JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

Even phantom bullies can hurt

Many of my friends who were once journos fled the newsroom for the greener pastures (or at least the deeper pockets) of the public service. Few regretted it. Some whinge about process-focused dogmatists and the plodding pace of government, but they also speak in awe of the efforts spent ensuring that staff ''feel good''.

One ex-journalist told me recently his government workplace was ''phenomenal''. ''Managers go to the enth degree to check whether staff are happy with what they're doing. But, the thing is, even though we have a lot of meetings to make sure we're all supporting each other, there are heaps of disputes about bullying. I just sit there thinking about life in a newsroom, and wonder what on earth they're talking about.''

I'll admit I've lost perspective on what a ''normal'' workplace is like. I've spent the last decade in politics and the media; industries not renowned for a softly, softly approach to personnel management. Arguments are an accepted part of reaching a conclusion; abuse from the public is unavoidable. Yet I realise this would create a legal mess in other workplaces. And perhaps that's fair enough: why should most workers need a thick hide to do their jobs?

Yet the Australian Public Service appears to be experiencing an epidemic of harassment. The government's workplace health regulator, Comcare, told Parliament last month the number of mental harm claims it received from public servants had risen 30 per cent in three years. Over the same period, the annual cost of bullying-related claims in the APS jumped from $27.4 million to $46.3 million.

Nonetheless, outsiders regularly guffaw at the notion of bullied public servants. The bureaucracy's image isn't helped by the occasional high-profile compensation claim (such as the official injured while having sex on a work trip, or this week's report on two Tax Office colleagues who stoushed over a cup of coffee). These cases are more complex than a prima facie account suggests, but they feed the public perception that APS staff need to harden up.

In truth, there's no epidemic: each year, only a tiny fraction of public servants (0.13 per cent in 2010-11) are investigated for harassing colleagues. Comcare also notes that, last financial year, it received just 1.6 compo claims relating to mental stress for every 1000 full-time staff. Yet this doesn't mean the problem isn't serious at the micro level: I've spoken with enough victims to realise how much trauma a malicious colleague can cause. (One new website, apsbullying.com, now collects and publishes these war stories.)

The reasons people bully others, or feel that they are bullied, are as complex as people themselves. I doubt there are any universally effective ways to stop workplace harassment. However, after reading recent case law, what's clear is that many (but not all) APS compo claims could have been avoided if managers tackled perceived underperformance earlier.

This is counterintuitive for many public servants, because of the stubborn myth that initiating a performance management process creates legal risks. Increasingly, the reverse is true, as shown by two decisions this year: Commonwealth Bank v Reeve in the Federal Court, and Fox v Comcare in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Both highlight the need for employers not only to prevent bullying, but to act to prevent employees from feeling harassed, even if there is no proven bullying or harassment taking place. Ignoring a staff ''problem'', in the hope it will fade, is probably the worst decision a manager can make, yet it still happens regularly.

A performance management process often helps the troubled public servant, too, because it coaxes them to voice concerns - about workloads or office relationships - they may otherwise have suffered silently. It's no cure-all: these processes don't always work perfectly, nor are they always fair. But they can clarify misunderstandings, identify looming mental-health problems, and save a hell of a lot of public money.

Markus Mannheim edits The Public Sector Informant. Send your confidential tips to aps6@canberratimes.com.au

1 comment so far

  • This article seems to imply that harassment is coincident with managers' perceptions of under performance by subordinates; the harassment arising presumably from the managers' responses to that perceived under performance.

    It is a mistake to presume that instances of harassment in the APS are confined to performance issues on the part of the complainant; perceived or otherwise.

    I twice resigned from APS legal roles (Attorney-General's Dept and Health) across a decade because of significant bullying by managers. On neither occasion was my performance in question. On each occasion, colleagues reported equivalent concerns about the same managers. Significantly, in respect of each manager, no complaint was ever made by myself or my colleagues - because the overwhelming perception was that it wasn't safe to do so, notwithstanding statutory and policy mechanisms which purport to protect complainants in such cases.

    I have direct experience of many other instances constituting legitimate, well-founded grounds for complaints by former colleagues in the public service, against bullying managers, where no complaint was made, for fear of reprisals, and because it was perceived that management would not take the complaint seriously (despite management rhetoric claiming otherwise). Those cases which make it to a formal complaint are the tip of the iceberg. The real story is in the complaints which are never submitted.

    And for those who criticize APS officers who complain of bullying - APS managers are paid from public funds and are subject to statutory obligations to conduct themselves honestly and fairly in their dealings in their workplace, including in respect of their conduct towards subordinates. Dishonesty and misconduct pervades the APS and bullying is an element in much of that conduct. The same managers often pay lip service to the ideals of the Code of Conduct.

    Skeptical? Read Goffman, Jackall, Shulman and Zerubavel.

    Commenter
    WitnessBearer
    Location
    Outside the APS
    Date and time
    August 12, 2012, 10:05AM

    Make a comment

    You are logged in as [Logout]

    All information entered below may be published.

    Error: Please enter your screen name.

    Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

    Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

    Error: Please enter your comment.

    Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

    Post to

    You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

    Thank you

    Your comment has been submitted for approval.

    Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.

    Featured advertisers

    Special offers

    Credit card, savings and loan rates by Mozo