|
Workplace
Bullying & The Law
by
Jo Anne Brown
Helen
Green’s case highlights the seriousness of
bullying and its long-term effects. Unfortunately,
some of the media coverage has been scathing, with
some casting doubt that Ms Green ‘suffered’,
was ‘bullied’ or
indeed ‘deserved’ the £800,000.
One such
example is Peter McKay of the Daily Mail who suggested
that the judge was ‘away with the fairies’ and
asked ‘Shouldn’t
the judge who awarded 37-year-old Helen
Green £800,000 in damages for being ‘bullied’ by
four women colleagues at Deutsche Bank
help us a little by explaining his thinking?’
Evidently
he had failed to read the publicly available judgement that would have told him
everything he wanted to know.
Ms
Green was awarded nearly four times the amount her solicitor
had put forward as a settlement some two years before the trial. On top
of the more than £800,000 that
Deutsche Bank must pay their former employee, they
are also liable for her full costs.
Mr Justice Owen called the bank ‘obdurate and uncompromising’ and
the case is an example to employers
that pinning hopes on a case ‘going
away’ is not an effective method of dealing with bullying.
Contrary
to some news reports, Ms Green’s case was
proven on existing personal injury
legislation, which includes the Hatton v Sutherland ’16
points’ test. She did not need
to fall back on an alternative claim under the Protection
from Harassment Act 1997, which
does not require forseeability to be proven following
the recent ruling at the House
of Lords. This ruling, Majrowski v Guys & St
Thomas NHS Trust, confirmed employers
are vicariously liable for the actions of an employer
under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Jo
Anne Brown runs the Centre Against Workplace Bullying UK
and welcomes the Majrowski ruling but
still feels employment disputes are more appropriate for Employment
Tribunals to deal with than civil courts. “There
is a great need for employment
legislation to tackle bullying and harassment at
work. For instance, if harassment
occurs because of discrimination, then an employee
is allowed to pursue a
claim through the Employment Tribunal system. This
is not so where bullying is
because of any other ‘reason’ or where
discrimination cannot be proven. Harassment is
harassment and all employees - tax-payers no less
- should have the same protection
against harassment under employment law.”
Many
victims of bullying are precluded from the tribunal system
because of the current legislation and
some employers do not take complaints of bullying seriously. For
those employers who refuse to resolve a case by taking
the carrot because it’s not
only the right thing to do but also makes good
business sense, then sometimes a stick is
needed. A recent study by the Royal College of
Nursing Scotland found that 21% of
nurses have been bullied in the last year alone,
leaving little doubt that bullying is at epidemic proportions and action needs to be taken
urgently.
Employers
can ward off bullying and expensive legal cases but declaring ‘We
have a policy’ is not enough.
Neither is the denial that 'bullying doesn't happen
here'.
A clear message that bullying will not be tolerated
from the
person at top of the organisation is as important
and ensuring that all levels of
management make this a reality. To manage
bullying effectively, it is cost effective
to
implement a package of solutions focusing
on prevention, intervention and recovery:
an effectual policy, awareness training,
mediation, independent investigations, appropriate
disciplinary action where bullying is proven
and well-timed counselling.
Will
that cost too much? Well, it might cost a lot less than
failing one bullied employee who follows in Helen Greens footsteps.
Copyright
Jo Anne Brown
Tel: 01753 610536
Email jo@jfo.org.uk
|
