I am not sure that the “Why” was discussed enough at this global conference. The discussions in the sessions I sat in were dominated by people trying to clarify what bullying and harassment are and what variations nor subcultures there are, or what sections of the community are most affected by workplace bullying and harassment. And I am not sure that all the presenters were targeting the workplace, even though the association and conference titles specify this.
I have been trying to challenge some of the speakers at this week’s conference of the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment to think further. In a panel discussion on day one, I asked why party politics is not being discussed. The panellists were gracious in responding and challenged my thinking.
Workplace bullying, harassment and other psychosocial risks are no longer fringe issues – they are central to how we think about safety, fairness and dignity at work. One forum that has been shaping this conversation for more than two decades is the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH) and its much‑anticipated biannual conference. This year’s event brings researchers, regulators and practitioners together in Canberra to tackle some of the most difficult problems in working life, with a strong emphasis on practical solutions, especially pertaining to sexual harassment and gender-based violence.
Professor Carlo Caponecchia, who is presenting at the conference, made some time for a couple of questions.
Continue reading “Solving Psychosocial Harm at Work: The Upcoming Global IAWBH Conference in Canberra”For the last few years in Australia, occupational health and safety (OHS) laws have required that the prevention of psychosocial hazards be given the same prominence as the prevention of physical hazards. The most effective recommendation for change is the redesign of work, but very few employers seem to be applying this control. Many employers are still asking (their Human Resources officer) what this psychosocial stuff is all about.
Examining organisational culture at one Australian institution that failed to prevent and may have generated psychological harm in the 1970s provides some context for contemporary OHS struggles.
Last year, some Australian media, especially the right-wing press like Newscorp and its suite of commentators, were incensed when journalist Laura Tingle stated that she believed that Australia was a racist country. But statistics seem to support Tingle’s belief, and as occupational health and safety (OHS) operates within that culture, is it also racist?
A new discussion paper from OHS consultancy firm fr&nk (based on a series of LinkedIn posts) acknowledges racism is a problem and suggests ways to address this psychosocial hazard.
Most of you will have been able to determine some of my values from the thousands of articles I have written here, but sometimes it is worth stopping, reviewing and clarifying. I met a friend in Zurich of a different political leaning from mine last week who, in a simple way, confirmed some of my thoughts.
He said that we need to respect each other. This is not difficult, but it can create enormous conflict and anxiety, especially as we continue to learn how traditional categorisations and approaches are no longer valid and may never have been.
You should have heard by now that Safe Work Australia (SWA) has come through with guidance on having work-related suicides included in each jurisdiction’s occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation as incidents that will require notification to the local OHS regulator. If you haven’t, get a new OHS or Human Resources (HR) adviser because the future will be a bumpy, uncomfortable and challenging ride.
Warning: this article discusses suicide.
