Delaware Employment Law Blog

The eBoss Watch Worst Bosses of 2009 award is one that you probably don't want framed above your desk. There are 25 "winners" selected by a panel of experts on workplace behavior, bullying, and civility. 

Here's the description of one of the 25 worst bosses of the year:

Water distribution superintendent, City of Monroe, Monroe, Louisiana
Benton’s employees recorded a four hour meeting that took place late last year where Benton used hundreds of obscenities and ordered one of the supervisors to physically attack an equipment operator.

For more on Jerks at Work, see these related posts:

Abusive Bosses Should Watch Their Backs

Everything You Needed to Know About Your Toxic Boss

Could an Ombudsman Help You Squelch Bullies in the Workplace

5 Costs of Coworker Bullying

Work-life balance, toxic bosses, and generation gaps, this week in BusinessWeek

Inside the Mind of a Super Jerk

Disrespectful Workplace Costs State $314k

How Crazy Is Your Boss? No, really, how crazy?

"My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true

It's Friday and Your Boss Is a Total Tool

The Truth About Workplace Revenge

Women Bullies In the Workplace

Jerks at Work and on the Web

Now's a Great Time for Workplace-Civility Initiatives

Follow me on Twitter at @MollyDiBi

Jerks at work are a problem. This proposition is not debatable. Just how pervasive the problem is may be subject to some debate. Some say that jerks are everywhere. Others say the jerk population has been reduced (or maybe just quieted) by the economy. Either way, there has been a lot of press about jerk. There’s also been an increasing acceptance of the proposition that jerks at work are bad for business.

So I was taken by surprise last night while watching The Next Iron Chef on Food Network. I’m not a major fan of Iron Chef, necessarily, but my husband, a professional chef and restaurateur, likes any show involving chefs, cooking, and competition, so we tuned in. In The Next Iron Chef, contestants battle for the title of Iron Chef. (If you’re unfamiliar with the show, it started in Japan, where it became a cult favorite. It was followed by Iron Chef America, which is filmed in the U.S. with Iron Chefs Mario Batali, Morimoto, Cat Cora, Bobby Flay, and the most recent addition, Michael Symon.)

During last night’s episode, the first in the newest competition, 10 contestants had to prepare two dishes using an “exotic” ingredient that they’d been assigned. (By “exotic,” I mean unlaid eggs, fallopian tube still intact, rooster cockscombs, and similarly appetizing fare.) Of course, this was done under outrageous time restraints in a kitchen in which they’d never worked, with equipment that seemed to fail more often than it worked, etc. Suffice it to say, the conditions were more than difficult.

When the buzzer rang and the host announced, “Knives down!” I nearly clapped I was so proud of the chefs! That pride quickly faded when the chefs were required to critique each others’ dishes.

What a terrible way to start the show. For the contestants and for viewers. We could have been riding high, celebrating their first big victory but, instead, had to watch several contests be petty and spiteful, ridiculing other chefs’ dishes without regard to professionalism or reciprocity.

But it got worse during the next phase, when the contestants were judged one by one by the show’s judges. The panel included two women and one man. Both women gave feedback that was insightful, intelligent, and knowledgeable. The man, on the other hand, just dished out a bunch of garbage. The jerky judge in question, Jeffrey Steingarten, was snarky, contrary, and negative to the point of disgust. It was just unbearable to watch.

I finally asked my husband, “Why do they even have this guy on the show?” To which my husband replied, “Because he’s a famous food writer?” Oh, really? Who cares?

I’ll never tune in to another program that has Mr. Steingarten as a judge. He’s apparently a world-class writer with a pedigree that outshines those of even the most prestigious and acclaimed in the industry.  But maybe he should consider sticking to what he does so well—writing—and leave the TV stuff to the pros. Every comment was more angry and hostile than the last, leaving me with a taste so bitter that it ruined the entire experience. He takes the title of food critic a bit too literally, in my opinion. 

Lighten up, Mr. Steingarten!  Celebrate food once in a while!  Didn’t you get into the food world to celebrate the magic and glory that such wondrous cookery can produce? Certainly you don’t eat for a living because you hate the sight of food!  Try to remember the beauty and majesty of it the next time you’re given such a unique opportunity to taste the creations of 10 of the country’s greatest chefs.  It can’t really be as bad as you make it—even if you did think the cockscomb (prepared by Philly hometown favorite, Jose Garces), was too rubbery.

Next time, I hope the producers can find someone to serve as judge who falls more on the sweet side, rather than the tart, as Mr. Steingarten is so apt to do.

In short, I hope Food Network wises up and tosses the jerk from their workplace. Jerks have a way for ruining one’s appetite.

There have been recently been several displays of incivility in the workplace worth a moment of reflection. Three incidents in particular come to mind.

The Conduct

First, there was the outburst by S.C. GOP Rep. Joe Wilson during President Obama’s congressional address last week. On Good Morning America the next day, George Stephanolopous was asked whether he had ever witnessed similar conduct. Stephanolopous immediately responded that no, he had not.

Then, during the women’s finals at the U.S. Open, tennis great Serena Williams threw her racket and, in the same match, cursed and pointed at the line official who penalized Williams for a foot fault. Williams’ opponent, Kim Clijsters, was awarded an extra point when Williams walked away only to turn around and come back at the official, finger pointing and profanities flying. In a press conference, she was positively unapologetic, even trying to justify her behavior, responding to a reporter’s inquiry by saying that everybody treats line people that way.

Then there was Kanye West’s “performance” at the MTV Video Music Awards when he bombarded 19-year-old Taylor Swift, snatching the microphone out of her hand during an ill-fated acceptance speech. The look on Swift’s face was heart wrenching. She looked like a child who couldn’t process how terrible people could be.

The Apologies

Each of the three offenders issued an apology. Wilson called his apology into the White House the day after his disrespectful display. Williams, after booed off the court and being smacked with a $10,000 fine, has apologized several times via the press. And West was first redeemed by Beyoncé, who won for best video of the year but kindly turned over her time at the microphone to the slighted Swift, giving Swift the chance to finish her acceptance speech. Then West made an appearance Monday night on the premier episode of the new Jay Leno Show. Before performing with Jay-Z and Rihanna, West sat down with Leno and seemed deeply troubled by his behavior.

Each incident occurred in the respective person’s workplace. Yet, despite having some familiarity with their surroundings, each of the three conducted themselves in a manner far too horrible to be described as inconsiderate. The displays were inappropriate and downright mean. They were embarrassing, even shameful, really. But what do they say about our society?

Continue reading "Where Have Our Manners Gone? Is Workplace Civility a Thing of the Past?" »

When managers were asked about the strangest employee complaints they’d ever received, they had a lot to say.  Careerbuilder.com asked this question and got some very strange results. Some of the answers made me laugh outside.  And not just because the complaints were so weird, which they are, but also because some of the weirdest ones I’d actually encountered in my practice. Here are a few of employee complaints that I found the most entertaining with my commentary following:

• Employee has big hair . . . umm, did this person spend the ‘80s locked in an office-supply cabinet?
• Employee eats all the good cookies . . . Unforgiveable!
• Employee is so polite, it’s infuriating. . . there’s nothing worse, is there?
• Employee suspected co-worker is a pimp. . . . and? what’s the complaint part?
• Employee is trying to poison me . . . a legitimate complaint, certainly (or just delusional)
• Employee’s body is magnetic and keeps de-activating my magnetic access card.
• Employee is personally responsible for a federally-mandated tax increase. . . .I bet she’s really, really unpopular
• Employee only wears slippers or socks at work. . . ok, I can’t deny it, this would bother me
• Employee breathes too loudly. . . .wow! talk about unworkable conditions!
• Employee has bells on her shoes and it’s not the holidays. . . .scary, scary, scary
• Employee spends too much time caring for stray cats around the building. . . seen it, never want to see it again

See these related posts for a little more office humor:

10 Best Excuses for Being Late to Work

Obnoxious Employee or Co-Worker? Just Tape His Mouth Shut

10 Worst Employees

Last night, the Philadelphia Eagles announced that they had signed quarterback Michael Vick to a two-year contract. Vick, of course, is returning to football after serving time for running a dog-fighting ring. The move by the Eagles, of course, is fraught with risk. Vick’s inhumane treatment of animals has made him one of the most controversial and hated figures in all of sports. This could lead to deteriorating team morale and loss of fan support. The addition of Vick also has the potential for great reward. He is an exceptional talent and his addition to the roster could be enough bring the Super Bowl victory that the City of Philadelphia craves.

The signing of Vick, however, stands in stark contrast to the image that Coach Andy Reed and the Eagles have always tried to portray. They have always proclaimed “character” as the most important attribute in a player. This move makes their public pronouncements seem hollow. Is “character” less important when a special talent is involved? It seems so. This move, and the earlier signing of Terrell Owens, seems to signal that the team will relax it’s rules and it’s team culture for special athletes. In the words of Bill Murray, as Dr. Peter Venkman in Ghostbusters: “Actually, it’s more of a guideline than a rule…”

The Eagles would not be the first employer to abandon its culture for short-term gain. The case law is full of situations where workplace rules were ignored because the violator had too much power or made the company too much money. Think of the top selling salesman or rainmaking partner who is allowed to sexually harass. The money rolls in, but later roll out in the form of a large judgment or settlement.

The Eagles are a good football team, with or without Vick. And, I suppose a Super Bowl win will make the fans of Philadelphia forgive the Eagle’s willingness to sacrifice its team culture for the ultimate prize. In a championship-starved city, that’s understandable. Forgive, maybe. Forget, never.

Delaware has lots of lawyers. In fact, the lawyer-to-citizen ratio is the third highest state in the country.  But, at the same time, we have a very small bar compared to other states.  It’s a privilege to practice law in Delaware, as any Delaware lawyer will surely tell you.  The limited number of lawyers in our community precludes anonymity for any substantial length of time.  And, when you work with the same people regularly, it is in your best interest to conduct yourself with professionalism and civility at all times. You will be remembered, so it’s better to be remembered for your good manners than for your abrasive style.

August, if you didn’t know, is Win With Civility month.  So it’s as good a time as ever to do a bit of self-analysis.  How would your colleagues and peers describe you if asked?  If the answer to that question is not totally positive, work to make a change starting today. 

If you’re interested, the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation has a detailed article on “The Delaware Way” of practicing law, specifically focusing on our esteemed jurists.  It’s a lengthy but worthwhile read. See Delaware’s Art of Judging.

Workplace civility is a value that all organizations should strive to achieve. For those employers who may need a bit more motivation to implement a workplace-civility initiative, now is the time! August is "Win With Civility" month.  Chase’s Calendar of Events includes a list of causes to which August has been dedicated as a “special month.”

Noting that it is a national dedication, I thought the dedication must warrant certain recognitions, so I did a Google search for ways employers celebrate, observe, or at least acknowledge the special dedication. Surprisingly, a Google search uncovered little more than other websites noting the dedications of August and companies selling promotional materials. Although I was disappointed at the search results, I assume the results reflect a lack of interest in the special dedication rather than a lack of interest in “winning with civility” as a general principle. To help readers who want to “win with civility” in August I have included a reminder of what civility means and some suggestions on how a person can behave to “win with civility.” 

Civility is one of those words that is often tossed around but rarely defined. Everyone knows it means something like “be nice.” This is not out of line with the Free Dictionary Online definition of civility as “polite or courteous behavior” or “the act of showing regard for others.” The general definition provides some guidance for behavior, but other websites have provided more specific ways a person can “show regard for others.” Although the specific suggestions were not necessarily written to provide guidance for workplace behavior, many are particularly appropriate for workplace civility.

One website,Because It Matters, lists 10 Keys to Civility. Although the keys are not specific to the workplace, they provide guiding principles that apply to all circumstances. The 10 keys are:

1. Respect others

2. Think positively

3. Pay attention

4. Make a difference

5. Speak kindly

6. Say thank you

7. Accept others

8. Rediscover silence

9. Listen

10. Keep your cool

Another source of guidance can be found on the National Public Radio (NPR) website. In 2003, NPR reproduced George Washington’s 110 Rules of Civility, editing them for readability. Although some of the rules are inapplicable to most modern workplaces, others are perfectly applicable and well worth noting during a special month dedicated to civility. I have included below 10 of the rules that struck me as particularly applicable to all workplaces.

1. Show not yourself glad at the misfortune of another though he were your enemy. (Rule 22)

2. Let your discourse with men of business be short and comprehensive. (Rule 35)

3. Strive not with your superior in argument, but always submit your judgment to others with modesty. (Rule 40)

4. Undertake not to teach your equal in the art himself professes; it savors of arrogancy. (Rule 41)

5. When a man does all he can, though it succeed not well, blame not him that did it. (Rule 44)

6. Being to advise or reprehend any one, consider whether it ought to be in public or in private, and presently or at some other time; in what terms to do it; and in reproving show no signs of cholor but do it with all sweetness and mildness. (Rule 45)

7. Take all admonitions thankfully in what time or place soever given, but afterwards not being culpable take a time and place convenient to let him know it that gave them. (Rule 46)

8. While you are talking, point not with your finger at him of whom you discourse, nor approach too near him to whom you talk, especially to his face. (Rule 76)

9. Undertake not what you cannot perform but be careful to keep your promise. (Rule 82)

10. When your superiors talk to anybody hearken not, neither speak nor laugh. (Rule 84)

In the spirit of civility, thank you for taking the time to read this post. Happy “Win with Civility” month!

Related Posts:

Courtesy and Respect Get Tossed to the Side by Political Staffer

Rude Employees Are Bad for Business

Disrespectful Workplace Costs State $314k

15 Things that Jerks at Work Usually Do

Bosses Aren't the Only Workplace Toxins: What to do with toxic employees?

Jerks-At-Work Expert Confirms Fridge Raiding Is #1 Worst Workplace Incivility

Employee Handbook Policy #502: Respectful Workplace

*This post was written by guest blogger, Elisabeth Bradley, who is wrapping up her second summer as a summer associate at Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP. Thanks, Elisabeth--great post!!

President Obama has made an “almost apology” to the police officer he offended with his “acted stupidly” comment.  The President made the comment when discussing the arrest of Black Harvard scholar, Henry Louis Gates, Jr., by Cambridge, Mass. police. The police were called to Gates’ home to investigate a possible break-in but ended up arresting Gates for disorderly conduct.  From most accounts, it seemed that both sides probably overreacted. No charges were pressed.  When later asked to comment on the incident, which was perceived as having racial undertones, President Obama said the arrest was a “stupid” thing to do.

Oh my.  Cambridge police, as you may imagine, didn’t appreciate the accusation that they, as a collective whole, tending to act stupidly. 

Responding to the escalating pushback, Obama called Gates and the arresting officer, Sgt. James Crowley, to “clear the air.”  At a subsequent press gathering, the President told reporters that he had called both men and invited them for a beer at the White House.  The President did not say whether his calls included an apology, nor did he apologize publicly about his comment.  

Many are now asking whether a true apology is necessary or appropriate, or whether it’s enough to simply “clear the air” and put the whole issue to rest.

My answer to this question is a practical one.  If “clearing the air” without a full-blown apology actually does the trick, then no apology is needed. But, more often than not, if you want to be sure that the matter is resolved, an apology is the way to go.  Remember, you don’t have to apologize for something you didn’t do. So, if your intentions were good but the words came out wrong, then apologize for your word choice. 

Is a public apology needed?  Again, I vote “no.”  If those persons who were offended by the comment, they were offended only on behalf of the individuals involved.  No slight was done to members of the public directly.  So, it makes sense that, if the individuals involved are satisfied with the President’s almost-apology, then the public should be satisfied, as well. 

In the workplace, conflict arises constantly.  Employees who understand the value of a sincere and immediate apology (or even an almost-apology), will avoid more senseless arguments, hurt feelings, and have less stress overall.  Plus, when you are the one apologizing, you feel as if you’ve conquered a big part of the conflict just by stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility for your actions. Then, even if the conflict does not resolve, you can take away the satisfaction of knowing that you tried and then let go of the results over which you have no control.

With that in mind, be extra kind to your co-workers today.  It’s Monday, after all.

Rude people--who needs 'em!?!  Not me.  My husband is a chef and restaurant-owner and regularly gets comments and complaints that, in my opinion, are totally insane.  (For example, "This venison tastes . . . . dead.").  Some customers will overreact to the most trivial issue--I've had a grown man scream (and I mean scream) at me because he didn't like his table.  I told him that I'd be glad to move his group to a different table but he continued to scream hysterically--totally undeterred.  The open demonstration of rage was shocking.  I'll probably never forget it. 

Politico has a remarkable story of unjustifiable rage.  It's a great story to start the week, putting things in perspective and reminding us to treat others with respect and courtesy.  The story is about a political staffer who lost control when she received an e-mail addressing her as "Liz" instead of "Elizabeth."  Despite the offending party's repeated apology, the offended staffer was relentless in her attack.  The exchange went on for 19 e-mails.  It's very . . . insightful. 

When you read the story, think of how terrible the exchange must have been for the "offender" and try extra hard to be extra nice even to those who try to push you to the brink.

Other posts about jerks at work:

Jerks at Work and on the Web

Rude Employees Are Bad for Business

Women Bullies In the Workplace

New Conclusions on the Potential Costs of Workplace Bullying

Women Who Bully Women at Work

"My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true

Jerks at Work.  They don't seem to be going anywhere quick.  But there does seem to be a steady stream of news and resources circulating the world wide web about the topic.  Here are a few recent items.

There is a fascinating article in American Lawyer, titled The End of Sisterhood by Vivia Chen.  Chen proposes that women lawyers are their own worst enemy.  We've posted about this recurring theme before.  See Women Bullies In the Workplace and Women Who Bully Women at Work. 

Slow Leadership points us to an insightful article on the line between bullying and intense management and concludes (rightfully so, in my opinion), that no good can come of bullying--either to the bullies themselves or to the poor souls who suffer at their hands.  For some more anti-bully posts, see New Conclusions on the Potential Costs of Workplace Bullying, "My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true, and Top 5 Lessons to Be Learned from the Jerk at Work.

The Workplace Bullying Institute is the online home to Drs. Gary and Ruth Namie, the turn-to experts on workplace bullying.  The website has been recently revamped and lots of new features have been added.  If you don't have it bookmarked already, now is the time.

Rude people are bad for business.  Employees who are mean, spiteful, or downright rude are actually harmful to their employer's bottom line. Although it may seem like an obvious conclusion, recent research now proves that this is true. The study, "Overlooked but not untouched:  How rudeness reduces onlookers’ performance on routine and creative tasks," was reported in the May issue of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.  The researches concluded that "[s]eeing one person be rude to another can stunt a person's creativity, impair their mental performance and make them less likely to be civil themselves. "

[via Deliberations] Just one more reason to eradicate jerks at work.  To learn    more about the dangers of jerks at work, check out these earlier posts:

Women Bullies In the Workplace

New Conclusions on the Potential Costs of Workplace Bullying

Women Who Bully Women at Work

"My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true

Top 5 Lessons to Be Learned from the Jerk at Work

Workplace bullying

It's Friday and Your Boss Is a Total Tool

The Truth About Workplace Revenge

Women who bully women at work is not a new topic on this blog.  A segment on Good Morning America today addressed the topic of female bullies from a different point of view.  The piece looked at the female target and how women tend to differ from men when subject to workplace bullying.  Some of the more interesting gender-specific perspective notes made in the piece included:

• Women are taught to be non-confrontational and this tendency to not fight back makes them especially vulnerable targets.
• Women, more so than men, tend to take negative interactions personally, concluding that the attack was directed to them specifically, as opposed to directed towards the individual standing closest to the bully at that moment.
• Women do not complain about an existing problem and, when they do, they aren't as persistent as maybe they should be. 

So, do women make better targets?  Or, are they just more vicious bullies? 

It's an interesting idea.  Women are better than men at bullying others and at being bullied by others.  Well, I suppose that there's something to be said for being better at something.  Ok, not really.  So why do women fall into both roles with ease?  Are we genetically predisposed to these opposable positions? 

Gary Namie, Ph.D, founder of the Workplace Bullying Institute, offered the following tips to those being targeted by workplace bullies:

• Get support from family and friends. Talking about the problem eases the burden and lowers the chances of stress-related illness.
• See a doctor or a therapist, especially if you're having stress symptoms, such as sleeplessness and appetite loss.
• Get witnesses to help you build a record of the bully's actions for a future complaint.
• Confront the bully with the same toughness he or she showed you. This should be done with a single witness or as a group.

It's interesting to note some of the ways in which these suggestions would be particularly effective for female targets.  The first suggestion, for example, is a very gender-specific technique.  Research proves that women are biologically programmed to talk about their problems, whereas the male brain actually reacts to stress by reducing his desire, even restricting his ability, to "talk about it." 

Similarly, the tendency to garner group consensus prior to acting is a female-specific trait.  Males, on the other hand, tend not to seek group consensus before executing a decision.  This idea of "power in numbers" also is seen in the final suggestion, which encourages a victim to stand up to the bully--but to be supported by either a single witness or by a group. 

To read more about Jerks at Work, you may want to read these earlier posts:

New Conclusions on the Potential Costs of Workplace Bullying

Women Who Bully Women at Work

"My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true

Top 5 Lessons to Be Learned from the Jerk at Work

Workplace bullying

It's Friday and Your Boss Is a Total Tool

The Truth About Workplace Revenge

Gossip in the workplace can be a powerfully destructive force.  Gossip spread by employees about their coworkers can be the result of passive participation or it can be triggered by a more affirmative attempt to cause harm to another.  Office gossip is an effective method to exact workplace revenge. 

What fuels efforts to engage in workplace revenge has a story all its own.  A new book, due out next month, takes a close look at what it is that workplace revenge entails and why employees engage in such conduct. In Getting Even: The Truth About Workplace Revenge - and How to Stop It, by Thomas M. Tripp and Robert J. Bies  conclude that workplace revenge is the product of individuals who feel that they have been victimized and seek to avenge justice on their own behalf.  The book is the result of years of research and the various lessons learned from the nearly 500 managers and workers interviewed for the project.  Pieces of the interviews are peppered throughout the book in the form of lively anecdotes.  

To read more about the problems of bullies and jerks at work, see these posts:

New Conclusions on the Potential Costs of Workplace Bullying

Women Who Bully Women at Work

"My Boss Is Killing Me": Why this just may be true

Top 5 Lessons to Be Learned from the Jerk at Work

Workplace bullying

A "tool" is a loser, a wanna-be. A tool, usually a male, could also be described as a "poser"--someone who acts soooo coooool that he almost has the world tricked.  But, then a real cool person comes along and assures us that the individual in question is, in fact, a tool.  How, you ask, does the tool make such a convincing case for his false coolness?  Usually by berating others and kicking on the little guy.  You remember someone like this from high school, right?  At the time, he was very convincing but now, in your wisdom, you can look back and recognize that it was his insecurity that made him toss freshman into lockers--not his alleged coolness.

Most tools get out of high school and, sometimes college, only to realize that they're really not so cool and they may even take a few beatings themselves.  By professional life, most tools outgrow this nonsensical camouflage.  And the ones who don't?  In some organizations, they're promoted.  That's right, in some worlds, where I am thankful not to live, the biggest tools take the day and are promoted as a result of their obnoxious conduct.  Why this is, truly, is beyond me. 

Maybe you've been wondering whether your boss is a tool.  Maybe you've suspected it for quite some time.  If so, you can take the following test, created by male-fashion blogger extraordinnaire, MagnificientBastard, and find out. Only MB uses the term "toolbag," which leadership blog, What Would Dad Say, defines "men who are clueless, inappropriate and overall doofuses."  (And, for the record with regard to the tool-toolbag debate, I'm not discrediting the use of the term "toolbag, I'm just sticking with "tool" as my preferred term, ok?)  

Here's how to tell if your boss is a toolbag:

1. He takes credit for everything you do.

2. He walks around the meeting with a baseball bat, asking if anyone saw the movie Untouchables.

3. He steals money from the coffee jar.

4. He is all gushy about you to your wife, and asks her to call him if you get upset at him.

5. He demands the project be completed overnight for his 8 am meeting, but then doesn’t show up himself.

6. He broke down, cried and asked “why don’t they like me?”

7. He wanted everyone to dress like a pilgrim at Thanksgiving.

8. He monitors phone calls.

9. He brings in his kids’ grade school artwork and asks for your honest opinion.

10. He puts you down for ten boxes of Girl Scout cookies because “everyone else is buying this much.”

Workplace bullying is not a recent phenomenon.  I'd go so far as to say that jerks at work have a primary cause of conflict and adversity since the inception of the modern workplace.  In her recent paper, Nancy Haig analyzes and synthesizes the research on workplace bullying.  She concludes:

Workplace bullying  is . . . commonly defined as a pattern of psychological abuse, over time, intended to degrade, humiliate and isolate the bully’s victim. Bullying may be impacted by individual characteristics and/or corporate structure; and corporate practices themselves have been called bullying. The costs of bullying are significantly high to both employees and employers.

The paper is very well-supported and offers readers a whole host of resources for further reading.  [Via Brandon Hall Research]

Bullying in the workplace has been a hot topic in the labor and employment world since 2007, when The Workplace Bullying Institute published a revealing survey on the topic. Since then, the subject of Jerks at Work has played a regular role in scholarly discussions about how employers can work to improve the working environment.  The attention, at least from legal scholars, has been focused on the overlap between unlawful harassment and the bullying epidemic.  So the theory goes, bullying conduct looks enough like harassing conduct that a jury could reasonably interpret the former as the latter. 

I speak frequently on the topic and, when making a case for the implementation and enforcement of anti-bullying policies, I explain it as a matter of simple business sense.  Happy people don't sue.  (Most of the time.)  But pissed-off people make great plaintiffs.  Pick on someone long enough and be mean enough and it's just a matter of time until the person reacts.  The reaction can come in a myriad of forms, all of which are adverse to the employer's interest.   Workplace violence is one possible response to bullying experienced by workers.  Legal action is another. 

This topic also comes up when I give general employment discrimination training or harassment-prevention training.  When discussing the legal elements of harassment, I tell attendees that the harassing conduct must be because of a protected class.  If a male supervisor terminates a female employee, this is not gender discrimination.  For gender discrimination to exist, the termination decision must have been made because of the employee's gender.  There is a principle in discrimination law that stands for the idea that, where the alleged discriminator is in the same protected class as the plaintiff-employee, it is less likely that discrimination occurred. 

At this point in the lecture, I laugh to myself because I know what comes next.  I give some examples of this principle at work.  If a worker alleges that he was not hired because of his age, the fact that the hiring manager was older than the candidate weighs against the candidate.  Similarly, if an employee complains that he was unlawfully terminated because of his race (Indian), the fact that the manager who made the decision to terminate also is of Indian origin will weigh in the employer's favor.  I go on to give another example involving an employee who is not promoted and files a charge of discrimination alleging gender discrimination.  Just as in the other examples, if the manager who made the promotion decision also is a woman, this fact will weigh against the employee's case.  I then say, "As any woman in this room will attest, this idea is ridiculous.  Women are treated the worst by other women."  All the women in the room laugh--the truth is funny. 

If she had been in the training session, Peggy Klaus of the N.Y. Times would have laughed, too.  In her recent article, A Sisterhood of Workplace Infighting, Klaus discusses the reality that exists among women at work. As she puts it, "we can be our own worst enemies at work."  She cites the Workplace Bullying Institute's study, which found that women bullies target other women 70% of the time, whereas male bullies are equal-opportunity abusers. 

Why is it that this dynamic is so true?  Why is it that women are most likely to pick on other women at work?  Although this certainly has been true for as long as women have had a seat at the table, I think that the tides have begun to turn and that women are comfortable enough in their seats so that they have no need to worry about someone kicking them out. 

Bad bosses can kill you.  Even more so than factors such as whether the employee smokes, exercises, or has weight problems. The data comes from a four-year-long study in Switzerland and was published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

Workers who were subject to inconsiderate and uncommunicative bosses were about 60% more likely to suffer a heart attack or other life-threatening cardiac condition.  Employees who had strong leaders as bosses, on the other hand, were roughly 40% less likely to suffer heart emergencies. 

Got boss troubles?  Check out these posts:

How Crazy Is Your Boss? No, really, how crazy?

15 Things that Jerks at Work Usually Do

Inside the Mind of a Super Jerk

5 Costs of Coworker Bullying

And In This Corner. . . Susan From Accounting. Office Rage in the Ring

Top 5 Lessons to Be Learned from the Jerk at Work

Workplace bullying

You Know You’re a Bad Manager When. . . Mutiny at the Post Office

Bosses Aren't the Only Workplace Toxins: What to do with toxic employees?

Employee Handbook Policy #502: Respectful Workplace

Everything You Needed to Know About Your Toxic Boss

How Crazy Is Your Boss?  No, really, how crazy?  Crazy boss?  Psycho boss? If you've had some suspicions about the sanity level of your supervisor, now's your chance to have those suspicions confirmed.  Take the test at Fast Company.com and find out! 

If the crazy-boss test does not confirm your suspicions, maybe you are the one with the personality disorder.  Find out at Personality Types.net

Workplace bullying is not unlawful. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), is not stopped by that, though.  It has entered into a consent decree with the State of Oregon, ending a lawsuit involving workplace bullying.  The case, filed by the EEOC on behalf of Sheri Peters, a former juvenile court clerk, was filed under federal employment laws but, at its core, alleged egregious workplace bullying.

Peters claimed that her former boss, the juvenile justice center manager, Linda Simonson, engaged in a variety of hostile conduct towards her subordinates. Peters claimed that, after working at the center for a month, she told Simonson that she was pregnant.  Simonson responded that she felt Peters had concealed her pregnancy to get hired and called Peters at her unborn child "garbage."  When Peters went to the hospital with a ruptured placenta in December 2004, she claimed, Simonson called her and chastised her for being not at work.

Court documents do not paint a pretty image for the center's management style.  Several current and former employees testified about the "bullying conduct" of Simonson who, as one witness described, “managed the department like an abusive parent.”  Another employee reported that she was harassed "relentlessly" by Simonson while out maternity leave.  Another claimed that, while she was pregnant, she was subject to “harassing and intimidating behavior” by Simsonson.  And one employee stated that Simonson was harassing, “cruel and vindictive."

As part of the settlement, Peters will receive $315,000. 

The real lesson here is not about pregnancy discrimination or even gender-based harassment.  The real lesson is about respectful conduct in the workplace.  Employers who fail to recognize that respect is an essential component of every job will eventually have to face the fallout of a distrusting workforce who feels they were thrown to the wolves by the organization that turned a blind eye to bullying and disrespectful treatment by management.

Jerks at Work.  Nobody likes them.  Everybody knows them.  Jerks at Work are easy to identify--you know one when you see one.  But for managers who want to eradicate the problem of workplace bullying, it may be difficult to identify just what it is that indicates the employee is a legitimate jerk and not just someone having a really bad day. 

To help those who want to make a difference and eliminate the Jerks at Work, here is a list of 15 common behaviors and offenses that indicate that there is a real problem.  

1.  Takes credit for the achievements of others.

2.  Repeats information learned in confidence.

3.  Talks about others in terms of stereotypes.

4.  Tells jokes that make others look stupid or unequal.

5.  Is adverse to any perceived change.

6.  Interrupts others while talking.

7.  Micromanages subordinates.

8.  Fails to keep commitments.

9.  Never volunteers to help coworkers.

10.  Gossips indiscriminately.

11.  Constantly seeks approval from others.

12.  Defensive in response to feedback.

13.  Inflexible with requests by others.

14.  Cannot be found when needed.

15. Places blame when unwarranted.