Studio(i) Videos

Phil Ray, Omni Severin Indianapolis, General Manager

Omni Severin Indianapolis General Manager Phil Ray talks to Inside INdia...Watch

Jonathan Weinzapfel, Mayor of Evansville

In a Studio(i) interview with Inside INdiana Business Host Gerry Dick, W...Watch

Mike Peduto, Partner, Circle City Tickets

In a Studio(i) interview, Peduto talked about the demand for Colts ticke...Watch

Features

In reversing the Indiana Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court affirmed a $325,000 jury verdict in favor of an employee who claimed he suffered bullying in the workplace. Although the facts of this case arose out of the often-tense environment of a hospital operating room, this decision by the Indiana Supreme Court may have significant ramifications for all Indiana employers.

The United States has had laws prohibiting discrimination and harassment on the basis of specified characteristics, such as those set forth in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for several decades. However, increasingly more attention is being paid to forms of behavior that may be harmful to employees but that may not be based on any specified characteristic or protected category. This non-discriminatory but still harmful behavior is more commonly known as “bullying,” “microinequities,” or in Europe, “mobbing.”

Articles in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Time Magazine, for example, reflect the growing concern of corporations across the country about the impact of these types of behaviors on employee morale, productivity, and attrition. Bullying is generally known as “the tendency of individuals or groups to use persistent aggressive or unreasonable behavior against a co-worker.” In addition to cases like the one recently decided by the Indiana Supreme Court, 13 states have considered or currently are considering statutes concerning potential liability for workplace bullying.

This trend is not limited to the United States. Recently, a British court upheld a record $26 million dollar verdict in an extreme case of "mobbing" of an employee by a supervisor.

In a recent poll, 44% of American workers reported that they have worked for a supervisor or employer who they consider abusive. Results from another poll showed that one in three employees personally experiences bullying at some point in their working lives; 49% of American workers have either been a witness to or victim of workplace bullying. Results of a February 2008 poll of workers in the United Kingdom reflects that bullying is a concern all over the globe, with the percentage of workers reporting that they were bullied increasing from 52% in 2003 to 69% in 2008. Of the victims, 56% said that they were bullied by a colleague; 44% by a manager. Regardless, it is clear that bullying has deleterious effects on the workplace.

Studies have consistently shown that bullying can lead to a wide range of physical and psychological health problems for victims, which in turn diminishes the effectiveness of the workforce. The costs to companies of bullying only seem to be mounting. A 1990 study estimated that bullying costs an organization an estimated $30,000 to $100,000 per victim of bullying per year. But a 2007 report by The Level Playing Field Institute, www.lpfi.org, estimated that voluntary turnover due to “unfairness,” including microinequities and bullying, costs U.S. employers $64B annually.

In the Indiana Supreme Court decision handed down April 8, 2008, a physician working at an Indianapolis hospital stood accused of workplace bullying with respect to fellow operating room personnel. The plaintiff accused the physician of intentional infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference with business relations, and assault. The plaintiff even brought in an expert witness to testify about workplace bullying.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $325,000 on the assault count, but the Court of Appeals previously reversed that result and ordered a new trial. On April 8, the Supreme Court overruled the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court award. In so doing, the Court expressly found the facts of the case supported a finding of assault, and that the damages assessed properly tracked the harm suffered. Moreover, the Court recognized that workplace conflicts may also support claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress.


On Friday, April 18th, Ice Miller will be hosting a fee webinar to discuss the recent Indiana Supreme Court decision and to help employers understand their options for dealing with workplace bullying. Please watch for further information on registering for this informative webinar or go to www.icemiller.com for more information.



This publication is intended for general information purposes only and does not and is not intended to constitute legal advice. The reader must consult with legal counsel to determine how laws or decisions discussed herein apply to the reader's specific circumstances.

  • Print
  • E-Mail
  • Newsletters

To view the past 6 months of archived Perspectives, select an article from the dropdown below and hit 'View':
 

To search the archive of Perspectives articles, go to the Search page

 
 

Web Site Design and Development by BitWise Solutions, Inc.