Bullying at the Workplace
Workplace bullying is a psychological, social, physical, and verbal abuse by another individual, employer, and colleagues (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). It can occur in various establishments such as state organizations, community groups, workshops, shops, restaurants, and cafes (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Moreover, not only permanent employees face the possibility of workplace bullying, but also the casual ones, apprentices, interns, experienced students and volunteers. It is necessary to say that the phenomena such as stalking, assault, and violence at workplace are criminal offenses that require immediate reporting in case they take place (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). Thus, it is essential to discuss the importance of stopping bullying and the approaches that can be implemented to prevent it on the job.
The prevention of workplace bullying is vital since it affects both the organization and employees (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). Its impacts can be categorized into organizational, human, and spillover effects. One of the causes of bullying is the employees increasing intentions to quit, lowered organizational commitment, and decreasing level of workers life and job satisfaction (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Besides, these actions reduce the companys performance and staffs productivity. Thus, it is imperative to address the issue in order to ensure the organizational survival.
To continue, the human effects include the influence on the health and welfare of employees (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). The staff members are likely to show signs of physical and psychological stress including anxiety, depression, nervousness, reduced self-esteem, muscular complaints, sleeplessness, and fatigue (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Besides, one should mention the decrease in work quality and output, higher absenteeism, and lower job satisfaction. Furthermore, the victims of workplace bullying might suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). However, not only those who experience the bullying directly demonstrate the wellbeing and health issues, but also those who witness the behavior.
Place New Order
Bullying in the workplace has a significant influence on victims, witnesses, their families, the organization and the teamwork (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). Moreover, every victim reacts differently to such behaviors. For instance, they might experience low self-esteem, impaired concentration at work, anxiety, sleep disturbance, panic attacks, and distress (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Witnessing bullying makes workers suffer from stress, anger, and unhappy feelings concerning work culture; sometimes, they are overwhelmed with the guilt of not stopping the act despite knowing the behavior is unlawful (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011).
Additionally, the impacts of workplace bullying can spill over into areas not interrelated to the job environment (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). For instance, workplace aggression and abusive supervision may penetrate into family relationships (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011).
To avoid all the negative outcomes, it is vital for an organization to respond, recognize prompt signs of workers affected by bullying, and support them in seeking help. Consequently, organizations should ensure the behavior under consideration is dealt with to make sure the employees health and safety are protected, to enhance the productivity of the company and its workers. They should adopt various measures to deal with the shortcomings of the bullying in places of work (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). First of all, the companies should reduce the effect of bullying on the group as the initial measure in overcoming the problem. Promoting a positive workplace culture is yet another way to solve the issue (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). The organization can model and identify the kinds of behaviors required in the group. It should also create a work culture built on respect and stress that bullying is not accepted (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011).
Providing respectful and regular performance feedback is another policy that companies can adopt to cope with workplace bullying (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). Employers are responsible for monitoring workflow, and providing feedback to workers regarding their work (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). It is not considered bullying if management offers proper assessment with the intention of supporting staff in improving their behavior and performance (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011).
Another approach is identifying and calling bullying behaviors early (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). In the case of bullying, it is essential for the management to recognize and act on it as early as possible to maintain a culture where it is unacceptable (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). The institution must have policies that address such acts. If bullying behavior occurs, it is vital for the victim to notify the administration (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). However, some individuals might not be aware their behavior may amount to bullying. In such a case, the management should have a conversation with employees concerning their behavior and the effects their actions have on colleagues (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Naturally, it is not easy to have such talks with workers that are why it is essential for a member of human resource team to be present during it.
Managing workplace risks and stressors is another measure that can aid in fighting bullying on the job (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011). Role conflicts and uncertainty puts a lot of stress on employees, thus, leading to behaviors under analysis (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). As a result, it is vital for organizations to ensure that their workers recognize their roles and acquire the suitable skills concerning their job (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). It will help to minimize the work circumstances that might lead to bullying. Finally, the risk of employees seeing various opinions and management action as bullying has to be made as low as possible. Organizational policies must include a clear statement of the morals that are anticipated and the process to deal with the cases when these are not met (Caponecchia & Wyatt, 2011).
The Benefits of Grievance Procedure
Grievances are dissatisfactions that employees have with their employer (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). While handling grievances in the place of work, there is no legally binding process which must be followed. However, the procedure is necessary since it brings benefits for a company. The essential principles of the procedures include promptness, fairness, representation, and consistency.
- Our custom writing services includes:
- Custom essay writing for the best grades;
- CV, resume and cover letters which would
make you successful
- Thesis and dissertations writing by academic
To start from, the process is vital to aid in outlining the means of addressing the problems that emerge in working relationship between employers and staff (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). Additionally, unsolved grievances may lead to workers resistance to change, risen absenteeism, lack of staffs goodwill, low morale and productivity, employees frustration, resignation and loss of competent staff (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011).
The availability of grievance procedure ensures the staff members obtain equal treatment in similar circumstances and assists in dealing with workplace hindrances in a rational and fair way (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Grievance measures are necessary as they offer workers a course of action in situations where there are issues that are beyond solving through the normal communication channels with the executives (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). The procedure offers contact point and a period for dealing with the problems in the workplace. Besides, organizations with GPs do not require embarking on external disputes resolutions procedures like employment tribunal to resolve the conflicts (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Nevertheless, GP helps to prevent only insignificant employment hindrances from increasing (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). Besides, the lack of a solution to the existing grievances may still lead to dispute. Thus, it is important for the executives to set up measures that provide consistency and fairness in handling every claim employee raises (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). For instance, workers might complain about harassment, new working practices, discrimination, discipline, grading, health and safety, non-pay terms and conditions, staffing levels and wages.
Both organization and employees benefit from an existing useful GP (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). With regard to company, the procedure ensures consistency in application and formulation of policy and makes sure middle management and supervisors comply with it since their decisions are hinged on the GPs (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Moreover, the top administration of an establishment can save energy and time as it does not have to deal with less significant problems that can be solved by the juniors and consider only the issues of great importance (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). Additionally, GP is instrumental in the creation of a workplace culture that promotes openness and trust. It warrants uninterrupted work throughout the time that the labor agreement is enforced (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). Moreover, the procedure acts as a source of information for the organization executives concerning the issues at the place of work that might aid in formulating corrective measures.
As for the employees, first benefit of having GP is that it develops the perceptions of fairness and equity (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). They are offered an opportunity to express their opinions before third-party arbitrators and top management. In fact, they are encouraged to articulate their thoughts and concerns through a grievance agreement without being terrified of the possibility of reprisal (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). Besides, GP offers a fair and speedy technique for handling complaints and provides an avenue through which workers frustration and discontent can be conveyed. Furthermore, it acts as a conflict management and dispute resolution instrument (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). The procedure offers a peaceful platform for minimizing pressures and fear of employees and coping with differences at the place of work without the necessity to embark on economic sanctions or halt work (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Thus, with the help of GP, minor conflicts are prevented from growing into serious disputes.
The Analysis of the Extent and Nature of Employee Involvement and Participation Practices at Qatar Airways
Employee participation and involvement might lead to significant developments in the performance of the organization (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). The framework for analyzing employee participation includes form, scope, level, and depth. The form entails a combination of indirect and direct schemes. The scope considers fields workers contribute to, from minor insignificant to major significant. The level consists of work departments and work group (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). Finally, the depth involves the analysis of the extent to which workers can influence decisions made by management (Cummings & Worley, 2014).
The first aspect to be considered while discussing the employee participation and involvement practices at Qatar Airways is whether the organization uses a joint employee-employer agreement regarding participation that are crucial (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). EPI arrangements that are approved jointly generate a sense of ownership in workers, thus, leading to higher commitment in realizing the companys schemes (Cummings & Worley, 2014). Nevertheless, in case management imposes the employee participation arrangements, staff members lose the sense of being important that minimizing their interest in ensuring the business succeeds.
Moreover, the nature and extent of employee participation practices at Qatar Airways should guarantee compatibility between the organizational characteristics and participation methods (Cummings & Worley, 2014). One should take into consideration the companys activities, structure, technology, and history characteristics. Obviously, the processes and schemes considered suitable for organizations with longer existence may not be appropriate for the requirements of newer ones that were established in a completely different social, industrial, and commercial context (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). In addition, the primary guiding principle of participation practices must be compatible with the existing circumstances of the business (Cummings & Worley, 2014). For instance, it is not significant to acquire employee participation practices to improve products or service delivery if the organization operates in a product market where the price regulates the competitive benefit of the good rather than quality and reliability. Therefore, one should definitely analyze the existing circumstances of Qatar Airways and determine whether participation practices are compatible with its needs (Cummings & Worley, 2014).
Besides, the resources distributed towards EPI schemes are yet another feature that has to be studied (Cummings & Worley, 2014). For employee participation methods to be effective, suitable resources are required to accommodate for the expenditures including the time lost, meetings, training, and paid leaves (J. Bartlett & M. Bartlett, 2011). The lack of resources might lead to failure of the employee participation initiative. Finally, the level of support that management provides is an essential aspect that can be analyzed as well (Cummings & Worley, 2014). To sum up, the success of employee involvement initiatives is measured regarding its influences in the realization of the organizational determinations.