a violation of human rights. Accordingly employers have a responsibility to provide employees with a workplace free from harassment as a result of any of the enumerated grounds of discrimination — race, ancestry, colour, marital status, same-sex partnership status, family status and disability. The courts have held there is a fundamental implied term of any employment relationship that employees will be treated with civility, decency, respect and dignity. Employers also have an obligation to prevent workplace bullying and other forms of general harassment in addition to preventing harassment due to any of the enumerated grounds of discrimination. Workplace harassment policies provide a relatively quick and simple way of protecting employees from harassment. In some provinces, human rights legislation even goes so far as to specifically impose liability on employers for the acts of its employees. Proactive steps by an employer to deal with workplace harassment may have an impact on a court’s decision regarding the appropriate remedy to be awarded to a victim. It is advisable therefore, for employers to institute some form of workplace harassment policy. Workplace harassment policies should, at a minimum, provide the following: •an explanation of the underlying philosophy of the policy; •some definition of the prohibited conduct; •a warning on penalties that will be invoked for a violation of the policy; •a method by which employees can raise issues of harassment in either a formal or informal manner; •a procedural guideline for filing a complaint; and •an outline of what might occur once a complaint has been filed. Designing and instituting the policy is only the first step for employers. Once a workplace harassment policy is in place, the employer must ensure employees are knowledgeable about it. Employers should distribute the policy to all employees, and have it posted prominently in the workplace. It may also be necessary to provide an in-house training awareness program to ensure all employees are fully knowledgeable about the policy. Supervisors and managers must also be knowledgeable about the policy. They are expected to be able to recognise and control the harassment and to implement the policy. Most importantly, these individuals must be informed of how to proceed if an incident of harassment occurs. If a complaint is made, managers and supervisors should be advised to: •respond to the complaint in a timely fashion; •measure the reported behaviour against the harassment policy and determine whether an investigation is warranted; •if merited, immediately select an independent and experienced investigator; and •ensure that the investigator meets with the complainant and the alleged harassor to conduct a thorough, timely and confidential investigation. The federal privacy legislation and its impact for third-party administrators Question: How does the federal privacy legislation affect the employer-employee relationship? I am specifically interested in how this legislation may affect an employer's handling of employee personal information, disclosed to third-party administrators for the purposes of such things as benefits, payroll and pensions? Jan. 1, 2004, marked the final phase in the implementation of the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). What impact does this legislation have on employers? The answer is, simply, probably less impact than you have been led to believe. PIPEDA has applied to employers, who are federally regulated, since Jan. 1, 2001. If your employees are subject to the Canada Labour Code, then PIPEDA already applies to their employee personal information. With respect to federally-regulated entities (typically in the transportation, communication or banking sectors) PIPEDA applies to information generated from interactions with employees and dealings with customers. With respect to provincially regulated businesses, PIPEDA does not apply to employee information. PIPEDA is limited to commercial activity. But it is important to note there has been some debate as to whether or not it will apply to the employment relationship in provinces, such as Ontario, that have not passed substantially similar legislation. The consensus is that until substantially similar legislation is passed in a province, PIPEDA will not apply to the handling of employees' personal information in provincially regulated workplaces. The reasoning for this is twofold. First, it is arguable the definition of "commercial activity" is not broad enough to include the collection of personal employee information that is only incidental to whatever commercial activity an employer is engaged in, such as payroll information. Second, while the federal government has constitutional jurisdiction to pass laws that relate to trade and commerce and to matters of an inter-provincial nature, the provinces have authority over property and civil rights. Arguably, this means the federal government lacks jurisdiction to regulate privacy issues between employers and employees in a provincial workplace. Nevertheless, employers should recognize that privacy legislation is coming to all provinces – it‟s a matter of when, not if. It is also clear that PIPEDA will be the model for the provincial legislation. Therefore there is a practical benefit for employers to implement compliance measures now in an effort to anticipate the types of changes every organization will eventually have to have in place. With respect to the question regarding the provision of employee information to third-party administrators, we suggest the following. Employers who use an external company to process payroll and benefits will arguably have to ensure the information provided to these outside providers is necessary information. Employee consent should be obtained to provide this information to these third parties. Employers should take steps to receive assurances from third-party benefit or payroll service providers that they are complying with the requirements of PIPEDA and not, for example, using the address information they have obtained to create and sell mailing lists or target customers for other services that they, or an associated company, may provide.