Ever instructed to bully staff?

krd

This is a question for people who have been in positions as supervisors.

Have you ever been given explicit instructions to bully staff, by your manager?

I'm not talking about being advised to drive people to work harder - I am talking about deliberately distressing people for the sake of it. Disciplinaries just for the sake of keeping people on their toes or to make examples of people.

Just to give an example. A work place, I know. Members of staff are routinely taken in for little chats, where they are told other members of staff are complaining about them - they're not told what they complaints are or who is making the complaints. This is routinely done to all staff members.

Normally, I would think bullying is down to an individual supervisor. I'm wondering, can it be more systematic. Like the example I have outlined - is systematic.

LegacyUser

You can bet your bottom dollar this goes on.
This is very good post.

Greenmachine

Can remember one summer job I had where I was working my socks off. I got called into the office and was told other staff felt I wasn't pulling my weight. Which was a pile of manure. After that I started to slack off. Got called in a few week later, and was told they noticed a huge improvment in my work. Needless to say I didn't go back the following year. It was their loss really.

borderlinemeath

I worked for a company for a good few years, 4 years in a new area manager started and she singled out who she didn't like straight away, this included managers, supervisors and regular staff.

About 3 months after she started I applied for an internal management position in a higher profile area. (as one of the managers she didn't rate had left) During my interview she expressly told me that I would get the position but I had a timeline in which to prove myself and get rid of the "baggage" in the department - and she outlined who she saw as the problems - 2 staff who had set shift patterns that couldn't be changed due to length of service and they also cost more than other staff due to length of service, and another that had a bad attendance record due to a history of depression (certified)

The staff member with depression left after about 8 months - although it was nothing to do with me - she was getting married and moving to the other side of the country, but the other 2 staff are still there and I'm long gone!!

The same area manager managed to bully out 4 other managers that I know of - the regional controller turned a blind eye to what she was doing - and lost a lot of good people over it. :mad:

dreamers75

"Manage them out" is the technical term. Did it many many times and currently doing it :pac:


Some people dont deserve jobs and yet have them, sometimes you have to do this to ensure someone who wants a job gets one.

randylonghorn

dreamers75 wrote: »

Some people dont deserve jobs and yet have them ...

Fair play for being so self-aware, at least!

borderlinemeath

dreamers75 wrote: »

"Manage them out" is the technical term. Did it many many times and currently doing it :pac:


Some people dont deserve jobs and yet have them, sometimes you have to do this to ensure someone who wants a job gets one.

"managing people out" is what my area manager asked me to do.

But - the reasons given weren't that the staff were incompetent or weren't pulling their weight - but because they had long service rights and one had a history of depression. Both of which the labour court would have a field day with if they were "managed out"

RachaelVO

dreamers75 wrote: »

"Manage them out" is the technical term. Did it many many times and currently doing it :pac:


Some people dont deserve jobs and yet have them, sometimes you have to do this to ensure someone who wants a job gets one.

I get that there are times when someone has to be "managed out" of their jobs, however this happens a lot based on personality not necessarily on productivity. This is where problems can and do arise, and as it's considered to be a form of bullying, if it was to be brought to court, you're the one in trouble!

Mrs OBumble

Sometimes, not always, one person's bullying is another person's effective management.

There are staff who consider being asked to carry out their basic job description properly as "bullying".

IMHO, a staff member who costs a department a lot (because they're on a high rate or historic T&Cs) should be contributing more than someone who costs less to employ. Some staff don't see it that way though.

Treora

JustMary wrote: »

Sometimes, not always, one person's bullying is another person's effective management.

There are staff who consider being asked to carry out their basic job description properly as "bullying".

Sometimes, not always, one person's bullying is another person's effective management.

Well this is up to the courts to determine intent by the bully and preceived affect on the bullied.

JustMary wrote: »

IMHO, a staff member who costs a department a lot (because they're on a high rate or historic T&Cs) should be contributing more than someone who costs less to employ. Some staff don't see it that way though.

This is just capitalism. Managers rarely see workers as capitalist animals, more as servants. If a worker is smart enough to place themselves in a more advantageous contract for the same job (as l long as gender etc was not the cause) then s/he is a successful capitalist. Anyone who tries to manage them out is just a sore looser and is wasting energy and company time trying to push labour laws to re-play a lost battle. That worker with the better contract is just smart, try using their intelligence to the company's profit and the manager's own promotion rather than loose the rag over loosing a capitalist contest. :eek:


On a wider point bully's appear to be loosing support in the world at large. :rolleyes:

http://www.thenewcurrent.com/2011/03/21/the-salient-australian-bully-gets-body-slammed/

borderlinemeath

JustMary wrote: »

Sometimes, not always, one person's bullying is another person's effective management.

There are staff who consider being asked to carry out their basic job description properly as "bullying".

IMHO, a staff member who costs a department a lot (because they're on a high rate or historic T&Cs) should be contributing more than someone who costs less to employ. Some staff don't see it that way though.

This can sometimes be the case but when I was asked to "get rid of the baggage" the two staff that had long term contracts were good staff who had worked there way up to supervisor level. One of them had a set pattern that worked around her invalid parent and the other had opted to go part time when her second child was born. Both set patterns were approved by the previous manager and area managers and it was only when the new AM started that it became an issue. (an issue for the AM and not the department, as there were 2 other flexi supervisors and 2 managers)

The AM even went so far as to critizise one of the staff for wearing a headband to work one day! She was very into her image and also told me once that what I wore to an area meeting was more important that what I said/contributed to the meeting!:eek:

I fully understand about baggage in departments - not wanting to start a public service debate - my sister is in a management position in the PS - she is routinely frustrated at the incompetence of staff that have been "transferred" from other departments to hers because they can't get rid of them

krd

borderlinemeath wrote: »

The AM even went so far as to critizise one of the staff for wearing a headband to work one day! She was very into her image and also told me once that what I wore to an area meeting was more important that what I said/contributed to the meeting!:eek:

People can get hired/fired/promoted purely on their looks alone - and their competence can be at stark at odds with how they look. There are many people, managers included, who believe all there is to being a manager is to look managerial. Something I've heard a few people say: if you walk into a company, and everyone is very smartly dressed and everything looks very slick. It's probably total chaos underneath the veneer.

I fully understand about baggage in departments - not wanting to start a public service debate - my sister is in a management position in the PS - she is routinely frustrated at the incompetence of staff that have been "transferred" from other departments to hers because they can't get rid of them

This doesn't only go on in the public sector. I've seen it go on in the private sector a good bit. I once worked for a company where we had two buildings. Teams from would make requests for an extra pairs of hands. There was a guy who was infuriatingly incompetent, a real hassle to have. He would be sent between buildings. He never did any work (or could do any work) he was just yo-yo'd between teams.

In every company I have worked for there have been incompetent people, who are sheltered - for whatever reason.

dan_d

Very true...I found they tended to be moved upwards quicker where they "could do less damage".
The phrase "sh*t flows downhill" was a very common one in my workplace..still think it's a disgraceful practice however.

Nody

dreamers75 wrote: »

"Manage them out" is the technical term. Did it many many times and currently doing it :pac:


Some people dont deserve jobs and yet have them, sometimes you have to do this to ensure someone who wants a job gets one.

Done it a few times due to the person simply not being able to do the job they where hired for.

Had one instance when I refused to do it when I had a manager pull out the full list of employees names and surnames and declaring 20 of the names to go (all names being clearly foreign) due to a complaint about the level of English from a customer. The person in my team from the list how ever was fluent English and was next in line for a promotion due to work ethics and skill and I convinced the manager accordingly with a few recorded phone calls.

Shelflife

One of the main problems is that it is very hard to get rid of someone who no longer cuts the mustard.

an employee can just up and leave if they no longer want to work somewhere, yet if a business owner no longer wants an employee its very hard to get rid.

we had a girl with us who basically turned bad, constant issues with her all over little things that didnt merit an official warning, it got to the point where we hated going to work (in our own business) because of her.

we couldnt make her redundant as there was a job there and she would have to be replaced and we cant sack her because we dont like her/trust her and she was a bad influence on other staff.

this is what leads to "managing them out".

im not saying that you should be able to sack people at will, but where you no longer trust or like a person or where they are making your life hell then you should be able to part ways without threat of unfair dismissal.

krd

"managing out" would be a topic in itself.

I'd like to know if anyone has been instructed to bully staff not with intention of driving them out but to harass them for the sake of the harassment alone.


I will say, it can be hard to know where it's coming from. I had problems with a manager one time. I'm not going to explain the entire situation. In the end it turns out it wasn't him but his manager was putting him up to - getting him to do their dirty work. It had nothing to do with my performance. The senior manager didn't like the look of me. In fact what they were doing, was more or less selecting people on a whim and getting their managers to put them on disciplinaries. One manager refused one time, and found themselves with a written warning.