Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Workplace Bullying: A Review of Litigated Cases

  • Published:
Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using policy-capturing methodology, this study examined the nature of workplace bullying in a random sample of 45 litigated cases in the United States. Among the findings were that most of the cases were in the District Court. Nearly one-fifth of the cases involved physical violence, the majority of the cases were in the public sector, and the supervisor was the perpetrator in many of the cases. The presence of a policy banning workplace bullying was present in slightly more than one-third of the cases. A striking finding was that 73.3% of the cases were found in favor of the employer as the defendant. These findings support the fact that even though there are no specific workplace bullying laws in the U.S., victims of workplace bullying can be legally protected. Implications for managerial practice and future research are suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Presence of dissatisfaction/frustration with working situation/organizational climate; Perceived status incongruence/ power imbalance; Autocratic style of management; Low perceived costs for the perpetrator; Laissez faire leadership style; Lack of policy against bullying; Lack of punishment; Bullying seen as a rite of passage; Efficient means of accomplishing tasks.

  2. High internal competition; Politicized climate; Relative ranking incentives (rewards); Form of discipline for those who are perceived to violate established production norms; Constructive discharge; Expected benefits for perpetrator.

  3. Restructuring, downsizing, crises; Organizational changes; Changes in management; Changes in composition of work group; Cost cutting; Reengineering; Employees who feel powerless; Delegation of control to semi-autonomous teams; Promotion of the perpetrator; Arrival of a new manager.

  4. The tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress has four elements: (1) the defendant must act intentionally or recklessly; (2) the defendant’s conduct must be extreme and outrageous; and (3) the conduct must be the cause (4) of severe emotional distress from http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/Courses/tortsF01/IIEM.htm

References

  • Aquino, K., & Thau, S. (2009). Workplace victimization: aggression from the target’s perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 717–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: a theoretical model and meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 998–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. N., & Smith, M. A. (2008). Mobbing in the workplace: the latest illustration of pervasive individualism in American law. Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 12, 130–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006). Survey of workplace violence prevention, 2005. Retrieved November 2, 2009 from http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osnr0026.pdf.

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2007). Census of fatal occupational injuries. Retrieved November 2, 2009 from http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshcfoi1.htm.

  • Carp, R. A., & Rowland, C. K. (1983). Policymaking and politics in the federal district courts. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K., & Pereira, B. (2002). Measuring workplace bullying. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20(1), 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and bullying at work A review of the scandinavian approach. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4), 379–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S., Matthiesen, S., & Skogstad, A. (1998). Bullying burnout and well-being among assistant nurses. Journal of Occupational Health and Safety-Australia/New Zealand, 14(6), 563–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Magley, V. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment? Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5–28). New York: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, S., & Stallworth, L. E. (2003). Racial/ethnic bullying: exploring links between bullying and racism in the US workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(3), 438–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, H., Beale, D., & West, B. S. (2006). Workplace bullying, psychological perspectives and industrial relations: towards a contextualized and interdisciplinary approach. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(2), 239–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, H., Cooper, C. L., & Faragher, B. (2001). The experience of bullying in Great Britain: the impact of organizational status. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 443–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, H., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C. L. (2004). Bullying is detrimental to health, but all bullying behaviours are not necessarily equally damaging. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 32(3), 367–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, H., & Salin, D. (2003). Organisational antecedents of workplace bullying. Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace. International Perspectives in Research and Practice (pp. 203–218). Taylor and Francis: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, P. H. (2008). Emotional adaptation and lawsuit settlements. Columbia Law Review, 108, 50–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ironside, M., & Seifert, R. (2003). Tackling bullying in the workplace: The collective dimension. Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace: International Perspectives in Research and Practice (pp. 383–398). London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennifer, D., Cowie, H., & Anaiadou, K. (2003). Perceptions and experiences of workplace bullying in five different working populations. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 489–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaVan, H., & Martin, W. M. (2008). Bullying in the US workplace: normative and process-oriented ethical approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. A. (2006). Nurse bullying: organizational considerations in the maintenance and perpetration of health care bullying cultures. Journal of Nursing Management, 14(1), 52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces. Violence and Victims, 5, 119–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leymann, H., & Gustafsson, A. (1996). Mobbing at work and the development of post-traumatic stress disorders. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5, 251–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutgen-Sandvik, P., Tracy, S. J., & Alberts, J. K. (2007). Burned by bullying in the American workplace: prevalence, perception, degree and impact. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 837–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikkelsen, E. G., & Einarsen, S. (2001). Bullying in Danish work-life: prevalence and health correlates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 393–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niedhammer, I., David, S., & Degioanni, S. (2006). Association between workplace bullying and depressive symptoms in the French working population. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 61, 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, M. B., Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2008). Sense of coherence as a protective mechanism among targets of workplace bullying. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13(2), 128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NIOSH. (2002). The changing organization of work and the safety and health of working people. NIOSH.

  • Ortega, A., Høgh, A., Pejtersen, J. H., & Olsen, O. (2009). Prevalence of workplace bullying and risk groups: a representative population study. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 82(3), 417–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quigg, A. M. (2007). Bullying in theatres and arts centres in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Arts Management, 10(1), 52–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raess v. Doescher (2008). No. 49 S02-0710-CV-424, Indiana Supreme Court (April 8, 2008).

  • Rayner, C., & Hoel, H. (1997). A summary review of literature relating to workplace bullying. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 7(3), 181–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, C., Hoel, H., & Cooper, C. L. (2002). Workplace bullying: What we know, who is to blame, and what we can do? London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richmann, J. A., Rospenda, K. M., Flaherty, J. A., & Freels, S. (2001). Workplace harassment, active coping, and alcohol-related outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13, 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehling, M. (1993). “Extracting” policy from judicial opinions: the dangers of policy capturing in a field setting. Personnel Pyschology, 46(3), 477–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rospenda, K. M. (2002). Workplace harassment, service utilization, and drinking outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2, 141–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, M. M., & Sherlock, H. (2005). Stress and verbal abuse in nursing: do Burned out nurses eat their young? Journal of Nursing Management, 13(3), 242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, C. K., & Carp, R. A. (1996). Politics and judgment in federal district courts. Lawrence, Kan: University of Kansas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salin, D. (2003). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: a review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56(10), 1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, P., Huynh, A., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2007). Defining workplace bullying behaviour professional lay definitions of workplace bullying. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 30(4–5), 340–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schat, A. C. H., Frone, M. R., & Kelloway, E. K. (2006). Prevalence of workplace aggression in the US workforce: Findings from a national study. In E. K. Kelloway, J. Barling, & J. J. Hurrell Jr. (Eds.), Handbook of workplace violence (pp. 47–89). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schat, A. C. H., & Kelloway, E. K. (2005). Workplace aggression. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway, & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (p. 191). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. J., & Stradling, S. G. (2001). Determining the cognitive ports of entry amongst the post-traumatic states: treatment implications behavioural and cognitive psychotherapy, 29, 245–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference: ASA.

  • Spaeth, H. J., National Science, F., Inter-university Consortium for, P., & Social, R. (1999). United States Supreme Court Judicial Database, 1953–1997 Terms. Ann Arbor: Michigan State University [Producer]; Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [Distributor].

  • Tracy, S. J., Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). Nightmares, demons, and slaves: exploring the painful metaphors of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 20(2), 148–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unison. (2000). Police Staff Bullying Report #1117. London: Unison.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vartia, M. (2001). Consequences of workplace bullying with respect to well-being of its targets and the observers of bullying. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 27, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, J. M., & Bolino, M. C. (1997). Explaining US courts of appeals decisions involving performance appraisal: accuracy, fairness, and validation. Personnel Psychology, 50(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C. V., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2007). Angry and afraid: women’s appraisal of sexual harassment during litigation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(1), 73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Workplace Bullying Institute. (2009). Definition. Retrieved November 2, 2009 from: http://www.workplacebullying.org/targets/problem/definition.php.

  • Yamada, D. C. (2004). Crafting a legislative response to workplace bullying. Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 8, 475–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, R. A. (2005). Beyond the schoolyard: workplace bullying and moral harassment law in France and Quebec. Cornell International Law Journal, 38, 625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (Eds.). (2003). Individual antecedents of bullying. London: CRC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, College of Commerce, DePaul University, 1 East Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL, 60604, USA

    William Martin & Helen LaVan

Authors
  1. William Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helen LaVan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Martin.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Coding of Variables

  • Coded as present 1, absent 0 for all of the following, except as indicated

    1. 1.

      Court level: District, Appeals, Supreme

  • Organizational or demographical variables

    1. 2.

      Sector: Public, private

    2. 3.

      Employer type : Manufacturing, service sector not school, school

    3. 4.

      Bully’s occupation: Employee, client, student, member of public, multiple

    4. 5.

      Victim’s occupation: Employee, client, student, member of public, multiple

    5. 6.

      Bully’s sex

    6. 7.

      Victim’s sex

    7. 8.

      Bully’s race/ethnicity: White/Caucasian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native American, multiple

    8. 9.

      Victim’s race/ethnicity White/Caucasian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native American, multiple

    9. 10.

      Number of bullies

    10. 11.

      Number of victims

    11. 12.

      Manager/Supervisor the victim

    12. 13.

      Manager/Supervisor the perpetrator

    13. 14.

      Third party

    14. 15.

      Number of third parties

    15. 16.

      Union involved

    16. 17.

      Arbitration involved

    17. 18.

      Duty of fair representation

    18. 19.

      Unfair labor practice

    19. 20.

      On vs. off job behavior

  • Behaviors

    1. 21.

      Persistent negative acts toward one or more individual

    2. 22.

      Repeated negative acts toward one or more individual

    3. 23.

      Perceived power imbalance

    4. 24.

      Hostile work environment

    5. 25.

      Interpersonal aggression

    6. 26.

      Antisocial behavior in the workplace

    7. 27.

      Between members of the organization

    8. 28.

      Social isolation

    9. 29.

      Silent treatment

    10. 30.

      Rumors

    11. 31.

      Attack private life

    12. 32.

      Excessive criticism

    13. 33.

      Withholding information

    14. 34.

      Depriving responsibility

    15. 35.

      Verbal aggression

    16. 36.

      Acts of physical violence

    17. 37.

      Regarded as a managerial style

    18. 38.

      Post Traumatic Stress (PTS)

    19. 39.

      Stress

    20. 40.

      Litigation

    21. 41.

      Violence

    22. 42.

      Retaliation

  • Employer Action

    1. 43.

      Fired

    2. 44.

      Constructive discharge

    3. 45.

      Refusal to hire

    4. 46.

      Suspended

    5. 47.

      Transferred

    6. 48.

      Reprimanded

    7. 49.

      No employer response

  • Relevant Laws—Legalities

    1. 50.

      Title VII sex discrimination

    2. 51.

      Title VII national origin discrimination

    3. 52.

      Title VII race discrimination

    4. 53.

      Title VII age discrimination

    5. 54.

      Title VII ethnicity discrimination

    6. 55.

      Title VII physical/mental ability discrimination

    7. 56.

      Title VII religious discrimination

    8. 57.

      Vietnam-era status discrimination

    9. 58.

      Americans with Disabilities Act

    10. 59.

      Vocational Rehabilitation Act

    11. 60.

      Pregnancy Discrimination Act

    12. 61.

      Age Discrimination Act

    13. 62.

      Whistleblower’s Protection Act

    14. 63.

      Occupational Safety & Health Act

    15. 64.

      Intentional infliction of emotional distress

    16. 65.

      Defamation of character

    17. 66.

      Constitutional (Federal)

    18. 67.

      Constitutional (State)

  • Outcomes Organizational and Legal

    1. 68.

      Morale

    2. 69.

      Safety

    3. 70.

      Productivity

    4. 71.

      Voluntary turnover

    5. 72.

      Ethics policy

    6. 73.

      Bullying disruptive behavior policy

    7. 74.

      Disruptive behavior policy

    8. 75.

      Codes of conduct

    9. 76.

      Finding

    10. 77.

      Remand

    11. 78.

      Monetary damages awarded

Appendix 2: Coding of the Salin Variables

  • Precipitating factors

    • Restructuring, downsizing, crises

    • Organizational changes

    • Changes in management

    • Changes in composition of work group

    • Cost cutting

    • Reengineering

    • Employees who feel powerless

    • Delegation of control to semi-autonomous work teams

    • Promotion of perpetuator

    • Arrival of a new manager

  • Motivating factors

    • High internal competition

    • Politicized climate

    • Relative ranking of rewards, incentives

    • Form of discipline for those perceived to violate established production norms

    • Constructive discharge

    • Expected benefits for perpetrator

  • Enabling factors

    • Presence of dissatisfaction/frustration with working situation or organizational climate

    • Perceived status incongruence/power imbalance

    • Autocratic style of management

    • Low perceived costs for perpetrator

    • Laissez faire leadership style

    • Lack of policy against bullying

    • Lack of punishment

    • Bullying seen as a rite of passage

    • Efficient means of accomplishing tasks

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martin, W., LaVan, H. Workplace Bullying: A Review of Litigated Cases. Employ Respons Rights J 22, 175–194 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-009-9140-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-009-9140-4

Key words

Search

Navigation