Category Archives: workplace bullying

Are Women Bosses Really Meaner?

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s what Abby L. Ferber had to say in this excerpt of her Huffington Post article about the issue:

So why do women most often bully other women? Because they are rarely in positions of power over men. According to the article [NY Times, Backlash: Women Bullying Women at Work:

“After five decades of striving for equality, women make up more than 50 percent of management, professional and related occupations, says Catalyst, the nonprofit research group. And yet, its 2008 census found, only 15.7 percent of Fortune 500 officers and 15.2 percent of directors were women.”

In addition, women are more likely to work in careers and workplaces that are primarily populated by other women. Men, on the other hand, wield power in the workplace over both women and other men.

Instead of examining the larger dynamics of power at work here, the article focuses on women as a group, asking why they bully other women.

We are left with numerous problematic conclusions:

Women’s relationships with each other are problematic and women need to learn to better support each other.

Women are the problem themselves, and they are becoming too much like men as they move into positions of power.

Bullying itself is not a gendered phenomenon, men bully men and women bully women, so we are all affected by it.

Bullying by men is natural, and not in need of examination. We should expect that kind of behavior from men.

Looking at the exact same data, however, informed by an understanding of how the dynamics of gender and power operate, a very different story can be told.

The reality is that:

Bullying is about power, and people bully those they have power over.

Bullying increases when people feel their power threatened.

Our unequal gender system contributes to the problem of bullying because it reinforces the idea that some people should naturally have more power than others; that men are by nature more aggressive, and women should be more nurturing and supportive.

And bullying in the workplace contributes to economic inequality between men and women. As this study makes clear, bullying is a very serious problem, with real consequences: 40% of the time, the target ends up quitting her job (remember, most targets are women). So bullying is a tool to maintain inequality.

The way in which the story of the data is told by the New York Times ends up hiding the real problems and blaming the victims. If our analyses are not informed by research and analyses of gender and power dynamics, we end up contributing to the problem, rather than developing real solutions.

Documentary Features Foxconn Factory Workers

Posted on by
1

Shortly after Steve Jobs’ death hit the news, I caught an early morning round table discussion with Mike Daisey.  He is funny!  But, as he talked about his latest one-man show, The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs, I was really hooked by his delight in shocking those members of his audience from Apple who outsource their product to factories in China.

“[The Agony And The Ecstasy] follows the standard line: Jobs was a combination of awesome visionary and ruthless businessman. He doesn’t tell us anything that we haven’t gleaned from Jobs’s obituaries, but that isn’t the point. The point is to ask us why we are not more troubled by the fact that our indispensable gadgets are assembled in part by children.”  [The Financial Times review]

Surprisingly, I couldn’t google up a video of Daisey’s monologue – except one in which 87 members of a Christian advocacy group staged a walk out.  But, I did find a Vimeo clip from Dream Work China, a documentary made by three Italian journalists who opened a photo shop across from the Shenzhen Foxconn factory [see video below]. They captured interviews with factory workers that represent the dreams of the millions of young Chinese migrant workers who leave their homes and families and travel long distances to work in factories – like Foxconn just across the street. Probably most disturbing are the scenes of dormitories with packed balconies overlooking the nets hung below as a painful memory of the suicides.

About a year before his death, the Daily Mail quoted Jobs as defending the conditions at Foxconn:

‘You go in this place and it’s a factory but, my gosh, they’ve got restaurants and movie theatres and hospitals and swimming pools. For a factory, it’s pretty nice,’ he said.

Jobs has been extremely outspoken about the need for his employees to be passionate about the products they create.  To bad this desire to inspire others and the understanding of the need for a creative and meaningful life didn’t trickle down. Then again, this is the same man who, according to his official biography hitting the bookstores Monday,  personally complained to President Obama that regulations on business are too tough to build factories here.  And, was frustrated that Obama was so focused on trying to understand why things happen.

“In the suburbs of Shenzhen, in Guangdong province, young workers talk about their lives, existences built on a precarious balance between hope, struggles and wishes for the future. Around them activists and NGOs strive to give sense and meaning to words like rights, dignity and equity.”

Visit the Dream Work China for more information

Here’s an hour long interview with Mike Daisey from CSpan

What does “Hot Coffee” and “Workplace Bullying” have in common?

Posted on by
Reply

This week, advocates in a dozen states are taking part in “OurBullyPulpit’s Take Action Screenings” to raise public awareness about workplace bullying.  Many are advocates for pending legislation, which in most states is the Healthy Workplace Bill [HWB].  But, the HWB they’re fighting for includes a $25K Cap on our (victims’s) emotional distress portion for those who haven’t lost their jobs, been demoted or suffered any other negative action.  You also have to prove malice and health harm.  The argument by the drafter of the HWB is that a purposely low Cap and high hurdles will help avoid “frivolous lawsuits.”

But, using Caps to avoid “frivolous lawsuits” is the battle cry for Tort Reform and so far much of the success from this effort has been the ability to place low monetary caps on court settlements.  Wisconsin’s controversial Governor just passed a tough reform in his state.

The powerful documentary, Hot Coffee, which premiered on HBO this summer, has fired up the national debate and helps demystify commonly held misconceptions for us laymen. We all want a law to stop bully bosses.  But, each of us has the right to ask that a law reflects our desires and concerns.  Those that want to can easily ask their legislator to strike the Cap out of the bill.  Please read the insightful Atlantic article excerpted below and see the movie:

Everyone has their own spin for so-called “tort reform” laws. Here’s mine: In each instance, state legislators, who are elected largely through corporate donations, have acted to reduce the authority and ability of jurors to render meaningful verdicts against corporations. These lawmakers have interceded to protect corporate interests in advance, via statutes that nullify the facts of individual tort cases, with arbitrary damage caps that are designed more to protect wrongful defendants from liability than protect the victims of their wrongdoing. And the state judiciary, also now being bought and paid for in many states, has followed the lead of the legislative branch in undermining the role of the jury.

No one wants a “frivolous” lawsuit but what exactly is that, anyway? And who is better to decide what is “frivolous” or not? The lawmaker who caps out damage awards based upon the views of the lobbyist who has made a campaign contribution? Or you and your neighbor sitting in judgment on a plaintiff and her case? No want wants an “excessive” jury award but what exactly constitutes “excessive?” Was it excessive for the Gourleys to want the corporate defendants, and their insurance carriers, to pay the $6 million it will take to pay for Colin’s care? Nebraska lawmakers made that decision for the family, in advance, without regard to the facts of their case. Were they better equipped than the Gourleys’ jury to evaluate the definition of the word “excessive”?

Here’s more:

The message has been simple: Corporations are being preyed upon by plaintiffs, trial lawyers, and juries, each of whom are involved in some sort of cosmic conspiracy to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor by virtue of a damage-award verdicts. This propaganda implies that this redistribution of corporate wealth in this fashion is unconstitutional or otherwise unfair. The narrative also pits neighbor against neighbor, juror against juror, and thereby undermines both the letter and the spirit of the Seventh Amendment, which codifies a right to civil trial by jury.

In short, the “tort reform” movement has largely succeeded in making jurors out to be anti-American vengeance-mongers, a mob of citizens unhinged by law or logic and set loose upon innocent corporations. This is all wrong. Tort reform isn’t democratic because the people’s wishes are being expressed through state legislation. It’s anti-democratic because the lobbyists have succeeded in taking away the power of individual plaintiffs and jurors to set damage awards at an amount they feel is just. Remember, no damage award has ever been handed out to a plaintiff who lost a tort case against a company.

How has this marketing campaign been so successful for so long when it’s so obviously built on so many misconceptions about the justice system? Easy. For decades, the media machine dutifully has played along. Indeed, one of the most striking parts of Hot Coffee is its consistent use of old news broadcasts to highlight the extent to which journalists, on the whole, have miserably failed to explain the true nature of “tort reform” to their audience. So many people uninformed about the nature of a jury’s work! So many people underinformed about who benefits and who is burdened by tort reform!

OurBullyPulpit.com Sponsors ‘Take Action’ Screenings During ‘Freedom From Workplace Bullying Week’

Posted on by
Reply

Advocating With Film To Raise Awareness About Workplace Bullying

Many thanks for your surprising support!  Advocates and victim/targets all over the country – and even Australia – are taking part in our “use film to create change“ initiative for both individual and community actions. 

Some of the actions include: 

  • Screening Partyyour_stories1.jpg
  • Mailing DVD to local legislators
  • Lobbying
  • Town Hall Meeting
  • College courses
  • Trainings
  • Sharing with fellow employees who are being bullied
  • Sharing with family members, friends, and co-workers to show the impact of workplace bullying and validate the experience
  • Donating to local library

DVDs have gone out to people across the country in states including:

  • Connecticut
  • Florida
  • Georgia
  • New York
  • New Jersey
  • Pennsylvania
  • Wisconsin
  • Minnesota
  • Massachusetts
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Texas
  • and even outside the U.S. to Australia

ABOUT THE INIITIATIVE:

* FREE DVD’s AS ORGANIZING TOOLS*

external image DVD_TBL.jpg
Wow! The DVD’s featuring moving personal stories that we offered yesterday for free to use in fighting against workplace bullying have been claimed! However, for a limited time or until they run out, if you are in the U.S. and willing to pay for postage we will send one to each person who emails a request. The only caveat is the same – you have to let us know how you used the DVD to educate others about this issue. Be creative and get the word out!  [More Information]

Each DVD contains Tracey’s Law, Marlene’s Law, Jodie’s Law, and the first episode of What Really Killed Kevin Morrissey. Use PayPalto pay for shipping and receive a Free DVD or Send your request to OurBullyPulpit@gmail.com

Guide To Kicking B*tt In The Workplace

Posted on by
Reply

In the struggle to combat workplace bullying it’s important to admit that we worker bees aren’t always perfect.  Weak managers can quickly lose the respect of their team only to watch them spiral hopelessly out of control and even mob up on their leader.   In the interesting Businessweek article below,  Jeff Schmitt tells bosses how to “kick ass” without being psychologically abusive:

A guide to reading your employees the riot act: Time to lay down the law? Some points to consider before you do

[Article by Jeff Schmitt, 10/13/2011 Bloomberg Businessweek/ msnbc.com]

“If I go down, you’re all going down with me.”

Our manager had finally crossed the line with this comment. She had delivered fire-and-brimstone speeches before. But this was different. Suddenly, she wasn’t Vince Lombardi Light, looking to get back to basics. Instead she had degenerated into a narcissistic despot who’d stoop to using us as human shields. She was passing the buck and covering herself. She may have considered it motivation. We saw it as a meltdown.

At some point, every manager must unload a kick-in-the-ass speech. Even the best teams get cocky and careless; they forget what’s important and what got them there. But here’s a reality check: If you have to deliver “The Speech,” you’re probably failing as a manager. Before you let loose with the grand oration, maybe you need a wake-up call. Sure, there’s truth in the adage about tearing people down to build them back up. But getting your team back on track requires more than threats and cursing. Want to really get their attention? Read the following recommendations.

1. Consider if The Speech is merited
Sure, you’re disappointed with performance. Before you go Knute Rockne, consider if the situation warrants an explosion … or coaching. Are you nearing a tipping point where financials or expectations dictate an intervention? Is there a broader motif, such as slow service, that could spill into critical areas such ascustomer retention? Should this diatribe be public and include everyone or could it be handled privately with certain members? Most important, what do you want to achieve? Bottom line: Weigh the offense against your options and the desired response.

2. Come with a plan
You’re probably tempted to graphically challenge their commitment and competence. But you’ll only look clumsy if you ad-lib The Speech. You want your team squirming, stomachs sinking, minds racing. That requires strategy: a bolo-punch opening, unassailable arguments, and a call to action that echoes for weeks. Even more, it demands rehearsing to get tone, pace, posture, and gestures just right. Fact is, you only get one or two speeches before your team tunes you out. Make this one count.

3. Don’t fly off the handle
A loose cannon. That’s how you’ll be labeled if you can’t control your emotions. They’ll snicker and lampoon you to everyone within earshot. Your anger, however genuine, must be calibrated for effect. Before you venture into the lion’s den, step back, breathe, and relax. Remember, an icy resolve often commands more attention than a rant. A pause can be as lethal as a pejorative.

4. Prep them
Surprise! Surprise! No, your speech shouldn’t come as a shock. In fact, it should hark back to previous fireside chats, where you focused on listening and understanding. Back then, you expected that your coaching would establish how important the task at hand was. But the time for such niceties has passed. A hands-on approach is needed. They can’t say they didn’t see it coming.

5. Cite specific examples
The Speech is no time for generalizations. Be specific: What actions and underlying sentiments are creating tensions and why are they unproductive and inappropriate? How has it affected customers and other departments? Of course, outline how these shenanigans have hit the radar of those above you — and what consequences will follow if they continue.

6. Keep it short
Your job is to shake them up and leave a lasting impression. The less said, the better. Let their imaginations run wild; it’ll keep your message on top. Don’t go off on tangents or pile on, either. It will only dilute your message. Cut quickly and deeply, then move on.

7. Set expectations
You’ve identified the problem. Now what? Start by leaving no ambiguity with the takeaways. Specify exactly what you expect, along with when and how. Don’t forget to spell out the repercussions for failing to meet these expectations. Hammer home that the time for second chances has long passed.

8. Monitor your own behavior
Their eyes will probably glaze over during your speech. Why? They’ve been mirroring your behavior. Is it any wonder you haven’t been getting through? Address it in your speech. Accept some blame and summarize how you’ll change. Then hold yourself as accountable as you hold your team for the result.

9. Rebuild bridges
You go to battle with the people you have, not necessarily the ones you want. Afterward, your team will make excuses and entertain mutiny. That’s why you need to quickly reel them back. Reach out, one by one, to tutor, praise, and motivate. You’ve shared what needed to be said. Now convey through action that there are no hard feelings. Don’t let them confuse you with the message.

10. Follow up
You’ve thrown down the gauntlet. But the weeks following The Speech will ultimately determine its success. That’s why you need to stay on the issue. Address it in interactions and meetings and constantly collect results. And when the time is right, celebrate. You may have devised the plan, but your team will ultimately win the battle.

Should Steve Jobs “management style” continue?

Posted on by
6

Here’s a dilemma for those of us concerned about workplace bullies: Steve Jobs.  One of the arguments for ‘zero tolerance’ and proposed legislation is that no one is irreplaceable.   The public response to Jobs’ death heralding him as this generation’s Edison also praised him for his ability to utilize team work and it’s hard to imagine anyone waiting in the wings who could have had such a global impact.  But, stories about his true ‘management style ‘ have been public for years.  So the real question is, does Steve Jobs fall under the definition of a workplace bully?   Would legislation, like the bill proposed by the Workplace Bullying Institute currently pending in several States, have crippled Jobs’ ability to be a visionary of historic proportions?  How do we take academic and legislative definitions and apply them to real workplace relationships?  These are questions that all of us involved in lobbying for legislation need to wrestle with.

“Apple CEO Steve Jobs is known for his obsessive attention to detail and iron-fisted management style. He is often accused of making his subordinates cry and firing employees arbitrarily. But Jobs’ subordinates remain loyal. Several deputies–even those who have left the company–say they’ve never done better work. As one Apple employee told journalist John Martellaro, “His autocracy is balanced by his famous charisma–he can make the task of designing a power supply feel like a mission from God.” [Forbes 2009 ]

This week a New York Times article, “Defending Life’s Work With Words of a Tyrant,” begins with a story of grade school bullying.  If you do a Google search on the term “workplace-bullying” you’ll find most reporters LOVE to start with phrases like: bullying moves out of the playground and into the board room.  The New York Times is no exception:

The first time Steve Jobs ever bullied anyone was in the third grade. He and some pals “basically destroyed” the teacher, he once said.

For the next half-century, Mr. Jobs never let up. He chewed out subordinates and partners who failed to deliver, trashed competitors who did not measure up and told know-it-all pundits to take a hike. He had a vision of greatness that he wielded to reshape the computer, telephone and entertainment industries, and he would brook no compromise.

Maybe it is only the despair people feel about the stagnating American economy, but the announcement of the death of the Apple co-founder Wednesday seemed to mark the end of something: in an era of limits, Mr. Jobs was the last great tyrant.

Why do employees put up with it?

Most definitions of workplace bullying refer to a repeated pattern that includes actions like verbal abuse and humiliation that take place over time.  But, while the NYTimes article seems to confirm this pattern, why do employees put up with it? And more importantly, if they do buy in, is it still fair to call it bullying?

There are numerous articles that link narcissism to bully bosses.   Back in 2006, Forbes noted how difficult it was to work for visionary CEOs like Jobs in an article titled, The Narcissistic CEO.

The desire to change the system is a defining element of narcissism. And while it can be inspirational to work for someone like that, interacting with a narcissist CEO can be torture. Don’t expect praise. Get used to hearing the word “I.” And be able to take lots of harshly worded criticism.

Jobs talked openly with Forbes  about his management style and the work culture he was creating:

“When I hire somebody really senior, competence is the ante. They have to be really smart. But the real issue for me is, Are they going to fall in love with Apple? Because if they fall in love with Apple, everything else will take care of itself. They’ll want to do what’s best for Apple, not what’s best for them, what’s best for Steve, or anybody else.”

A players hire A+ players

Surveys and workplace bullying pundits say that bosses bully because they have low self-esteem and feel inferior to their employees.   But, according to Guy Kawaski, Jobs certainly didn’t fall into this category:

Actually, Steve believed that A players hire A players—that is people who are as good as they are. I refined this slightly—my theory is that A players hire people even better than themselves. It’s clear, though, that B players hire C players so they can feel superior to them, and C players hire D players. If you start hiring B players, expect what Steve called “the bozo explosion” to happen in your organization.

Jobs own take on his demanding reputation:

“My job is to not be easy on people. My job is to make them better. My job is to pull things together from different parts of the company and clear the ways and get the resources for the key projects. And to take these great people we have and to push them and make them even better, coming up with more aggressive visions of how it could be.” [CNN]

Should this ‘Leadership Legacy’ really continue?

Hopefully Jobs replacement will have greater empathy towards employees both here and abroad.  Considering the pride Jobs reportedly took in controlling each detail of the product he created, his apparent disregard toward the suicides and horrendous working conditions in factories in China that create the iPhone is deeply disturbing.  Back in 2009 the Harvard Business Review probably summed up his legacy as a leader best:

…Humility is not part of the Steve Jobs leadership repertoire — and that’s worked out fine for him. But humility has become a crucial part of the job description for leaders who aren’t Steve Jobs. So marvel at his products, applaud his feel for design, wonder at his capacity to cast such a large shadow over so many industries — and, by all means, pray for his speedy recovery and long health.  But don’t think you’ll do better as a leader by acting more like Apple’s leader. Trust the art, not the artist. [Harvard Business Review 2009]

RIP Steve Jobs!

This article was written on a MAC and published to iPads & iPhones everywhere.