Personnel

Awareness-raising meeting for staff – UNOG, 3 March 2005

Workplace harassment

Introduction

The aim of this meeting was to raise awareness of the problem of workplace harassment in general and its existence in UNOG in particular, and to report on the progress of efforts being made to address the problem within our Organization. We were most fortunate to obtain the services of Ms. Ariane Dreyfus, psychologist and mediator for the Etat de Genève in cases of harassment. Ms. Dreyfus gave a full and clear description of the way harassment develops and its devastating effects and above all, valuable guidelines on how to recognize and prevent it. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Susan Thompson, Deputy Executive Secretary.
The meeting was relatively well attended, with 160-170 staff members and staff representatives, not only from UNOG but also from other international organizations. We were pleased to see the UNOG Staff Counsellor, members of the UNOG Medical Service and representatives of the UNOG Staff Development and Training Division, all of whom may in the future provide vital links in the chain of prevention mechanisms. We are very grateful to the six English, French and Spanish interpreters and one conference operator who assisted us in our efforts on a voluntary basis.
Unfortunately, no managers or supervisory staff attended. This was surprising for various reasons. First of all, managers are not immune to harassment: with no preventive measures in our workplace, managers can and do become victims of harassment, just like any other staff members. Secondly, managers need to be particularly alert for incidents of harassment for, although it is not always easy to detect, it directly affects the work of their units in the following ways:

1. It has a pernicious effect on overall morale;
2. It has a direct negative impact on output quality and productivity;
3. It is a drain on financial resources.

We hope to have a more representative audience at our next meeting.

Nigel Lindup, Coordinator
UNOG Working Group on Workplace Harassment,
Geneva, 15 March 2005.

For further documentation, see /
pour la documentation supplémentaire, voir:

UNOG Intranet
> Staff Services / Services au personnel
   > Staff Coordinating Council
        Conseil de coordination
          >Current Activities /
              Activités récentes >...:

1. Summary of awareness-raising meeting for staff, UNOG, 3 March 2005 (E only / seulement);
2. Présentation complète de Mme Ariane Dreyfus, 3 March 2005 (F seulement / only);
3. Full text of statement by Nigel Lindup, 3 March 2005 (E only / seulement);
4. Working Group on Harassment: Draft administrative instruction (E only / seulement);
5. Working Group on Harassment: report to the Staff-Management Coordination Committee (SMCC) (E/F).

What is harassment?

A broad definition: «Reprehensible and clearly negative actions by one individual or a group, directed against a specific person (supervisor, subordinate or colleague), which may lead to that person’s exclusion from the workplace community».

What is not harassment?

Stress; workplace conflict; single incidents of aggression; poor working conditions; professional requirements (transfers, changes in job description, etc). However, all or any of these may contribute to harassment in the context described in paragraph 1 above.

What specific behaviours may constitute harassment?

Attacks on the dignity of the victim, throwing them into a state of uncertainty and fear:

1. Refusal to communicate with victim; isolation;
2. Denigration of victim’s professional competence; obstructing victim’s work;
3. Derogatory comments about victim’s personal qualities;
4. Verbal, physical or sexual violence.

How does harassment develop?

A conflict arises and is not properly resolved. An harassment situation takes shape. It is essentially a vicious circle: the victim is destabilized by constant criticism and attacks and their performance suffers, thus providing apparently objective justification for further criticism. Depending on the reaction or lack of reaction on the part of management / human resources administrators, this may or may not lead to exclusion through dismissal, resignation, invalidity or simple ostracism.

Risk factors: in what circumstances can harassment take hold?

1. Organizational: Lack of clearly-defined tasks – Incompetent managers – Tolerance of unethical practices;
2. Work environment: Poor staff-management relations – Little recognition of achievement;
3. Structural change: New manager – Transfer – Restructuring;
4. Individual attributes: Someone perceived as «different».

What is the effect of harassment on the victim?

1. Social relations: Irritability – Aggressiveness – Oversensitivity – Isolation at home and
   at work – General apathy;
2. Work performance: Fatigue — Lack of concentration — Confused thinking;
3. Physiological: Disrupted sleep patterns — Digestion problems — Skin rashes —Headaches — Back pain;
4. Personality: Hostility — Withdrawal — Despair — Permanent change not ruled out.

What can I do?

1. The victim: you should attempt to enter into a dialogue with the harasser or at least let the harasser know that you are not prepared to put up with such behaviour. You should also start keeping a journal and try to collect evidence. Golden rules: Keep calm - Try to do a good job so you cannot be criticized on that score - Obtain psychological support, e.g., psychotherapy — Do not seek revenge: you just want to be able to get on with your work.
2. The victim´s colleagues: you should try to maintain a core of solidarity with each other and with the victim. You should try not to let yourselves be drawn into the cycle of harassment.

What should the employer do to prevent harassment?

1. Front-line prevention
   • Establish an anti-harassment policy, structures and procedures;
   • Improve recruitment procedures and training, both for managers in general and on conflict resolution in particular;
   • Provide a positive working environment by ensuring that its rules and values are respected and staff are motivated;
   • Ensure that there is adequate communication between management and staff.
2. Secondary prevention: appropriate action
   • Be vigilant and take prompt action when harassment is detected;
   • Send a clear message that such behaviour will not be tolerated and should encourage attempts at reconciliation;
   • Institute legal proceedings where reconciliation fails;
   • Ensure that sanctions are imposed on the guilty party;
   • Provide rehabilitation for the victim.

The first thing to say is that the need to minimize the risk of harassment occurring is the same in the UN Secretariat as in any other workplace.
The second thing to state clearly is that harassment exists in the UN Secretariat. We [in the Working Group] are aware of cases that in our opinion fit the various existing definitions of harassment in, for example, ECE, UNCTAD, the UNOG Languages Service and, paradoxically enough, in the very heart of UNOG´s operations, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Yet the Standards of Conduct for International Civil Servants prohibit harassment and instruct all departments to establish procedures to deal with it. The Staff Rules and Regulations prohibit harassment. The Secretary-General himself said as long ago as 1997 that harassment has no place in the UN. And a circular was issued in late 2003 recalling all these prohibitions and instructing managers to act promptly in cases of harassment. So how is it possible for colleagues to be treated in this way? The short answer is that there is quite simply a vast gap between our employer´s rhetoric on harassment and the reality of staff´s experience of it. There are five reasons for this:

1. No definition of harassment in any of the UN staff rules.
2. The continuing tendency to promote managers on the basis of technical competence, not demonstrated people-management skills.
3. Delegation of ever more authority down to ever lower levels of management.
4. In parallel with this delegation of authority, no corresponding reinforcement in practice of accountability procedures and sanctions.
5. No genuine trade union representation or support for staff members.

In the first half of 2004 the WG was mandated to prepare a draft administrative instruction giving a definition of workplace harassment and suggesting preventive measures and informal and formal procedures to deal with cases. We fulfilled that mandate and the draft was adopted by the Staff Coordinating Council in April 2004 and sent to New York as input to the Administration´s own work on harassment in July 2004 . The main aim of the draft is the prevention of harassment. The main mechanism proposed in that regard is that of trained, professional harassment counsellors in each duty station. We believe the predictable costs of establishing and maintaining such posts more than compensate for the hidden, unpredictable overall costs of unchecked harassment in the workplace.
We are now anxious to work with the Administration on a basic joint text for negotiation at the next meeting of SMCC. The situation now is that we have finally entered into email discussions of our draft instruction and are awaiting concrete input from their side.

1. The WHO Ombudsman said he frequently received requests for support in cases of harassment. In his experience there is nearly always a chronic psychological context on the alleged harasser´s side (issues of selfesteem, ability to cope, pressure, etc.). It is difficult to deal with such psychological problems through organizational responses, yet that is the response that tends to be made: the existing structures are not very adaptable.
   For longer-term cultural change, what is needed is aggressive statements by senior management that there will be Zero Tolerance of harassment.
2. A UNOG temporary staff member asked how it might be possible to give United Nations staff access to external judicial mechanisms. The United Nations was constantly preaching to States, yet its own approach to internal conflict effectively put it above the law.
   • Ariane Dreyfus, independent mediator designated by the Etat de Genève, replied that, even in Switzerland, it is difficult to establish a solid case of harassment against an employer.
   • Nigel Lindup, coordinator of the UNOG Working Group on Harassment, recalled that the solution proposed by the Working Group is to establish harassment counsellors in each duty station, with the facilities they require to ensure their independence. Another possibility is to designate an independent external psychologist, as the Etat de Genève has designated Ms. Dreyfus, to deal with victims of harassment. On the whole, however, it is preferable to have people on the spot who are familiar with the United Nations.
   • A UNOG staff representative said what is needed in the United Nations is a culture of accountability and of peace, based on human rights and good governance. Normally, it is States´ responsibility to prevent situations of harassment arising; however, the same States, as Members of the United Nations, irresponsibly fail to act to prevent harassment within their Secretariat. It is important to break down the impunity surrounding harassers. Otherwise internal harassment counsellors will be powerless.
   • A staff member of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) pointed out that, although it used to be possible, in certain circumstances, for Secretariat staff members to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice in the Hague, the General Assembly removed that possibility in 1995. He also said that the United Nations Administrative Tribunal is not a genuinely independent body, since its secretariat is part of the Office of Legal Affairs and financially dependent on the United Nations.
   • The deputy head of the Swiss labour delegation to the International Labour Conference (ILC), a former UNOG staff member, said international labour standards should apply to the United Nations Secretariat. Then our employer would be unable to ignore the standards adopted in the outside world. A historic resolution to that effect had been introduced for the first time ever at the 2004 ILC by the Swiss delegation. It had not been adopted but would be reintroduced in 2006.
3. A former UNOG staff member and former UNOG staff representative made three points. (a) The costs of harassment were borne not only by employers but also by victims, with suicide being the extreme case; victims’ families, and particularly their children, also paid dearly; (b) A multicultural environment such as the United Nations Secretariat complicated the process of listening and exchanging information; (c) The most vulnerable staff members are those on short-term contracts, who dare not speak out. The first reprisal is usually nonrenewal of their contract.
4. A member of the WHO working group on harassment said that studies have shown that there is a greater risk of harassment arising in hierarchical organizations such as the United Nations.
5. A staff representative from another international organization said she had recently had to deal with two people who each accused the other of harassment. A «grey area» had developed between harasser and victim.
   • Ariane Dreyfus, independent mediator designated by the Etat de Genève, said that was often the case: the two parties attack and wound each other, each perceiving their own rightness. It is rare that there is one harasser and one victim. Moreover, harassers’ personalities are often such that they already see themselves as under threat or attack.
6. The former General Secretary of the Federation of International Civil Servants' Associations (FICSA) said that, at recent meetings with the International Civil Service Commission, the body that sets international civil servants' working conditions, she had insisted that the issues of staff representation, freedom of association and consultation mechanisms, as well as Administrations' duty to respect these principles, be placed on the agenda. She was concerned that many organizations were implementing changes in employment conditions, staff rules and policies without consulting the staff associations and unions. This was also supported by CCISUA. It is no coincidence that harassment was only really discovered in the 1980s, a time when the bonds of loyalty between employer and employee, and solidarity among employees, began to break down, partly as a result of outsourcing and increased competition among workers themselves. If we want to see any improvement, we must renew solidarity by taking things into our own hands again and acting responsibly. Not voting, not going to staff meetings, what message does that send to the Administration? It tells them they can do what they like.

7. A UNHCR staff member and former UNHCR and WFP investigator said she believed the draft ST/AI prepared by the UNOG Working Group pointed the way forward. A key point that must be addressed and resolved, however, is fear of retaliation, which stops people coming forward even to testify and hampers all internal procedures.
8. An UNCTAD staff member and member of the UNOG Working Group on Harassment, said almost anyone, if tempted, might steal, for example, and he wondered whether the same applied to harassment or if harassers have a particular psychological predisposition.
   • Ariane Dreyfus said many factors are at play in such situations. Some studies refer to the «narcissism» of harassers, but the structure of the organization and working conditions are also two very important factors. As to the victims, the studies that have been carried out do not yield consistent findings: in some cases they are weak or submissive people, but others are people who invest a great deal in their work.
9. A UNOG staff member suggested three concrete actions that could be taken in the area of prevention. (a) Induction and management training courses should include modules on harassment, led, for example, by a member of the Working Group; (b) The Medical Service should introduce mechanisms for sounding the alarm when cases of harassment arise; (c) Staff members themselves can set up peer counselling groups (groupes de parole) to help break victims’ isolation and encourage discussion about peoples’ experiences.
   • Ariane Dreyfus agreed that the Medical Service and Human Resources Management can detect areas of malaise in the Organization through such symptoms as absenteeism and resignations. The Medical Service, however, is bound by the code of confidentiality.
   • Susan Thompson, Chair, said that, with the victim’s permission, it is always possible for staff representatives to work with the Medical Service to try to resolve cases. Staff representatives could also possibly cooperate with the Staff Development and Training Division.
10. Nigel Lindup, coordinator of the UNOG Working Group on Harassment, said that, unfortunately, as long as we have no definition of harassment it is not possible simply to name someone as a harasser.
11. An OHCHR staff member, referring to the issue of evidence, said that in the case of torture it had taken 20 years for a manual on substantiating torture to be produced. He wondered whether any cases in the Etat de Genève had shown that there are ways of demonstrating that harassment had taken place.
    • Ariane Dreyfus said people who feel harassed are psychologically broken but their experience is internal. It is not possible to say whether they have «really» been harassed. It is rarely possible to tell from the symptoms just what kind of experience the person has undergone. However, clearly something has happened and whether or not you call it harassment, something must be done to help the person.
12. A UNOG staff representative pointed out that half of those who leave the Secretariat on disability pension do so for psychological reasons. On the question of harassment counsellors, he said it is certainly vital to have trained support for victims, but once a harasser has been identified it must also be possible to impose sanctions. This is difficult in the United Nations, for even the United Nations Administrative Tribunal cannot force the Secretary-General to apply a sanction.

Report by Nigel Lindup, Coordinator,
UNOG Working Group on Work place Harassment.