Skip to main content

Public service managers ask workplace authority for help with false bullying claims

Australian Public Service bosses have pleaded with their workplace authority for help with false claims of bullying and harassment from the bureaucratic rank-and-file.
Now the Australian Public Service Commission has warned that bogus bullying claims could serious consequences for those concocting them.
The commission's new question-and-answer service for federal bureaucrats struggling with workplace issues has attracted pleas for help from public servants who fear being unfairly smeared as office bullies.
The reports offer more evidence that the public service's workplace slackers are using bullying allegations to derail efforts to get them to lift their games.
One manager told of workers, under pressure for their inappropriate behaviour or underperformance, telling "anyone who would listen" that they were being bullied.
Bullying and harassment has been a serious problem in government departments for some time.
In the 2016-2016 financial year, nearly one-in-six APS employees, who responded to a Public Service Commission survey, reported being bullied or harassed in their workplaces in the previous 12 months.
Sixty-seven per cent of alleged victims said that at least one of their tormentors was a manager.
Co-workers were responsible in just 36 per cent of incidents,and just 9 per cent said that they were bullied or harassed by a junior colleague.
But the commission itself is cautious about taking bullying claims at face value, noting "what is perceived as harassment by one person may be proper management action to another" and warning "the reported level of bullying and harassment needs to be treated with some caution."
One manager who turned to the help service, said employees complaining of bullying and harassment persisted with their claims even when they were unable to substantiate them.
"When employees are advised to report their concerns, they won't," the unnamed supervisor wrote.
"When asked for examples, they are not forthcoming.
"Managers cannot explain their sides to those listening to the employee and often feel they can take no action to defend their reputations."
Another public servant asked the help desk if there was any action that could be taken against those making false allegations, either through the public service's code of conduct or the Fair Work Act.
Managers do not have to simply cop bogus claims, the Public Service Commission says.
"An employee who has knowingly made a false statement against a colleague may have breached several elements of the Code of Conduct,"the commission wrote.
"[the code] requires an APS employee to act with honesty and integrity in connection with their employment.
"The making of a deliberate false statement against a colleague is likely to be inconsistent with this."
The manager trying to deal with underperformers was advised to confront the problem at the source, reminding his colleagues that the code-of-conduct could be used against public servants making untrue claims.
"You might ask them if they have been talking about the matter with their colleagues and, if they have, remind them that they are bound by the Code of Conduct and are obliged to act honestly and with respect and courtesy," the commission advised
'It may also be open to you to direct the employee not to discuss with their colleagues how they are being treated.
"It might be useful for you to get advice from your own human resources area about this or about any other policies that may be in place in your agency or next steps you should take."
Labels:
Location: Sydney NSW, Australia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Unfair dismissal – harsh to dismiss, however reinstatement not appropriate

In the recent decision of  Paul Johnson v BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd  [2017] FWC 4097, Commissioner Hampton found that, although the employee had engaged in misconduct constituting a valid reason for dismissal, the dismissal was nevertheless harsh due to a number of mitigating factors. However, the Commissioner did not consider reinstatement appropriate because the employer had a rational basis for its loss of trust and confidence in the employee given the importance of the need for compliance with safety policy and the maintenance of appropriate discipline in connection with workplace health and safety matters. The employee was instead awarded compensation. The facts The employee was employed by BHPB from 24 May 2001 until his dismissal on 31 March 2017. At the time of his dismissal, the employee was a process specialist, responsible for a team of technicians looking after a flash furnace and other equipment in areas of a smelting facility at an und...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lorna Jane vindicated after two-year, $570,000 bullying case

Legal experts are urging businesses to train their staff in up-to-date social media policies this year, after activewear brand Lorna Jane won a two-year legal battle in November against a former employee who claimed the company was responsible for the psychiatric impacts of bullying at work. Former Brisbane store manager Amy Robinson filed a legal claim against Lorna Jane in 2015, seeking $570,000 in damages. The former manager claimed Lorna Jane was negligent and should be held responsible for her being bullied by a learning and development manager at the company, which led to psychiatric illness and a loss of employment and future employability. The company came out swinging against the claims early on,   posting a later-deleted Facebook post in 2015 defending itself against the claims  and saying it had been “very disappointed” by what had been reported in the media about the case. The claims included that Robinson was bullied and called a variety of names while...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop-bullying application rejected

An employee who claimed his new team leader micromanaged and bullied him has had his stop-bullying application rejected, after the Fair Work Commission found her behaviour "abrupt" but not repeated or unreasonable. The Bunnings Warehouse employee claimed that in May 2016 the new team leader asked him about his face – the left side of his face "droops" and he is unable to move his left arm – which he found "deeply disrespectful and hurtful". A few weeks later, the team leader on two occasions confronted him and questioned why he was in different sections of the store, he told the Commission, noting he believed he was being singled out and treated differently from colleagues. He contacted the store manager to discuss the issue but was told she was too busy to speak with him, and he subsequently took two days off because of work-related stress. The employee claimed that when he returned to work, the employer suspended him but didn't tell him wh...
Post a Comment
Read more