Delaware attorneys are not strangers to civility. In 2003, the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Bar Association promulgated the “Principles of Professionalism for Delaware Lawyers.” The Principles provide insight into the practice of law in the First State. “Civility” is defined in the Principles and is taken seriously by the courts and bar as a whole.

The Principles demonstrate that civility in the workplace is not limited to the cubicles of corporate America. Jerks at Work are not welcome in any workplace, including the lawyer’s workplace—the courtroom. Here’s a story about a judge outside of Delaware who is an advocate of civility:

U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange sanctioned lawyer Gerard Pignato for his extraordinarily jerky conduct. Pignato was reprimanded for comments he made in letters to his opposing counsel. As penance, the judge ordered the sharp-tongued Pignato to write an article on civility. He must include why he is writing the article and direct it to new attorneys, so they might avoid a similar embarrassment.

Here are some examples of his noxious and debasing comments:

Your self-serving comments are putting me to sleep.
Can you not say anything in a page or less?
You’re just a broker who refers difficult cases to experienced attorneys.
Be like a potted plant and sit quietly in the corner.

{The court’s full Opinion can be read here.}

You don’t have to be a lawyer to experience this type of attack from a colleague, vendor, or customer, even. This conduct is very effective—no matter how illogical, it is difficult to jut brush off degrading comments.

I think Judge Miles-LaGrange should be applauded for taking action when she saw what can be described only as unbecoming conduct. And her response is commendable, as well. Unlike a monetary fine, Mr. Pignato is forced to sit down, pen in hand, and mull over his behavior and put into words just how dishonorable his actions were and how embarrassing this type of attitude is for other members of the bar. Plus, if his article deters even a single junior lawyer from scribing a seething note to opposing counsel, he’ll have made a real contribution to the profession.

The Preamble to the Principles of Professionalism states:

The purpose of adopting the Principles is to promote and foster the ideals of professional courtesy, conduct and cooperation. These Principles are fundamental to the functioning of our system of justice and public confidence in that system.

Maybe Mr. Pignato can use the Delaware Principles as a reference as he writes his article for the Oklahoma Bar Journal.

[Hat tip to the Legal Profession Blog]

John Phillips at The Word on Employment Law noted the ABA Journal’s post on this story, as well.

Robert Sutton’s book, The No A**hole Rule, has been an eye-opener to many, myself included. In his book, Sanford Professor Bob Sutton (pictured below) addresses a message sure to resonate with every employee who has ever worked with or for a toxic coworker or boss.

Michael P. Masklanka, managing partner of Ford & Harrison in Dallas, has written a top-rate article for the April 2008 edition of In-House Texas titled, No Jerks Allowed: How and Why to Stop Angry, Rude and Demeaning Workplace Behavior.

The piece is heavy on the human-touch element that is essential for an effective work environment. But for each antecdote, Maslanka follows up with a hard-hitting statistic, many of which derived from Robert Sutton’s book (or, as I like to call it, “The HR Bible”), The No A**hole Rule.

Mike has been kind enough to share the article with our readers up North. Here’s an excerpt to whet the appetitie. Mike is discussing the revealing results of a “jerk experiment”:

41 employees carried a palm-sized computer for two to three weeks. Researchers prompted the employees at random intervals to answer questions about their interactions with co-workers and then to rate their resulting feelings as positive, negative or neutral. Here’s the expected: 30 percent were positive interactions, 10 percent negative, the rest neutral. Here’s the unexpected: The negative interactions had a fivefold stronger effect on mood than the positive ones and thus took much longer to get over. Talk about radioactive.

For those of you who, like myself, are strongly “anti-jerk,”this article is a must-read. Thanks, Mike!

For prior posts on Bullying and Jerks in the Workplace, see:

Are Bullies Beating Up Your Employees’ Health?

The Cost of Bully Legislation

Bullying in the Workplace is Water Cooler Talk on Good Morning America

Bullying Gets Physical, . . . But Torture?

Team-building or torture? A sales rep in Provo, Utah has filed suit over what appears to be an extreme case of workplace bullying. The young man claims, and his employer doesn’t particularly deny, that he was waterboarded by his supervisor as part of a “team-building exercise.” He claims that he volunteered when his boss asked for participants for a “new motivational exercise.” But the 26-year-old says that he had no idea that the “exercise” would involve his supervisor pouring water out of a gallon jug over his nose and mouth, while his coworkers held him down. The last time the team had done an exercise outside, it was an egg toss.

His supervisor remarked immediately afterwards, “You saw how hard Chad fought for air right there. I want you to go back inside and fight that hard to make sales.”

It seems that the supervisor truly believed that causing your reports to feel the near-death experience of forced drowning is actually a motivational tool. The employee has filed suit for assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and wrongful termination.

Another of the supervisor’s “motivational tools” was to remove all chairs, forcing employees to stand for the entire shift. This was his response to a day without sales. He kept a “motivational 2 x 4″ wooden “paddle” on his desk on stand-by.

Normally, this is where we would provide sage advice on preventative measures, “be proactive with an anti-bullying policy,” and reparative tactics, such as follow-up training for all employees. This case, though, is so extreme those normal reactions seem inappropriate. Instead, my recommendation is to to take a very close look at the supervisors in your workplace. Keep your eyes open for physically aggressive behavior, even if it’s couched as “positive reinforcement.”

This will definitely be a case to keep our eyes on.

Our Annual Seminar for Employers was held today at the Chase Center on the Riverfront in Wilmington, Delaware. The attendance at the seminar was our best ever, with more than 130 of Delaware’s best human resource professionals, labor relations specialists, senior managers, and small business owners.

Our many thanks to The Honorable Mary Pat Thynge, who spoke candidly about the federal mediation process. Her comments were direct and insightful for everyone, including for the attorneys!

Another thanks to all of the attendees who completed and submitted a survey at the end of the day. We’re looking forward to reviewing your comments. Our objective is to make the seminar as effective and enjoyable as possible. Your opinion really tells us what we can do to better to maximize the client experience. We are especially interested to learn what topics most interest you for future seminars. If you were in attendance today but did not have an opportunity to submit an evaluation, just let us know and we’ll send you one that can be completed and returned electronically–no stamp necessary!

Again, thank you to all of our clients, colleagues, and new friends, who gave us your attention and participation for a very full day on a variety of employment-law topics.

This week, on Good Morning America, a feature segment ran about Bullying In the Workplace. The forums on the GMA website, where viewers can post comments about the show’s topic. There was an overwhelming response to the Bullying segment. So much response, in fact, that Tory Johnson, GMA’s Workplace Contributor, was invited back the next day to continue the discussion.

On Tuesday, the topic focused on how to spot a bully at work. On Wednesday, the discussion was aimed on how to handle a bully if you are being targeted. Both episodes were spot on. One of the best points I heard Ms. Johnson make was:

Document, document, document.

On Wednesday’s episode, Tory Johnson talked about documentation of the bullying as a survival strategy. Of course, in the world of the employment lawyer, nothing could be more true. One reason documentation can be so important is for your mental health. When you are on the receiving end of workplace bullying, you are likely to experience a great deal of self-doubt.

Bullying usually comes in passive-agressive forms. A roll of the eyes, a deep sigh, a whispered comment, or a mumbled expression of exasperation can all seem very normal when taken in isolation. Sure, most of us occassionally give in to the daily frustrations and take those feelings out on our co-workers and colleagues.

That’s why it’s not uncommon for targets of bullying to get push-back if they do report the behavior. Likely, they’ll get a response of, “Oh, that’s just her personality,” or, “He didn’t mean it, he was having a really tough day,” or, my personal favorite, “She’s like that with everyone.”****

Why don’t HR professionals and managers seem so determined not to believe that there is bullying on in their working environment? Because they’re people. People don’t like to get involved in personality conflicts. Inevitably, the manager will be on the “bad side” of at least one of the fighting employees. And let’s face it, nobody likes to be unpopular.

Documentation helps with both problems. First, by having a written record of the conduct, you won’t question yourself about the validity of your feelings. When it’s all set out on paper with dates and details, that chronology makes it clear that it is not just a series of isolated incidents, but a regular barrage of assaultive conduct.

Second, that documented chronology will force superiors to see the same picture that you’ve been seeing. To say to a manager, “Sarah is hurting my feelings,” might be effective–but it’s highly unlikely. But what if you said to that same manager, “Sarah has spent the last several weeks making inappropriate comments directed towards me. She has also spread untrue rumors to my co-workers about me, which has negatively affected my professional reputation. (Or, how about, “defamatory” instead of untrue?! Even better!!) When your manager wants examples of that behavior, you’ll have them.

And if the manager still doesn’t bite, that’s ok. Keep documenting. If for no other reason but to prevent that question, “Am I just being oversensitive?”

[****A sidenote on that last one: Employers, please, please, please, do not EVER use this as an “excuse” for an employee’s socially unacceptable behavior. If you would not want the comment made to your mother or to your spouse, then it should not be said in the workplace. Although it sure can feel like it sometimes, the workplace is NOT a battle zone. Save your combat gear for that Nintendo Wii.]

There is a general agreement among commentators that Workplace Bullying is an undesirable workplace behavior that affects the bottom line. Bob Sutton’s book, The “No A**hole Rule”, was tremendously popular among the B-School types and HR professionals alike.

There has been a recent flood of proposed legislation that would make bully behavior unlawful. And, of course, laws that restrict are laws that have remedies. The legislation, thus far unsuccessful, would provide another basis for employment litigation.

At some point, there must be a cost-benefit analysis by legislators and advocates. Workplace bullying is bad for business. It leads to increased absenteeism and turnover rates, and is tied to reduced productivity and teamwork. The costs of recruiting and training, managing “problem employees,”
and trying to rally the affected employees’ support. These are all costs that the business must bear when it permits bullying to go on in the workplace.

But what is the cost of increased employment litigation to businesses? Any employer that has earned its stripes in the courtroom knows that the cost is no small burden. Litigation is expensive. More expensive than the direct and indirect impact of bullying?

Great question! At some point, those who are advocating for this new legislation should stop to have a look.

Not that I am an advocate of bullying, of course. But I do think that the recent movement against bullying will serve only to help prevent it. Part of prevention is knowledge. Now that employers are becomming more aware of the costs of bullying, the market will likely work to eradicate it far better additional legislation.

As a Tennessee appellate court noted in rejecting Joan Frye’s lawsuit against her hospital employer, “[T]he fact that a supervisor is mean, hard to get along with, overbearing, bellig­erent or otherwise hostile and abusive does not violate civil rights statutes.”
Workplace Bullying is a current hot topic in the business world. There are lots of theories about how bullying costs employer real dollars and cents in a variety of ways. From fdlr.com, here is another potential cost–employees’ health.

Given the rapidly increasing cost of health insurance, this theory gives businesses another reason to put a stop to bullying behavior.

fdlr.com reports:

When it comes to employee health, bullying is bad for business.

Workplace bullying can create a cache of health problems for workers who feel overburdened by stress, said Gregg Brewer, employee assistance program supervisor for IntegNET, a division of Agnesian HealthCare.

Employee Assistance Programs are designed to prevent workplace bullying and solve conflicts that arise at work, among other things.

Brewer said someone who is being bullied at work is often under a tremendous amount of pressure.

“It leads to stress,” he said. “And generally people who are under a lot of stress have 45 percent higher health- care costs.”

Physical signs of stress include rapid breathing, fatigue, sleep and appetite changes, Brewer said. Emotional symptoms can include anger, irritability and forgetfulness and cause employees to have a hard time concentrating at work.

These stress symptoms can lead to changes in productivity and interaction with co-workers and lower morale, Brewer said.

More serious health problems have also been linked to stress.

“There is a strong connection between stress and cardiovascular issues,” Brewer said.

Stress can cause blood pressure to increase and can lead to strokes and other heart problems, he said.

Brewer said it might also lead employees struggling to cope to drugs and alcohol.