Managing reports of bullying

Employers should always respond quickly and appropriately to reports of bullying.

Contact police on Triple Zero (000) when:

• someone is in immediate danger
• a crime is in progress
• you need immediate police attendance.

For non-urgent incidents or to report a crime that has already occurred:

• call the Police Assistance Line on 131 444 (available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week)
• submit an online report at online reporting.police.vic.gov.au
• contact your nearest police station.

Referring a matter to police does not mean that employers take no internal action. Any report of bullying in the working environment is an occupational health and safety (OHS) matter, whether the police are contacted or not.

Employers should have a clear system in place to respond to reports of bullying. This should address the following factors.

• Immediate safety issues or interim risk controls for ongoing risks in the working environment, including at work-related events. For example, considering alternative duties for relevant parties when required.
• Psychological support for all involved parties.
• Internal reporting and investigation.
• How to implement investigation outcomes in a timely manner.
• Notifications required to external agencies such as:
  • Child Protection
  • WorkSafe Victoria.

Employers must consult with employees and any HSRs when developing policies and procedures for preventing and managing bullying. These should include:

• reporting procedures and investigating incidents
• guidelines on when to call the police, ambulance or other external services
• possible sanctions and actions against respondents
• testing and maintaining of communication systems and duress equipment
• employee supervision and monitoring
• guidelines for managers/supervisors on how to:
  • provide options for immediate psychological support
  • develop a plan and options for ongoing support
• guidelines for reviewing patients or clients who display harmful behaviours, such as bullying.

Employers should provide training for anyone who may handle a report of bullying. This includes:

• managers
• supervisors
• HSRs
• union delegates
• other nominated people in the working environment, such as contact officers.

This will help to ensure that affected employees are not harmed further.

Reasonable management action or performance processes carried out in a reasonable manner is not bullying. An employee who participates in a performance process may experience a reasonable negative psychological response. Employers should still implement interim risk controls during a bullying investigation to eliminate or reduce the immediate risk of harm for employees involved.

It is important that performance and conduct management processes are carried out in a fair, supportive and reasonable way.

For more information on reasonable management action and how to manage underperformance lawfully and safely, see the Fair Work Ombudsman’s Managing underperformance best practice guide.

Responding to reports of bullying is an important step in the risk management process.

Examining a report of bullying will usually require the following approach.

Initial assessment

Complaints should be triaged through a desktop assessment of their content.

There should be an initial assessment of the allegations to determine if the report meets the definition of bullying.

It is common for initial bullying reports to not meet the full definition. They may describe disagreements, interpersonal conflict or management action that may meet the definition of other psychosocial hazards such as:

• poor workplace relationships
• high job demands.

If the complaint meets the definition of a different psychosocial hazard, it should be referred for further review or investigation as required.

Type of response

If bullying is identified, the duty holder should decide on the appropriate response.

Workplace bullying reports that are of a serious or complex nature should always be investigated. All reports should be taken seriously and assessed on their merits and facts.

Consider the following points that can show the seriousness or complexity of the report. They may set useful thresholds for when an investigation or review is necessary.

• The nature of the hazards or incidents. For example, were incidents extremely serious or dangerous?
• The level of risk involved. For example, is the respondent in a managerial or high-level role? Is the employee who is lodging the report a vulnerable worker?
• The complexity of the situation. For example, the complexity may be increased if:
  • the reports involve senior managers
  • there have been no previous actions put in place to resolve the matter
  • the allegations are being disputed
  • the report includes examples that cover a long period of time.
• Any repeated exposure to incidents of a similar nature. For example, if there is a cluster of reports or allegations made about a single individual.
• The number of employees involved or affected. For example, if multiple employees are involved or affected.
• Other people involved, such as clients, customers, patients or students.
• For larger employers, whether an organisational response is required to manage the risk in a systematic way across multiple work sites or locations.

In some organisations, psychosocial hazards, such as bullying, may be reported frequently, due to the nature of the work. The employer should put processes in place to consider all reports.

For example, this may include reviewing reports of bullying perpetrated by a particular client, patient, student or parent together. This may:

• reduce the administrative load for an organisation
• help employers to assess if there is new information about risks in the working environment
• highlight if risk controls need to be revised.

Investigation scope and process

Once an employeer has decided that an investigation is needed, they should establish the scope and process. This includes the following.

• Who will do the investigation. This should be someone who:

  • is unbiased
  • has experience or knowledge in dealing with workplace bullying matters
  • will maintain focus within the scope of their investigation.

  For example, an internal party may be suitable if they do not know the involved parties and are suitably qualified. In small workplaces where there may be perceived or actual conflicts of interest, it may be best to appoint an external investigator.

  In many workplaces, this appointed person may come from Human Resources (HR). In this case, the HR and OHS teams should work closely together to:

  • share appropriate information
  • identify all psychosocial hazards
  • control any associated risks.

• The scope of the investigation. This includes:

  • the allegations or behaviours that are being investigated
  • what the investigation seeks to achieve.

  Multiple coordinated investigations may be needed for different purposes. For example:

  • a security investigation when a security breach is identified
  • a conduct investigation into employee behaviour
  • an OHS investigation to consider psychosocial hazards that may be interacting to increase the risk of bullying.

  If multiple coordinated investigations are required, employers should consider opportunities to reduce the need for employees to retell their story, to minimise further harm. For example, considering whether there are opportunities to do a single interview and share information with other relevant parties, with the individual’s consent.

• How the investigation will be conducted. This includes:

  • likely timeframes
  • the communication of outcomes; for example, in an investigation report.

  Investigation reports generally will outline:

  • what was investigated
  • the process that was used
  • all relevant evidence, including any witnesses interviewed
  • if any claims were substantiated and any recommendations made on this basis.
• Investigation findings. At the end of an investigation, all parties involved should be told of the findings. If a report is substantiated or recommendations are made, actions taken by the organisation must be consistent with relevant policies and procedures. This is important for:
  • managing specific risk that may relate to individuals
  • maintaining organisational justice
  • ensuring there is no further harm caused.

An investigation of a report of bullying should have the following characteristics.

• It is done in a fair, timely and transparent way.
• All parties are engaged and supported throughout the process. For example:
  • providing regular progress communications or check-ins with involved parties
  • offering EAP details to all involved parties once a report is made or at the outset of an investigation
  • offering to have a support person present at interviews or meetings. This might be an HSR, a peer or a union representative.
• There is neutrality, impartiality and procedural fairness. For example:
  • all reports should be treated as allegations until otherwise substantiated
  • respondents must be provided with allegations so they can explain their version of events
  • the person making the report should be respectfully listened to and treated as credible
  • there should be opportunities to review decisions
  • the investigating party must not be directly involved in the allegations or have a personal relationship with anyone involved.
• Investigators use a trauma-informed process, so interviewees do not have to repeat their story. This can help to minimise further harm to those involved.
• The investigator is impartial, with the appropriate expertise and skills. They may also:
  • be trained in trauma-informed interviewing techniques
  • have expertise in psychosocial risk management.
• The investigation outlines how sensitive information will be handled. This includes issues of privacy and confidentiality. Confidentiality should be protected as much as possible. Only people directly involved in the complaint or with resolving it should know details of the matter.
• The investigation identifies and manages any ongoing physical and psychological risks in the working environment. For example, serious allegations may warrant an individual to be stood down. In this case, the employer should maintain contact with the employee who has been stood down to:
  • provide support and wellbeing monitoring
  • answer questions and provide clarity
  • manage expectations about the investigation process.
• There are proper records of the investigation.

• Employees may have experienced trauma or been exposed to traumatic events or content.
• Trauma can affect people in many ways. For example, how an employee recalls and describes events.
• Any investigation needs to be done in a way that prevents further psychological harm. For example, there is a risk of further harm if employees must explain what happened multiple times.

Reviewing risk controls

Following a review or an investigation, employers should use the findings, themes and any other relevant information to:

• review risk controls
• if necessary, revise risk controls.

An OHS response to a report of bullying should include the following.

• Identifying whether any other psychosocial hazards are present.
• Identifying if there is any new or additional information available about bullying.
• Assessing associated risks, including:
  • if new or additional information changes the risk
  • if so, how the risk has changed.
• Reviewing existing risk controls, including their effectiveness.
• Revising risk controls to eliminate or reduce the risk where necessary.
• Monitoring the implemented risk controls following the review or investigation.
• Monitoring trends in reporting data for bullying and any related hazards. This includes across multiple sites where relevant.

The review or investigation should also check whether the risk controls available to employees were used and effective. For example:

• Did recruitment processes help to identify candidates with a history of harmful behaviour? For example, reference checks or psychological pre-employment screening.

• For students, clients, patients or residents engaging in disrespectful behaviours, was a:

  • risk assessment completed?
  • management or support plan developed and/or reviewed?

  If a manager was present and saw the behaviour, did they intervene appropriately at the time? If available risk controls were not used, consider why.

The OHS review or investigation should avoid placing blame on individuals. Instead, consider the reasons the risk controls may not have been used or effective. For example:

• A team had a high workload and needed to quickly backfill vacant roles. This meant that recruiters had to choose candidates:
  • with mediocre references
  • who were a poor organisational fit.
• A risk assessment and management or support plan was not created, reviewed and/or updated due to the high job demands of employees who reported having insufficient time to do so.
• Management did not intervene as they:
  • were unsure how to manage the situation
  • had not received active bystander intervention training or training on how to respond to a report of bullying.

Any relevant findings should be implemented to help control the risk. See Step 3: control risks for more information.

Employers should document and communicate the outcomes of a review or an investigation to all appropriate parties, to the extent that it is necessary and consistent with confidentiality obligations. This may include:

• involved employees
• relevant supervisors or managers, where appropriate
• relevant representatives from HR and OHS teams.

An employer must give an HSR access to information they have about:

• relevant hazards
• the health and safety of people the HSR represents.

This does not include access to:

• medical information
• details of reports or allegations
• information on the specifics of complainants, witnesses or respondents.

Outcomes of a bullying investigation will vary according to the nature of the situation. Following a report of bullying, you must review and revise risk control measures. You may also need to take action at the individual level. 

Review and revise organisational-level risk controls 

• Complete a psychosocial risk assessment for the affected work area to: 
  • identify psychosocial hazards and risks
  • review and implement additional risk controls where required. See Step 3: control risks for more information.
• Ensure ongoing monitoring of the affected work group.

Take action at the individual level

• Direct an employee to stop the behaviour.
• Provide a verbal or written warning. 
• Invite an apology. 
• Provide mediation or another dispute resolution process.
• Coach, counsel and/or mentor an employee or employees. For example, training sessions with follow-up coaching sessions that focus on:
  • communication skills
  • conflict management
  • interpersonal skills
  • respectful behaviours
  • bystander intervention.
• Use disciplinary action subject to workplace relations laws.

If an investigation finds that bullying did not occur, outcomes should still recommend further actions to address the situation. This may include mediation, counselling or changing working arrangements. 

A report of bullying that is found to be false and intended to cause harm is known as a vexatious report. If a report of bullying is found to be vexatious, disciplinary action or counselling may be considered against the person who made the report, in line with the employer’s policies on misconduct.

An employee may wish to contact other agencies about a report of bullying. When dealing with the report and discussing referral options, employers and other employees should respect:

• what the affected employee wants to happen
• how the affected employee would like to manage the matter.

If the affected employee wishes, it may be appropriate for them to contact:

• WorkSafe Victoria Advisory
• Victoria Police for matters that may be criminal offences
• Fair Work Commission.