On workplace harassment”
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 5:52 am
Workplace HarassmentAuthor : Francisco Trujillo. Professor of the Master's Degree in Occupational Risk Prevention – PRL (3 specialties) of Bureau Veritas Training (Madrid, Spain)
Workplace harassment, also known as “ mobbing [1] ”, harassment, psychological harassment, or moral harassment at work, is considered one of the psychosocial phenomena that causes the greatest concern to Labor Law and, by extension, to the Prevention of Occupational Hazards. The presence of this psychosocial risk in the workplace is beyond any doubt: it is so alarming that countless international statistics conclude that 80% of the working population has suffered a situation of harassment during their working life .
These statistics are causing social alarm and refer to line data workplace harassment from a psychological perspective, given that from a legal perspective less than 5% of workers report this situation for fear of reprisals, and of losing their job and not finding another.
Situations of workplace harassment have been increasing over the years. For example, there are many cases suffered by workers that fit the definition of harassment. Thus, the elimination of functions or the lack of effective occupation, which can cause a health problem for the worker, is one of the situations that usually occur in the workplace.
As a result of the increase in these unwanted events, the studies and treatments to combat this scourge are proportional to the seriousness of the issue; multiple studies ranging from psychology, sociology or law.
Some statistics serve to demonstrate the scope of the phenomenon: there are more than 2 million victims of moral harassment in Spain, which translates into 15% of active workers. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), women are the most affected, followed by temporary workers.
The researcher and expert in the field, Marie-France Hirigoyen [2] , defines the concept as “ any abusive conduct (gesture, word, attitude, behavior, etc.) which, by its repetition or systematization, threatens the dignity or the psychological or physical integrity of a person, endangering his or her job or degrading the work environment ”. For his part, Heinz Leymann [3] , a pioneer and leading expert, provided a technical definition of workplace harassment as “ the chain over a fairly short period of attempted or completed hostile actions, expressed or manifested by one or more persons towards a third party, constituting a process of destruction consisting of a series of hostile actions which, taken in isolation, might seem meaningless, but whose constant repetition poses serious harm to the person affected ”. Along these lines, Leymann argued that “ attacking in working life implies hostility and that communication is systematically directed by one or more individuals, mainly towards another individual, who finds himself in a helpless and defenseless situation, remaining in this situation for a long time .”
Finally, the Spanish courts also define psychosocial risk as “ any situation or conduct that, due to its repetition over time, its degrading nature of working conditions and the hostility or intimidation of the work environment that it generates, has the purpose or result of attacking or endangering the integrity of the worker ”. Thus, for the court to consider that the worker is being harassed, this harassment must occur persistently , that is: with a frequency of once a week. This unpleasant situation causes the victim symptoms such as: anxiety, stress, depression, digestive ailments, sleep disturbance, loss of self-esteem or general irritation [4] .
Workplace harassment, also known as “ mobbing [1] ”, harassment, psychological harassment, or moral harassment at work, is considered one of the psychosocial phenomena that causes the greatest concern to Labor Law and, by extension, to the Prevention of Occupational Hazards. The presence of this psychosocial risk in the workplace is beyond any doubt: it is so alarming that countless international statistics conclude that 80% of the working population has suffered a situation of harassment during their working life .
These statistics are causing social alarm and refer to line data workplace harassment from a psychological perspective, given that from a legal perspective less than 5% of workers report this situation for fear of reprisals, and of losing their job and not finding another.
Situations of workplace harassment have been increasing over the years. For example, there are many cases suffered by workers that fit the definition of harassment. Thus, the elimination of functions or the lack of effective occupation, which can cause a health problem for the worker, is one of the situations that usually occur in the workplace.
As a result of the increase in these unwanted events, the studies and treatments to combat this scourge are proportional to the seriousness of the issue; multiple studies ranging from psychology, sociology or law.
Some statistics serve to demonstrate the scope of the phenomenon: there are more than 2 million victims of moral harassment in Spain, which translates into 15% of active workers. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), women are the most affected, followed by temporary workers.
The researcher and expert in the field, Marie-France Hirigoyen [2] , defines the concept as “ any abusive conduct (gesture, word, attitude, behavior, etc.) which, by its repetition or systematization, threatens the dignity or the psychological or physical integrity of a person, endangering his or her job or degrading the work environment ”. For his part, Heinz Leymann [3] , a pioneer and leading expert, provided a technical definition of workplace harassment as “ the chain over a fairly short period of attempted or completed hostile actions, expressed or manifested by one or more persons towards a third party, constituting a process of destruction consisting of a series of hostile actions which, taken in isolation, might seem meaningless, but whose constant repetition poses serious harm to the person affected ”. Along these lines, Leymann argued that “ attacking in working life implies hostility and that communication is systematically directed by one or more individuals, mainly towards another individual, who finds himself in a helpless and defenseless situation, remaining in this situation for a long time .”
Finally, the Spanish courts also define psychosocial risk as “ any situation or conduct that, due to its repetition over time, its degrading nature of working conditions and the hostility or intimidation of the work environment that it generates, has the purpose or result of attacking or endangering the integrity of the worker ”. Thus, for the court to consider that the worker is being harassed, this harassment must occur persistently , that is: with a frequency of once a week. This unpleasant situation causes the victim symptoms such as: anxiety, stress, depression, digestive ailments, sleep disturbance, loss of self-esteem or general irritation [4] .