Today's Wall Street Journal featured not one but two articles addressing jerky behavior at work. The first article addressed the extremes of people management: the supervisor who approaches business in a “nice” manner risks being labeled ineffective, but bullying, the other extreme, has some pretty direct consequences.
The second article posits that managers who resort to explosive expressive behavior (the "tongue lasher") in fact may represent the iconic effectual supervisor who gets things done out of provoking subordinates' fear (which is the very definition of a bully). Neither article, however, addressed the legal implications of neutrally nasty bullying behavior in the workplace. Federal and state laws prohibit harassment in the workplace based on any legally-protected characteristic.
So when a boss directs impolite behavior selectively to subordinates based upon a real or perceived characteristic (age, gender, race, religion, to name a few), legal liability may ensue. But absent such targeted and clearly objectionable nastiness, there is little legal recourse for workplace bullying. While most would agree that common courtesy (civility, professionalism - and yes, politeness) motivates people to do what they are asked to do, the very nature of being human means supervisory workplace direction will be delivered in many different forms.
Even California, which prides itself on employee-focused regulation, declined to make workplace bullying legally actionable when it...
President Donald Trump made false claims about the war with Iran, the economy and other subjects during public comments at a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday. Many of them have been debunked before. H...