ILNews

Quality of Life: Don’t be a slug when dealing with a workplace bully

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Quality of LifeI don’t know if you recognize the name Scut Farkus, but if you do, you know that he is the coonskin-capped bully who tormented Ralphie Parker and his friends in the movie, “A Christmas Story.” In the film, Farkus terrorizes the kids in his neighborhood to the point that they run away whenever they see him. In one memorable scene, Ralphie’s brother, Randy, falls down while running to get away. The narrator’s description of the mishap is one of my all-time favorites: “Randy just lay on the ground like a slug. It was his only defense.”

Have you ever had to deal with a bully? If so, hopefully you didn’t have to resort to becoming slug-like in order to survive the experience.

Bullies in the workplace are not all that different from bullies on the playground – in large part because grown-up bullies (is that an oxymoron?) use many of the same tactics as their younger counterparts.

According to a 2010 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, a nonprofit organization in Bellingham, Wash., 35 percent of American workers reported being bullied at work.

In 2007 at a national conference on professional responsibility sponsored by the American Bar Association, one panel discussion focused on workplace bullies. Because the legal profession by its nature includes a great deal of competitiveness and confrontation, legal professionals sometimes misdirect those behaviors toward colleagues at inappropriate times and in inappropriate circumstances. Some firms acknowledge that bullies do exist in the legal community and create policies that attempt to weed out bullies or prevent the hiring of bullies in the first place.

WBI research shows that bullying usually takes one of four forms. 1) The bully can scream, taunt or yell, often in front of others, causing distress and humiliation for the target. The practiced bully knows how to bring the target’s performance into question in situations where the person is unable to defend himself – when the files, facts or figures needed to back up a position are not readily available. 2) The bully can criticize his or her target in private, ripping the individual to shreds and making accusations of gross incompetence. Interestingly, this tactic is usually inflicted upon an extremely competent target. 3) The bully is inconsistent – friendly one moment and extremely critical the next. This keeps the target off balance, never knowing what to expect. 4) The bully can make it impossible for the target to succeed by denying the resources the target needs to do his or her job, or by setting unrealistic deadlines that are impossible to meet.

Some bullies employ more than one of the tactics listed above. Most bullies are quite adept at the art from years of practice, and may start with what appear to be well-meaning constructive criticisms. At this stage, it is easy for the target to internalize the criticisms, taking them to heart and trying to “improve” his or her work performance. Initially, this is where the bully can do the most damage – because the target doesn’t yet realize that he or she is becoming the victim of a bully. It is the repetitive nature of the criticism that can start to chip away at the target’s confidence, causing the target to actually begin making mistakes due to the unrelenting stress caused by the criticisms.

It is important that the target recognize that he or she is being bullied – hopefully before it reaches a critical stage, as the effects of bullying can be severe. Early signs include: 1) You find yourself dreading the start of the work week; 2) You are tense and on edge when you are at the office; 3) When you go to the doctor, you find that your blood pressure has skyrocketed, and you are plagued by maladies that are caused by stress; 4) You find yourself taking days off for “mental health breaks.”

If you are the victim of a bully, you need either to confront the offender directly, and/or report it to management. In most workplaces, you will be told to try to handle it yourself, at least initially. To the extent you can, respond to the bully in a clear, concise, reasoned (and most importantly) firm fashion. Many times bullies will back off when they are confronted.

Sometimes, though, the practiced bully knows how to respond when confronted and can often manipulate the situation in his or her favor. It is best to document every bullying encounter that you experience and take that information to management or human resources. You may even want to seek counseling if the bully’s behavior starts to drain you emotionally.

According to a WBI study, targets are often more technically skilled than their bullies and are often the “go-to” veteran employees to whom other employees turn for guidance. When targets take steps to preserve their dignity and their right to be treated with respect, the bullies escalate their efforts to intimidate and degrade the target.

If you are the target of a bully, try to remember that he or she most likely has zeroed in on you because you are competent and sees you as a threat. You’ve heard the adage, “the best defense is a good offense.” The bully misplaces that advice and uses it to try to manipulate and threaten people he or she fears. Bullies go on the offensive toward those who aren’t actually threatening them – as the perceived threat is only in their minds.

Bullies engage in their bad behavior because they are insecure and feel vulnerable. That may be small comfort when it is happening to you, but it is something to keep in mind if you ever become a target. It is also important to remember that bullies usually get their comeuppance sooner or later. Even Scut Farkus got his in the end.•

__________

Jonna Kane MacDougall is assistant dean for external affairs and alumni relations at the IU Robert H. McKinney School of Law. A professional career/life coach, MacDougall can be contacted at 317-775-1804 or whatsnextcoaching@gmail.com. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  2. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  3. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  4. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  5. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

ADVERTISEMENT