Intimidating actions by unions
Most researchers agree that the work of Heinz Leymann, a Swedish psychologist and professor, constituted the starting point for conceptualizing and understanding this phenomenon.During the 1980s, Leymann drew on his experience as a family therapist and began investigating various forms of interpersonal conflict at work.We now understand the most common bullying behaviors, the frequency of this conduct, and the potential impact on workers and employers.
Such harassment has taken a toll, not just on the physical and mental well-being of the individual directly affected, but on his or her familial and social relations, job productivity, and overall workforce morale. It may be in the way of workers who deliberately sabotage the reputation of a co-worker by spreading lies and rumors about her performance and character.Workplace bullying is on the verge of entering the mainstream of American employment relations.In recent years, the , and many other leading newspapers and periodicals have run feature stories on bullying at work (Parker-Pope, 2008; Tuna, 2008), and popular television news programs have devoted segments to the topic.It is intentionally hurtful, typically repeated, and often malicious in nature. Workplace bullying does not concern everyday disagreements at work, the occasional loud argument, or simply having a bad day.Among the most frequently reported behaviors are yelling, shouting, and screaming; false accusations of mistakes and errors; hostile glares and other intimidating non-verbal behaviors; covert criticism, sabotage, and undermining of one’s reputation; social exclusion and the “silent treatment”; use of put-downs, insults, and excessively harsh criticism; and unreasonably heavy work demands (Namie & Namie, 2003, p. Furthermore, it does not involve interpersonally difficult aspects of work, such as giving a fair and honest evaluation to an underperforming employee.