Workers have won workplace bullying cases in the courts.  

The number of legal cases in the Employment Court and the Employment Relations Authority demonstrates that bullying cases in the workplace are on the increase.

Research provides that battling bulling leaves life long scars unless the matter is dealt with. 

Bullying at work is no longer easy to sweep under the carpet.  

The outcomes of cases in the Employment Court and the Employment Relations Authority provides that there are three phenomena that make for a winning case.  

Step One: Bullying has to be repeated, there needs to be a pattern.

In Roberts v Japan Auto NZ Limited a salesman’s boss: 

• Made insulting comments about the workers wife’s race.  

• Required Roberts to hand-write his details on blank cards in lieu of business cards (something that the other salesmen did not have to do BECAUSE THEY HAD CARDS PROVIDED BY THE EMPLOYER!!). 

• Continually commented he was not needed. 

Although this bullying only lasted three weeks the Court resoundingly found this bullying had made Mr Roberts resign and Roberts was awarded:   

• Twelve thousand five hundred dollars ($12,500) in damages.

AND

• Eight thousand three hundred and seven dollars  ($8,307) lost wages.

Step Two:  The actions of the employer or other workers who are doing the bullying must be carried out with the desire to gain power and exert dominance:

The classic case in that instance is Cartwright v Commissioner of Police. 

A local rural policeman (Cartwright) was assigned a to new manager (Sergeant). 

The first thing out of this managers mouth was:

I not going to put up with any of his “f__ing nonsense”, and removed his responsibilities. But wait, there is more...

At a performance appraisal, Cartwright was called an “arrogant c__”. 

Cartwright was also told not to publish his usual articles in the local newspaper.  (Silencing and manipulation much?)

Cartwright the stressed and bullied Constable sought medical advice and was diagnosed as being clinically depressed. 

Cartwright took leave. 

On returning, Cartwright complained to his District Commander who purportedly asked sarcastically: if complaining was also “part of the therapy”. 

Subsequently, Cartwright left the police and was paid twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for humiliation and lost wages.

Step Three:  carried out with the intention to cause fear and distress.

In Nagai v Carlton Hotel Mr Nagai worked as a Teppan Chef in the hotel's Japanese restaurant. 

The head chef ran a strict Kitchen, and could speak harshly. 

The Authority concluded these harsh and belittling exchanges were well within the scope of expected and acceptable conduct between a supervising chef and an employee in a busy kitchen. 

It was not bullying. 

TV’s “F Word” cooking programme with Gordon Ramsay provides the disturbing and normal custom and practice in those enviroments.  

However, the courts recognises different work places have different standards. 

Each case, as always turns on its own facts and merits. 

What goes in the construction site smoko shed, could be frightfully unacceptable in a politically correct government department and there is a line to be determined between what is really a personality clash with a sensitive worker and real bullying.

Some find it useful to explain workplace bullying in either vertical or horizontal terms as well.

Vertical bullying: An example of vertical bullying that comes to mind is paradoxically the worker on the boss rather than the usual boss on worker. 

In McGowan v Nutype Accessories, McGowan the Manager of the company was tormented by some staff over a leaked (later to be shown unfounded) investigation of the High Court over a former partner alleging he had pornographic images of her. 

The tormentors habitually passed his office making over the top rude comments and threats at him. 

McGowan eventually could no longer put up with this taunting and resigned. 

McGowan sued his former employer who he had told about the taunts and won twelve thousand five hundred dollars ($12,500) compensation and six (6) months loss of wages.

Horizontal bullying: An example of horizontal bullying, that means workers bullying one another.

Healthcare professionals and public sector workers are classic examples of horizontal bullying.  

These workers and professionals are not immune to bullying; in fact, they experience bullying at an alarming rate. 

Sometimes the bullying is passed down from superiors, but frequently bullying occurs between coworkers. 

This is known as "horizontal bullying," and it has become a serious issue within the nursing profession and the public service. 

Horizontal bullying between nurses and public sector workers can cause negative consequences for everyone involved, in particular the nurses, patients, and the entire organization. 

An example of merger of these two (2) worlds of bullying can be provided by Phillips v ACC as it lead to change in the way ACC handled claims for mental injury as a result of Bullying.  

YOU CAN CLAIM ACC FOR MENTAL INJURY AS A RESULT OF BULLYING.  

Phillips was a senior staff member who took her case to court and won and now the agency must provide ongoing cover for a mental injury that happened under its watch.

Yvette Phillips moved her family to Christchurch to take up her dream job working as a claims advisor for ACC but two years later she faced redundancy amidst a restructure.

During a meeting in October 2019 to discuss her potential redeployment, she said her manager was "confrontational and aggressive", and she left the meeting in tears feeling "ambushed and blindsided".

While on stress leave, Phillips returned to the office in March 2020 to retrieve her laptop and was publicly humiliated in front of colleagues when another staffer accused her of lying and then stripped her of her laptop.

Phillips provides that in her words her experience was:

"It's extremely painful, honestly. I suppose that's the best word for it. They were very painful experiences because in fact it's put an end to my career"

When Phillips described here personal experience of remembering the bullying she states:

"I can hear my voice cracking now ... to try and take myself back there and describe it is tough. I suppose I've kind of closed that book."

Philips attended two doctors and was diagnosed with major depression and post traumatic stress - and two doctors pointed out either of the events she experienced at work could lead to mental injury in most people.

Knowing ACC's policy inside out, Phillips put in a claim for cover for a work-related mental injury but it was refused, as was a subsequent review.

But having advised on claims, Phillips thought her case was solid and appealed the decision in the Wellington District Court.

In his judgment, released in May, Judge Chris McGuire found that Phillips had suffered a work-related injury.

"The appellant's accounts of these two incidents in particular are detailed and meticulous. I accept them. The respondent has offered no counter evidence."

Phillips said it was difficult to speak out and pursue her case.

"It's only because of my knowledge of ACC, having worked there for seven years, and my understanding of the legislation that I could say to myself: 'no you know you've got this, you know the legislation, you know how this works"

"I certainly knew what kind of injuries can be covered, I know what kind of injuries can't be covered, and I knew that this was a mental injury that was caused in the workplace."

Phillips eventually receive weekly payouts after winning the appeal.  

ACC is the Crown entity responsible for administering the country's no-fault accidental injury compensation scheme.

At the time, ACC had accepted eighty one (81) claims for work-related mental injuries last year, but could not easily identify how many of those related to workplace bullying.

In a statement ACC's chief people and culture officer, Michael Frampton, said as an employer the organisation has only received one (1) mental injury claim for bullying at work but he could not speak about individual employee matters.

"It is important that all our people feel safe and supported while they are at work. ACC does not tolerate bullying or harassment in any form. We encourage our people to raise any concerns, and we provide multiple avenues to do so."

He said ACC introduced a new policy earlier this year, replacing its previous bullying and harassment policy.

It is argubly disappointing that it had to come to a court case for ACC to change its ways, however, it is likely better late than never.  

Don’t put up with being bullied – life’s too short, your mana is important, and the law is on your side. Tell your boss, and if he is cavalier and unsympathetic like the District Police Commander, seek help.