Bullying and Harassment

Partner, Andrew Bryan, comments on a recent case  where an employer found themselves in a position of dismissing a hardworking and well – liked employee because of an incident for which the employee apologised profusely, however because of the employers own policies it found dismissal was the only option. 


It is normal to see a workplace policy prohibiting bullying and harassment which gives examples of unacceptable behaviour. Verbal and physical bullying will be obvious inclusions in the policy , email and social media formats are now becoming increasingly more common inclusions. The harassment allegation in this particular case, however, was focused around a different medium – a drinks mug.


A female employee found a mug in a kitchen cupboard at her workplace. She complained to her manager that she found the comments in the form of graffiti that appeared on the side of the mug to be threatening – she described it as an ‘offensive misogynist message directed at me’.


The employer took a serious position with regard to instances of bullying and harassment in their organisation including requiring employees to undertake a 3 hour online training session on equal opportunities.


An investigation culminated in the employee who brought the mug into the office being invited to attend a disciplinary hearing. At the hearing he apologies and insisted that the comments on the mug were not directed at the employee who had complained. Although he had 20 years service and a clean disciplinary record, he was dismissed.


In light of the zero tolerance policy towards bullying and harassment, the employer’s decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses to the circumstances.  The employee appealed to the Employment Tribunal which confirmed that with a zero tolerance policy towards bullying and harassment, there could be no instance of bullying that would get past a robust zero tolerance policy.


It is important the:

  • Employers appreciate that bullying can take place via a wide range of media.
  • Employers are in a strong position to fairly dismiss employees for one instance of alleged bullying through media which is not necessarily initially though of a controversial, provided a fair procedure is adopted.
  • Long service and good disciplinary record will not always be sufficient mitigation for employees in bullying/harassment cases.

If you have an employment issues you wish to discus please call Andrew Bryan on 02392 820747

 

August 2017

Is a worker employed or self-employed?

June 2018

Following a recent high profile Court case, partner Andrew Bryan poses the Question “When is a worker an employee rather than a self-employed contractor?”

More Info

Upskirting Law moves a step closer

June 2018

After the recent private members bill on ‘upskirting’ was so spectacularly and publicly blocked in parliament recently, the Government has finally stepped in to take action.

More Info

Commonhold – a different option for owning property

June 2018

Partner, Liz Moger, comments that the Law Commission is asking flat owners, housebuilders, mortgage lenders and lawyers to help shape a law which could help people own their flats outright.

More Info

High Court Rules that female cohabitee is entitled to share of deceased partner’s estate

May 2018

Solicitor Gemma Nolan comments on a recent landmark ruling where the High Court has found in favour of a 79 year old woman, after her partner of 42 years left her out of his will.

More Info

We’re proud to be associated with

  • The Law Society, Conveyancing Quality Accredited logo
  • The Law Society, Children Law Accredited logo
  • The Law Society, Criminal Litigation Accredited logo
  • The Law Society, Family Law Accredited logo
  • The Law Society, Family Law Advanced Accredited logo
  • The Law Society, Lexcel Accredited logo
  • Solicitors For The Elderly Accredited logo
  • Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners logo
  • Dementia Friends logo
  • Resolution logo