BULLYING. Do you have a Plan?

Bullying has become a key concern in workplaces.

A recent decision in the Employment Relations Authority of Chery Akaba Marr Lino v Restaurant Brands Ltd spotlights the steps an employer took when faced with an allegation of bullying.

The employee was required to wear a name badge as part of the employer’s operational (and national) guidelines.  Pending the arrival of the employees’ own name badge, the employee’s manager asked her (as per the national guidelines) to wear a spare name badge (with someone else’s name on it), or a trainee badge (these were not always available).  The employee raised some concerns to the manager about this, and the manager responded, attempting to address her concerns.

The depth and extent of the employee’s concerns over the requirement to wear a name badge (that was not her own) was not brought to the manager’s attention, and the employee made a complaint that the manager was bullying her.

The Area Manager stepped in and attempted to resolve the employee’s bullying complaint in a number of ways, including initially attempting to discuss the issue informally.  He also investigated the matter so he could report back to the employee.  The Area Manager also offered an apology to the employee and reassured her that she would not need to wear someone else’s name badge.

The employee (and her father) refused to participate in an informal meeting so a formal meeting was arranged.  The Area Manager had investigated the employee’s allegation of bullying against the manager and reported his findings to the employee and her father in this formal meeting.  He found that the manager had not bullied the employee.  The employee did not accept the Area Manager’s findings on bullying from the manager, and she filed a personal grievance.  The matter was not resolved at mediation.

The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) found that the employee had not been bullied by the manager on the issue of the name badge (or from other non related matters) and was satisfied that the employer took appropriate steps from the outset to address the employee’s concerns in a number of different ways.  The ERA was satisfied that the employer took all reasonable steps, including an investigation into the complaint of bullying, and that the manager’s communications with the employee had not been ‘unreasonable and repeated’ behaviour.  The ERA found that the employee’s personal grievance was not substantiated.

So what can we learn from this decision?

Firstly, have a clear documented response plan in place before you receive a bullying complaint – a Bullying and/or Harassment Policy.  The employer in this case had a Bullying and Harassment Policy in place.   It would have provided clearly what ‘bullying’ behaviour is (how to identify it),  how to make a complaint if you think you may be experiencing it (it may provide for both an informal and formal process) and what to expect from the employer once you have made a complaint.  It is a clear map,  identifying step by step, what will occur and a guideline on how the matter may be resolved along with some idea of timeframe.

Secondly, we can learn that the employer’s response when an issue is raised with them is very important from the outset. In the Chery case, the employee’s manager did make the effort to respond to the employee as soon as she raised her concern and he provided some solutions for the employee to consider.  The manager continued to respond to the employee professionally and with courtesy, which was not proving to be easy when the employee’s father became involved.

Finally, when it became apparent that the informal approach was not going to be workable, the employer appropriately moved to the next step in its Bullying Policy and moved the matter to a formal approach.  Importantly, the employer took steps to investigate the employee’s complaint.  This was an indication that the employer took the complaint seriously and considered the employee’s concern objectively and with an open mind.  The ERA emphasised the steps the employer took in the employer’s investigation by listing the various factors the employer considered when it reached its conclusion and reported back to the employee.  Importantly, the Authority specifically recorded that the employer at the outset of its investigation, set out the employee’s concerns (as it understood them to be) which provided the employee with a reference of what matters (and the scope) the employer would be investigating.  The Authority also set out the various attempts made by the employer to resolve the employee’s original concern about the name badge.  It could be inferred from this decision that the Authority were satisfied that the employer took all reasonable steps available to it to resolve the concern in a timely manner.  No doubt the employer’s clear and well-defined Bullying policy greatly assisted the manager and Area Manager’s in taking out the guess work of how to respond to the situation as it unravelled.

If you do not have a Bullying and/or Harassment Policy, Chapman Employment Relations can assist you with this.