Workplace Bullying in the Public Sector

Ghaziri, Mazen El; London, Matthew; Lipscomb, Jane

doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5154-8_16-1

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the European public sector, a higher prevalence of WPB has been noted in certain agencies and settings, such as public administration, health services, education, prison service, and social services compared to those in the private sector (El Ghaziri, London, & Lipscomb, 2019; Lewis & Gunn, 2007; Zapf, Escartín, Einarsen, Hoel, & Vartia, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the intrinsic stringency of the public sector, at least in democratic societies, the sector regularly faces changes in leadership and government that change the sectors’ mission, operations, and the workplace culture and climate (Sorozan, 2018). Other factors that potentially increase the risk of bullying within this sector include: budget constraints, media inquiry, and political intrusion that affects certain public sector employees (Crimp, 2017; El Ghaziri, London, & Lipscomb, 2019; Sorozan, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding the Impact of Bullying in a Unionized U.S. Public Sector Workforce

Ghaziri

Simons

Lipscomb

et al. 2019

Workplace Health Saf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Workplace Bullying (WPB) can have a tremendous, negative impact on the victims and the organization as a whole. The purpose of this study was to examine individual and organizational impact associated with exposure to bullying in a large U.S. unionized public sector workforce. Methods: A cross-sectional Web-based survey was conducted among 16,492 U.S. state government workers. Survey domains included demographics, negative acts (NAs) and bullying, supportiveness of the organizational climate, and individual and organizational impacts of bullying. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the impact among respondents who reported exposure to bullying. Findings: A total of 72% participants responded to the survey (n = 11,874), with 43.7% (n = 5,181) reporting exposure to NAs and bullying. A total of 40% (n = 4,711) participants who experienced WPB reported individual impact(s) while 42% ( n = 4,969) reported organization impact(s). Regular NA was associated with high individual impact (negatively impacted them personally; odds ratio [OR] = 5.03) when controlling for other covariates including: female gender (OR =1.89) and job tenure of 6 to 10 years (OR = 1.95); working in a supportive organizational climate and membership in a supportive bargaining unit were protective of high impact (OR = 0.04 and OR = 0.59, respectively). High organizational impact (transferring to another position) was associated with regular NA and bullying (OR = 16.26), female gender (OR = 1.55), providing health care and field service (OR = 1.68), and protective effect of organizational climate (OR = 0.39). We found a dose-response relationship between bullying and both individual and organizational-level impact. Conclusion/Application to Practice: Understanding the impacts of WPB should serve to motivate more workplaces and unions to implement effective interventions to ameliorate the problem by enhancing the organizational climate, as well as management and employee training on the nature of WPB and guidance on reporting.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%