New guidelines seek to address workplace bullying
17 March 2014 - Bullying in the workplace is under the microscope with WorkSafe NZ recently issuing guidelines on how
to prevent and respond to workplace bullying.
Sarah Townsend, an employment law specialist with Duncan Cotterill, says workplace bullying can come at an enormous cost
to a business.
“Morale and productivity are often significantly affected, not to mention adverse effects on employees’ health and the
potential for expensive legal claims.
“But what constitutes bullying is not always easy to identify. Case law has shown that the line between what constitutes
bullying on the one hand, or blunt management on the other, is far from clear.”
She welcomes the new WorkSafe NZ guidelines that define workplace bullying as repeated and unreasonable behaviour
directed towards a worker or group of workers that creates a risk to health and safety.
“There is now more certainty around preventing and responding to bullying in the workplace. While the guidelines do not
have the force of law, employers will still be expected to comply with them where issues of bullying have been raised,”
Townsend says.
“A failure to comply with the guidelines will significantly undermine any argument that the employer has acted as a fair
and reasonable employer. Accordingly, all complaints of bullying should be taken seriously and promptly and fairly
investigated.”
The importance of employers effectively addressing workplace bullying issues was recently highlighted by the Employment
Relations Authority in the case of Hirini v Bay of Plenty District Health Board [2013]. In that case, an employee of a
District Health Board brought complaints of bullying to the attention of management after a series of what were supposed
to be constructive “group case reviews” left the employee feeling belittled, threatened and criticised by his
colleagues. It was alleged that this demonstrated a pattern of bullying behaviour that was present throughout the
workplace.
While acknowledging the complaints, management failed to look any further into the issue despite a process for doing so
being outlined in the DHB’s policy manuals. This failure to conduct a thorough investigation saw the Authority find that
the employee had been constructively dismissed. The employee was awarded three months’ wages and $7000 compensation for
hurt and humiliation.
ENDS