 |
 |
|
12-February-2007
Big Brother in big bother
Unless you are a cave-dweller, the recent events on the Channel 4 show “Celebrity Big Brother” can hardly have escaped your notice. A record number of complaints have poured in to the broadcasting regulator Ofcom as certain of the housemates (in particular Jade Goody) have been accused of racially motivated bullying of actress Shilpa Shetty. The fall-out has even drifted into the political arena, threatening a diplomatic incident and overshadowing Gordon Brown’s visit to India as the Indian media brand the show “Bigot Brother”.
On one level, arguably anyone who is prepared to put themselves in the “CBB” house should expect a surreal and even potentially stressful experience. This sort of programme encourages controversial behaviour in the name of securing maximum ratings.
On the other hand, is it acceptable that the housemates should engage in such playground tactics as name-calling and mimicking Shetty’s accent, even telling her to “go home”?
Whether you love, hate or are indifferent to “CBB”, the epic proportions of the row that has developed raise an interesting point – what amounts to racist bullying? Without an understanding of what is and what is not acceptable, how are employers to know what is appropriate and, on the other hand, what demands censure?
Commentators all seem to be working from their own definition of “racist”. Channel 4, for example, has said: "To date there has been no overt racial abuse or racist behaviour directed against Shilpa Shetty within the Big Brother house.
"However there has undoubtedly been a cultural and class clash between her and three of the British females in the house." Are they therefore saying that a “cultural clash” is by definition something inherently distinguishable from racism? Are they denying that any bullying behaviour has taken place?
Whatever construction is being placed upon the emotive terms “racist” and “bully” for the purposes of “CBB”, employers should not let themselves get distracted.
Under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 employers have a duty to provide workers with a safe place and system of work. This includes a workplace free from harassment, intimidation and bullying.
Harassment is any unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct which has the purpose or effect of affecting a worker's dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
Bullying means offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power intended to undermine, humiliate, denigrate or injure a colleague.
On that basis, employees in the workplace who make insensitive or offensive comments or jokes – or who tease or shun a colleague – are likely to be engaging in bullying and / or harassment. Where the individual on the receiving end of that treatment is in some way different from the perpetrators (and in particular is of a different sex, race, religion or sexual orientation) then there is a significant risk of discrimination claims being brought, in addition to bullying and harassment claims.
Another important fact to focus upon is the subjective nature of the definition of harassment. Behavior may amount to harassment not only where it is intended to affect dignity or create a hostile environment, but also where it has that effect (without being intentional).
What can employers do to minimise their risk of claims? First, implement and publicise a comprehensive “dignity at work” policy that makes it clear that discrimination, harassment and bullying (as well as victimisation) will not be tolerated and will result in disciplinary action. Provide training, including examples of what can amount to prohibited behaviour. Lastly, never simply dismiss an employee’s concerns on the basis that you don’t think he or she “should have” taken offence.
ENDS
About Levi Solicitors LLP Disclaimer |
