3.2-O que é e o que não é assédio moral-Ingrid Pequeno

[Music]

[Music]

Hello, my name is Ingred Pequeno, and in this

lesson we will continue discussing

workplace harassment. After studying the concept of

workplace harassment, its

characteristic elements, and the harmful effects

it brings, we will now try to

better distinguish what is and what is not

workplace harassment. To begin, let's explore the

most common ways in which workplace harassment

manifests itself. To make it more didactic,

we have divided it into four main groups:

attacks against dignity;

isolation and refusal of communication;

intentional degradation of

working conditions; and verbal and physical violence. This includes

using

disrespectful insinuations to disqualify someone, such as

pejorative nicknames

and mockery based on the

victim's personal characteristics, such as using a nickname like "

fat" to refer to

someone's weight negatively, using

someone's height for mockery (

e.g., "shorty"), using the expression "

old" to refer to someone in a

derogatory way based on their age, "

airhead" to label someone as

forgetful or inattentive, and

insults. In short, there is an infinite number of

expressions like "wild animal," "lazy," and "crazy," which can be used to describe someone who is a bit of a buffoon.

Used

deliberately and repeatedly with the purpose of

belittling, disrespecting, humiliating, and creating

a bad, hostile, and intimidating environment

can characterize workplace harassment.

Another form of harassment is mocking someone's

origins, nationality, illnesses,

religion, or beliefs, for example, "

Northeasterner," "Paraíba," "Latino," etc. In short, the

harasser uses someone's nationality and

ethnic origin in a discriminatory way

with the purpose of humiliating and

ridiculing their religion or beliefs

in a way that segregates,

embarrasses, and creates a

hostile environment. There are other ways

harassment can manifest itself, such as

discrediting work in front of

colleagues, superiors, and subordinates,

disregarding health problems or

medical recommendations in the distribution

of tasks, imposing humiliating punishments (

those little dances and forfeits) when a

public agent, intern, or

collaborator does not meet

established goals. Has anyone here ever seen those

companies that rank employees with that picture

plastered everywhere, showing the worst employees

of the month? Generally, companies and

institutions will publicize

photos of their

best employees, not their worst, as a way to stimulate competitiveness and exceeding expectations.

Labor courts are full

of convictions against companies that use

abusive practices with the intention of

deliberately embarrassing their

employees. Examples include companies that make their

worst

employees wear clown noses,

donkey tails, and so on, and

post derogatory messages in

social media groups. I'm not talking

about an unfortunate post here; who hasn't

made an inappropriate or impertinent comment,

whether in social or

work environments, physical or virtual? Harassment occurs

when inappropriate,

prejudiced comments are used on

social media, which are spaces of wide

visibility, as operating methods to embarrass, persecute, and

humiliate. So far, we've

seen many

behaviors that can constitute

moral harassment at work. Of course, there are

other elements that characterize

harassment. Another way harassment can

manifest itself is through the

intentional degradation of working conditions.

Let's look at some examples: not transmitting

useful information for the completion of

tasks. In these cases, the harasser

will manipulate information;

they fail to pass it on with the

necessary advance notice for the

employee to perform their activities;

delegating tasks that are impossible to

complete. Setting unnecessarily and exorbitantly

unreasonable deadlines for completing

tasks

is also a form of

harassment. Assigning tasks that are below or

above their competencies, distinct

from their responsibilities, are cases where

tasks are assigned far below their

competencies with the aim of

humiliating them. For example, you put an

engineer to do a laborer's job,

you put a nurse to do a

nursing technician's job, and we

have nothing against construction workers or

nursing technicians;

all professionals are important

within a company or institution.

Understand that engineers and nurses have

degrees that

qualify them for more

specialized work. Not recognizing this

specialization is a tactic used

by harassers to coerce and

humiliate, demanding the delivery of tasks

always on an urgent basis in

unnecessary ways. A typical example is

the boss who asks for a

complete report by the first

shift the next morning. The next day, the

employee who stayed up all night

to finish the report delivers

what was requested, and the boss says it's no

longer necessary because the meeting was

canceled or is no longer needed. Or even

mentioning any information from that text

in the meeting, understand that asking for a report

is not harassment. To classify a certain

conduct as harassment,

all other constitutive elements must be present.

Thus, moral harassment

can be configured, for example, when the

boss deliberately and repeatedly

demands the performance of

unnecessary tasks, for example, always

this regime of urgency, always

giving impossible deadlines without

a real

need, demanding that the employee be

attentive to email or WhatsApp 24 hours a day,

for example. It is a fact that many

have lost the notion of time to

communicate both in social groups and

in work groups, and it is also a fact

that the dynamics of work have changed, the way

the workplace has also changed, so

today I have teams that work 100%

remotely, teams whose

members live in cities with

different time zones, but let's go, it's not the

case that a boss sends emails or messages

through any type of social network outside of

working hours. Perhaps what could

constitute moral harassment, if

the other characterizing elements are present,

is not just sending

messages outside of working hours, but demanding

that these public agents, employees,

collaborators in general, do so in a certain way. The team should

be attentive and available 24 hours a day

to handle requests

submitted outside of working hours.

If this management kind of forces the

teams to... (That thumbs up that reads

messages in real time) we can

analyze whether or not harassment is occurring there.

Another form of harassment that

intentionally degrades working conditions

is depriving the person of access to the

necessary tools to perform the

work, and also

systematically contesting all decisions and

criticizing their work in an exaggerated

and unfair way, especially in front of

other people. Criticism is not harassment;

often it can be a form of harassment.

Now let's discuss

harassment behaviors that operate through

isolation and refusal of

communication. These include isolating the victim from the

rest of the group or by refusing

communication, whether through physical exclusion or

online exclusion, which was the type

of harassment seen in the previous class, so

that they do not communicate with other

colleagues. This is a classic form of

harassment: avoiding direct communication,

addressing the victim only through emails,

notes, or through third parties. This

can be a way of harassing; prohibiting

colleagues from communicating

with each other. It can also be a form of

harassment, isolating the harassed person from social

gatherings, lunches, and

activities carried out jointly with

other colleagues. This does happen, and

when it does, the harasser won't

explicitly prevent the person from going to a happy

hour with other colleagues; they will

do it indirectly and

subtly. For example, they might arrange a

task that prevents them from socializing,

precisely on the day of the happy hour. The harasser

might ask for one of those

urgent reports, the kind for the first

session of the next day. Then the victim will

continue to be increasingly excluded

from socializing with colleagues, and that's the

objective: ignoring the harassed person's presence,

addressing only other

employees, or not giving them the

floor in meetings, not assigning

the person any tasks, leaving them without

any to perform, provoking

that feeling of uselessness and

incompetence. This is what we call

isolating and sidelining the person until they

ask to leave the company, requesting a

transfer, a reassignment,

until they can't take it anymore and ask to

leave the workplace. I remember well

a case involving... In a

labor court case, an

employee was judged as having been dismissed from a bank.

He

filed a lawsuit to be reinstated and won.

However, his boss was

very unhappy with his return

and, upon his return, the boss,

completely dissatisfied with the decision,

placed him at the company

entrance and told him he didn't need to

do anything anymore, that his job was to

stand there all day watching who came and

went. This led to

another lawsuit

against the company, this time for

moral damages resulting

from the humiliation he

suffered, having been completely isolated and

segregated. Moral harassment

can manifest itself through

verbal or physical violence, which is also quite common. This

includes threats and

physical aggression, even in a

milder or less aggressive way, such as

pushing, slamming doors in someone's face, bumping into them,

tearing up someone's work, or

throwing it away aggressively. There are also

verbal aggressions: shouting,

communicating loudly, swearing,

imitating, etc. While using derogatory terms, it's

important to clarify that if a person is

consistently rude to everyone, and this

behavior seems to be replicated

in social or work circles, it's

possible that we're not dealing with a case

of workplace harassment. Therefore, it's

crucial to analyze each

specific case and all its nuances and

peculiarities. When we want to

distinguish between moral harassment and what is

not, we

also need to address conflicts. We

cannot confuse isolated,

sporadic conflicts with moral harassment. Conflicts

exist in all our relationships,

whether social, familial, or

even in the workplace; they are

common. A conflict at work between a

boss and an employee doesn't

necessarily constitute

workplace harassment. There may be situations where

disagreements or tensions occur but don't

meet the specific criteria for

workplace harassment. Let's look at an example

to make it more practical.

Suppose an employee is

working on a very

important project for the company, but the deadline

is

rapidly approaching. The boss, extremely

concerned about the schedule,

approaches the employee and asks them to

dedicate more hours to the

project, even... Even when working on

weekends, conflict arises precisely

when an employee who already has

personal commitments scheduled for the

weekend refuses to fulfill this

demand, claiming they need more

time for their family and other

responsibilities. The boss, on the other hand,

becomes frustrated with the

employee's refusal and argues that the

priority should be the project, from

their perspective. In this scenario, we

have a classic case of conflict in the

workplace due to

differences in priorities and expectations

between the boss and the employee. This does not

automatically constitute moral harassment.

As long as the boss does not use

abusive tactics such as humiliation, insults, or

unequal treatment to pressure the

employee, the conflict can be

resolved through

effective communication, negotiation, and the search for a

compromise that takes into account the

needs of both parties. So it is

important to note that not every conflict

at work turns into

moral harassment, and many conflicts can and

should be resolved

constructively, promoting a

healthy and productive work environment. So far, we have

seen many

behaviors that can constitute

moral harassment at work, if present. Of course, there are

other elements that

characterize it; now we will address what does

not. It's about moral harassment. Let's

talk precisely about what is not

harassment: demanding work done

in a clear manner;

assigning tasks and defining

expected results. This is not harassment.

Therefore, demanding that

work be done

efficiently; encouraging the achievement of

goals in daily work is natural;

criticism and evaluations of

work and

professional behavior are natural. Occasional

complaints arising from

uncompleted or discrepant tasks

do not constitute harassment.

Sporadic conflicts with colleagues or superiors

are what we've seen;

disagreements on a particular topic

communicated in a direct and respectful manner;

constructive criticism; the use of

technological mechanisms to control working hours are

also not

harassment. But working conditions, such as

a small, poorly

lit environment or chairs that are not

ergonomic, are not harassment

unless the professional is

placed in this situation with the objective

of being humiliated or diminished in front

of other colleagues, or receiving

unequal treatment. There was a case of

moral harassment in a certain public entity

where the entity built a brand-

new building with pristine facilities and almost

the entire team of a certain... The unit

was transferred to the pre-construction building again, and only

one employee was left

working for several months in the

old facilities without any need, since the

new building had

plenty of space to accommodate everyone.

This was a classic case of workplace harassment.

Performance evaluations

conducted by colleagues or superiors,

as long as they are not done in a way that causes

a humiliating situation for the person

being evaluated, are not considered workplace harassment.

As we will see later, it is

good

practice. An increase in workload is

not harassment. There are activities where the

workload will increase during

certain periods; it is seasonal. Thus, during

these peak periods, it is possible to

demand

extraordinary services,

within the obvious limits of the law. But

the question many managers ask is:

where is that line that separates what

they need to demand in terms of

results—which is a

personal demand and also a demand

from the team—from what constitutes harassment? As we

have seen, there is no harassment when you demand the

achievement of goals and the delivery of

results. Now, if to hold a

particular professional accountable, the superior

demands unattainable or impossible goals from them or the team,

always in a

disrespectful manner... Rude behavior, often

shouting and belittling the team,

can constitute harassment, meaning it goes too far.

As a rule, and always in

disrespectful ways,

these attitudes can be classified as

harassment. We will have to analyze all the

other elements

as well. Towards the end of this

lesson, we will give three tips on how

managers can prevent harassment in the

public service. Moral harassment is often

related to disrespect

for the principles of

impartiality and

morality. The first tip is to

establish clear rules. It

is very important

to define tasks, functions,

goals, and

working conditions within each department of each

institution. It is important that everyone

knows the competencies of the unit

they work in, as well as

what tasks they need to

perform, how they should do them, the quality,

and the deadlines.

Furthermore, it is important that

choices are always guided by the

public interest.

For example, who schedules

vacations or recess periods first,

who chooses the desk in location X, who will

have the right to a parking space, who

participates in... Training opportunities within the country or

even abroad, and those who may take leave

should be granted in the

public interest. The rules for granting such leave

should, if possible, always be

predefined to avoid

any feeling of being overlooked or

excluded within a team. So, a

golden tip: the rules of the game

need to be clear, with well-

defined and unambiguous guidelines. This makes it easier not

only to manage but also to prevent

any unfounded allegations of harassment.

The second tip is to always justify

decisions in the public interest,

explaining the reasons that led to the

decision, beyond mere moral harassment.

The motivation for the decision should always be based

on the public interest. The boss

cannot sideline an employee because they did

n't deliver the desired quality of service.

If the service was done

poorly, it must be

demonstrated that the service wasn't good.

You have to work with that

employee so that they can

provide the best service possible. This conduct must

always be justified by reasons of public interest. So, you're going to leave this

unit, and that's why you'll choose

vacation time last or first. That's why you

often have to deal with the problem of that

negligent employee, that employee

everyone knows doesn't perform well. Nothing

he doesn't produce is what Ass

often pats him on the head, they are

condescending, they don't register

any satisfaction with the server's deliverables.

But on the other hand, they also don't

reward the server, so that

negligent server will always be the

last to choose their vacation, the last to

choose their end-of-year break, they

never participate in training

inside or outside the country, and what is the risk of

this? The server may feel

harassed and report the boss, and the

boss in the process

will often have great difficulty

proving that that server didn't

deliver, didn't fulfill anything diligently, did

n't fulfill their duties. Now you see

the great importance of

substantiating and documenting many

things, right? And the third tip is to conduct

periodic team evaluations.

Team evaluations are a good

tool for managers to prevent

harassment, based on what has been

established: servers should

be constantly evaluated. And these

evaluations will serve precisely

to support the making of various

decisions, always based on the

public interest and meritocracy. And then

the managers will... To shield against

any questioning from

dissatisfied employees who unfairly feel

overlooked, there are also many

other practical measures that can

help prevent harassment within

an institution, which will be

discussed in the next module. I've

only given a few spoilers here, so we've

reached the end of this lesson, and we hope

you've learned a little more

about what

workplace harassment is and what it isn't. Thank you very much.

[Music]