The ‘Brown bullying row’ has done nothing to encourage meaningful discussion about what can sometimes be a serious problem in the workplace – or an easy claim made by disaffected workers.
At a Bevan Foundation conference recently, Prof. Duncan Lewis concluded that bullying is ‘complex, messy and open to multiple interpretations’. He emphasised that bullying – as opposed to unpleasant behaviour – is persistent, is about power, is negative and it escalates. Shouting, or being hauled over the coals for poor work, isn’t necessarily bullying – some of the worst instances of bullying involve the silent treatment. It also has to be recognised that claims of bullying are also sometimes made by people who are looking for a quick jibe against their employer.
Good employers - which surely includes the civil service - have in place anti-bullying policies as well as grievance procedures that staff who feel they are being bullied can invoke. The test of whether bullying has taken place is scrutiny through the proper processes. No doubt we will never know whether working conditions in No. 10 constituted ‘bullying’ or were just robust as you would expect them to be.
Whatever, Andrew Rawnsley has certainly had better publicity for his book than he dared dream of, while those who do suffer bullying are left no clearer about what is acceptable and what they should do about it.
angela elniff-larsen 6:37 pm on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
Its becaome a fashionable phrase rather than a serious condition
The number of bullying investigations in process is amazing , its a wonder that people stayed so long in jobs being bullied before they speak out
May be the processes and policies being put in place are not fit for purpose.Certainly the ones I have come accross are not user friendly and having to sit in a room face to face with a bully who you have complained about is not pleasant by any means
It need training to go along side these tools.
Andrew Rawnsley is a disaffected new labourite looking to earn money.that to me does not form the basis of robust evidence