Posted on

Bullying and Harassment

Subject: Bullying and Harassment

Research Question:

“Are non-management employees, such as disposal staff, being bullied, harassed or discriminated against, in any manner, form or signifier, by the direction degrees within the NHS ( National Health Service ) ? ”

Introduction to Research Proposal

This assignment is a proposed research survey that will be carried out in the spring of 2010. The research inquiry has been identified and grounds and justifications for this proposed research survey can be explained in the literature reappraisal. The chief survey is based on intimidation and torment in the workplace. Explanations of what intimidation and torment are and how they are dealt with within the UK political system can besides be identified in the literature reappraisal. The administration that I have chosen to analyze is the NHS. Based on a old survey between two Primary Care Trusts and working in the NHS myself, I found it to be a absorbing administration to implement my survey. The assignment is a counsel tool for the chief survey and undertaking in the spring for the faculty HR3P09N ( Current Issues in HRM ) .

Research Question

“Are non-management employees, such as disposal staff, being bullied, harassed or discriminated against, in any manner, form or signifier, by the direction degrees with the NHS ( National Health Service ) ? ”

Purposes, Aims and Hypothesiss

The aim of this research proposal is a readying tool for a undertaking and survey in the spring. It is a assisting tool, when transporting out my research survey as it will hold already been thought through, in footings of background information, a proposed timetable of the events to come and the research methodological analysis, how I will transport out my research. My purpose is to bring forth a questionnaire for NHS non-management employees sing intimidation and torment, and whether or non they are or have been in a certain state of affairs sing intimidation, torment and favoritism.

Literature Review

Since its launch in 1948, the NHS has grown to go the universe ‘s largest publically funded wellness service. The system was born out of a long-held ideal that good health care should be available to all, irrespective of wealth – and that rule remains at its nucleus. With the exclusion of charges for some prescriptions and optical and dental services, the NHS remains free at the point of usage for anyone who is occupant in the UK – more than 60m people. It covers everything from prenatal showing and everyday interventions for coughs and colds to open bosom surgery, accident and exigency intervention and end-of-life attention. Although funded centrally from national revenue enhancement, NHS services in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are managed individually. While some differences have emerged between these systems in recent old ages, they remain similar in most respects and go on to be talked about every bit belonging to a individual, incorporate system. Nationwide, the NHS employs more than 1.7m people. Of those, merely abruptly of half are clinically qualified, including about 120,000 infirmary physicians, more than 40,000 general practicians ( GPs ) , more than half a million nurses and about 25,000 ambulance staff.

Bullying and torment in the workplace is a job that many employers will come across. If intimidation is handled severely, or goes unbridled, there can be serious jobs for an administration. However, behaviour that is considered strong-arming by one individual, possibly considered as steadfast direction by another. There are many definitions of strong-arming. It can be said that intimidation is violative, intimidating or dissing behaviour towards an person. There are many actions that both employers and employees can take when intimidation and torment takes topographic point at work. Bullying and torment, a batch of the clip, is based on the evidences of sex, race, sexual orientation, disablement and spiritual positions. Over the old ages, Torahs and Acts of the Apostless have come into topographic point to guarantee that receivers of intimidation and torment can take legal action. Harmonizing to Hannabuss ( 1998 ) , “It causes anxiousness, illness, low morale, tenseness, misgiving, overwork and emphasis. It may originate from workplace aggression or from sexual torment. It may be premeditated or non, overt or covert, emotional or not” , ( Hannabuss 1998, pg 304 ) .

There is no specific statute law on intimidation and torment. The Health and Safety at Work Act places a general responsibility on employers to protect wellness, safety and public assistance of their employees and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations sets out the agencies of making so. Anti-discrimination statute law, the Sex Discrimination, Race Relations, Disability Discrimination Acts, may use in some cases. The Criminal Justice and Public Order and the Protection from Harassment Acts may afford protection. The Employment Rights Act trade with the right to claim ‘unfair constructive dismissal ‘ in the face of an employer ‘s breach of contract which could include a failure to protect wellness and safety. However, adept advice should be obtained on all these steps before any trust is placed upon them. Harmonizing to Berry ( 2006 ) , “

The NHS has so put into topographic point there ain policies on intimidation and torment. Two recent tribunal instances could hold really serious deductions for all NHS Trusts. The landmark opinion in the instance of Majrowski v Guy ‘s St Thomas NHS Trust set the case in point that employers can now be held vicariously responsible for strong-arming of their staff by their staff and in Helen Green v Deutsche Bank Group Services ( UK ) Ltd the High Court upheld a claim for personal hurt against the employer due to psychiatric unwellness caused by strong-arming and torment. The tribunal besides upheld a claim under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and awarded amendss in surplus of ?800,000.

In Green v DB Group Services ( UK ) Ltd the High Court found that, strong-arming and torment had taken topographic point. There had been a “relentless run of mean and vindictive behaviour” by four adult females colleagues and a male co-worker had treated her in a “hostile, disrespectful, dismissive, confrontatory” mode. The claimant ‘s line directors knew or ought to hold known what was traveling on, and that a sensible and responsible employer would hold intervened every bit shortly as it became cognizant of the job.

Perpetrators would hold been warned about their unacceptable behavior and reminded that disciplinary proceedings could be taken against them if they persisted. The defendant knew of the claimant ‘s old history of depression and prescribed anti-depressant medicine which indicated she was more vulnerable than others. The emphasis created was far more than that usually to be expected in the workplace and it was foreseeable that some people would non be able to stand such degrees of emphasis. Workplace emphasis was the cause of the two nervous dislocations suffered by the claimant.

The behavior of the persons concerned amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 because it was targeted at the person, occurred with great frequence and was calculated to straiten. NHS Trusts need to guarantee that they take a pro-active function in the direction of intimidation and torment, and in peculiar where the victim is known to be vulnerable. Arranging for staff to go to harassment preparation was non considered a sufficient defense mechanism in the Green instance because the alleged toughs did non take the preparation earnestly and the High Court decided that the employer should hold done more to forestall the torment.

The NHS 2004 and 2005 staff studies identified staff-on-staff intimidation and torment as a cardinal issue to turn to, with 10 per cent of NHS staff describing sing intimidation, torment and maltreatment from co-workers in the past 12 months and 7 per cent coverage sing intimidation, torment and maltreatment from managers/supervisors. More worryingly, merely 54 per cent of staff really reported the incidents. Bullying and torment is non merely confined to the wellness service, it is now being recognised as a job across all sectors. The costs of strong-arming and harassment include increased sickness absence, low productiveness, high staff turnover, costs of possible judicial proceeding and harm to the repute of the administration. Research has indicated that intimidation and torment can hold the same negative impact on the perceivers as it does on the people being bullied, to the extent that perceivers may take to go forth the employer, peculiarly if they do non comprehend the employer to be covering with the intimidation and torment in a satisfactory mode. Stereotyped images of intimidation and torment in the NHS frequently focus about junior physicians being berated by irate senior advisers. Although junior physicians may be more vulnerable to strong-arming and torment, in world it reaches all degrees of the administration, impacting anyone from managers down. This counsel is intended for all staff throughout the NHS in England and in the instance of junior physicians will supplement work being carried out by NHS Employers Equality and Diversity squad.

Research Methodology

Quantitative methodological analysiss are concerned with measurement ( quantifying ) variables in a numeral manner. This methodological analysis has the advantage that informations generated can be analysed scientifically and in a crystalline manner. A disadvantage of such quantitative methods is that by cut downing variables down to simple numeral steps, some of the rich context of life can be lost. In short, this attack has high dependability but has jobs in footings of cogency. Quantitative research is basically numerical. Qualitative methodological analysiss are concerned with analyzing behaviors, statements or duologues within their contexts. Datas are non reduced to Numberss or measurings, but are analysed as a whole. Datas are analysed for common subjects and significances. A popular manner of obtaining qualitative informations is by utilizing interviews. Some interviews are extremely structured and utilize closed inquiries, such as ‘Do you think all war is unjustified? Yes/no ‘ . Questions formed in this manner limit the scope of replies, so efficaciously the informations can be coded with Numberss and treated as quantitative. However, such limitations of replies is more common in questionnaires, since the point of interviews is that they allow rich, elaborated informations to be gathered. Therefore, many interviews will utilize unfastened inquiries, such as, ‘In what state of affairss do you believe war is justifiable? ‘ This allows the respondent to give a elaborate and considered response, including attitudes and sentiments. An advantage is that rich context of the information is retained. However, a disadvantage is that findings are less easy generalised, since the methods do non ensue in informations that can be analysed statistically in footings of chance. In short this attack has high cogency, but has jobs with respect to dependability.

The research methods that I have chosen to transport out are questionnaires and interviews. Questionnaires are a cost effectual and simple manner to garner informations ; they are by and large used to try some information. With questionnaires it is extremely of import to detect ethical guidelines and Torahs on confidentiality. Questionnaires are inexpensive, simple and speedy to administrate. Information can be gathered about intangible features ( constructs and concepts that we ca n’t straight detect, such as attitudes and sentiments ) . Consequences can inform hereafter survey, and can supply a simple step for comparing between groups. However, there are restrictions to implementing questionnaires as a research method ; these are dependability and cogency issues. A questionnaire relies on upon the research worker ‘s ain definition and apprehension of the concept being measured ( which may be biased, inaccurate, excessively loose or excessively narrow ) . Closed inquiries ( where respondents select from replies provided ) are common i9n questionnaires and can take to responses that do n’t to the full stand for the respondent ‘s echt sentiment or place. Closed inquiries are posed in a manner to let merely a limited scope of replies, and frequently ask for the respondent to click or circle their chosen response. Open inquiries are asked in order to ask for more item and a wider scope of responses from the respondent.

My 2nd pick of research method that I will be transporting out is interviews. Interviews range from extremely structured inquiry and reply Sessionss ( basically, a questionnaire administered orally ) to really loose, informal conversations. Interviews have an advantage over questionnaires in that misinterpretations of inquiries can be clarified, but they carry a hazard that experimenter effects may originate. On the other manus, looser signifiers of interview can garner more elaborate information, but are unfastened to researcher prejudice and are debatable with respect to dependability and cogency. Advantages of this method include the high degree of item that can be acquired, the flexibleness of the inquiries that can be asked, the high ecological cogency, and its usage as a tool for bring forthing thoughts for subsequent experimental research. Disadvantages include the jobs of dependability and cogency, trouble in retroflexing, limited ability to generalize from findings, the possible prejudice of reading and ‘leading ‘ from the interviewer, and the potency for demand features.

Previous research has been carried out in footings of mensurating whether non direction NHS staff are or have been bullied, harassed or discriminated. Burnes and Pope ( 2007 ) , carried out a survey into two Primary Care Trusts in the NHS, where they were detecting negative behaviors in the workplace, including intimidation and torment. The result of the research survey showed peculiar attending to societal factors, such as aggression and how this can take to bulling and torment in the workplace. The research method that they have used is a questionnaire, which as stated above has its strengths and failings. One of the chief results of the survey is that it states that the NHS has the highest degree of negative behavior so any other administration, which provides information to non direction employees being bullied and harassed, “of the populace sector, the NHS appears to see one of the highest degrees of negative behaviors with, in some studies, over 50 % of staff experiencing/witnessing negative behaviours” , ( Burnes and Pope 2007, pg 286 ) .

A random sample of non direction employees within the NHS will be approached at different locations within the Barnet country of London. Uniting employees from infirmary and GP surgery sites, I will plan and bring forth a questionnaire with a mixture of closed and unfastened ended inquiries to have a diverse sum of information. I plan to plan my questionnaire in two parts, the first will mensurate the demographic variables, e.g. age, place, gender, the 2nd portion will incorporate inquiries that will supply an reply to my research inquiry, holding both quantitative and qualitative inquiries will give me both important, dependable and rich with information replies. The mark population will be a upper limit of 100 and a lower limit of 50 participants from five different locations, Barnet Hospital, Edgware Community Hospital, Finchley Memorial, Torrington Park Group Practice and Torrington Park Speedwell Practice. The questionnaire will hold a covering missive or paragraph at the start of the questionnaire explicating what they have to make, how they complete it and why I am transporting out this research. I will non be at that place when the participants are registering in the questionnaire as this can do them to experience overwhelmed and could ensue in false replies.

The presentation of the consequences and findings will be in the signifier of statistical natural informations and graphs and charts. I have chosen to show this manner because it is really good if people show the existent chief figures and findings every bit good as seting that into a graph. Looking back at my purposes, aims and hypothesis, I have predicted that there will be a considerable sum of non direction employees who are being bullied, harassed or discriminated against in any manner form or signifier. The NHS has outlined its policies on undertaking this job within the workplace, but I will see if that is really put into pattern and its non there merely for legal grounds.

Timescale

October – November 09: Reappraisal of literature & A ; methodological analysis
November – December 09: Draft of literature & A ; methodological analysis
December – January 09/10: Agree on research methods
January 10: Design and production of questionnaire ( pilot )
February 10: Distribution of questionnaires to locations & A ; aggregation
February 10: Analyse consequences and findings
March – April 10: Draft of undertaking
April – May 10: Final undertaking






Mentions and Bibliography

BERRY, M. ( 2006 ) . HR manager accepts NHS trust weaknesss on intimidation, Personnel Today, pp28-28

BLOISI, W. ( 2007 ) . 1st Edition. Introduction to Human Resource Management, McGraw Hill, Berkshire, UK

BLOISI, W, COOK, C W & A ; HUNSAKER, P L. ( 2003 ) . 1st Edition. Management and Organisational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Education, Berkshire, UK

BRATTON, J & A ; GOLD, J. ( 2003 ) , 3rd Edition. Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, UK

BREAKWELL, M G et Al. ( 2000 ) . Research methods in psychological science, Sage Publications, London, UK

BURNES, B & A ; POPE, R. ( 2007 ) . Negative behavior in the workplace: A survey of two Primary Care Trusts in the NHS, International diary of Public Sector Management, Volume 20, ( 4 ) , pp 285-303

CANNON, J A. ( 2006 ) . 1st Edition. Making the concern instance, CIPD, London, UK

FOOT, M & A ; HOOK, C. ( 2005 ) , 4th Edition. Introducing Human Resource Management, Pearson Education Ltd, Essex, UK

FURNHAM, A. ( 1992 ) . 1st Edition. Personality at work: The function of single differences in the work topographic point, Routledge, London, UK

HAIR, J et Al. ( 2007 ) . 1st Edition. Research methods for concern, Wiley and Sons Ltd, West Sussex, UK

HANNABUSS, S. ( 1998 ) . Strong-arming at work, Journal of Library Management, Volume 19, ( 5 ) , pp 304-310

HARVEY, C P & A ; ALLARD, M J. ( 2009 ) . 4th Edition. Understanding and pull offing diverseness, Pearson Education Ltd, New Jersey, USA

McMAHON, L. ( 2000 ) . Bulling and torment in the workplace, Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Volume 12, ( 6 ) , pp 384-387

MILLWARD, N. ( 1995 ) . 1st Edition. Targeting possible favoritism, Equal Opportunities Commission, London, UK

PATON, N. ( 2005 ) . NHS nurses face torment, emphasis and intimidation, Journal of Occupational Health, Volume 57, ( 3 ) , pp 4-4

RAYNER, C et Al. ( 2002 ) . 1st Edition. Workplace intimidation: What we know, who is to fault and what we can make? , Taylor and Francis, London, UK

RAYNER, C et Al. ( 1999 ) . Theoretical attacks to the survey of bulling at work, Journal of Manpower, Volume 20, ( 1/2 ) , pp 11-15

SAUNDERS, M, et Al. ( 2009 ) . 5th Edition. Research methods for concern pupils, Pearson Education Ltd, Essex, UK

STEPHENS, T. ( 1999 ) . 1st Edition. Bullying and sexual torment, CIPD, London, UK

STEPHENS, T & A ; HALLAS, J. ( 2006 ) . 1st Edition. Bullying and sexual torment: A practical enchiridion, Chandos Publishing Ltd, Oxfordshire, UK

TAYLOR, S. ( 2005 ) . 3rd Edition. Peoples Resourcing, CIPD, London, UK

THOMSON, R. ( 2002 ) . 3rd Edition. Pull offing Peoples, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxfordshire, UK

WILSON, J P. ( 2005 ) . 2nd Edition. Human Resource Development, Kogan Page Ltd, London, UK

YIN, R. ( 2003 ) . 2nd Edition. Case study research, Sage Publications, London, UK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.