Contents Page: NZJER, 2013, 38(1)
Name

Title

Venkataraman Nilakant, Leading in a Post-disaster Setting:
Bernard Walker, Kylie
Guidance for Human Resource
Rochford and Kate Van Practitioners
Heugten
Stephen T.T. Teo,
Cameron Newt, andKarina Soewanto

Context-specific Stressors, Workrelated Social Support and WorkFamily Conflict: A Mediation
Study

Kate Blackwood, Tim
Bentley, Evan Catley,David Tappin andDarryl Forsyth

Out of Step? The Efficacy ofTrans-Tasman Law to Combat
Workplace Bullying

Yusuf Sheikh Omar

Gaye Greenwood andErling Rasmussen

Work stimulates you to think about
your future”: The importance of
employment during social
integration from the perspectives ofyoung Somali men living inAustralia and USA
Workplace conflict management:
legal intentions versus managers’
experiences

Page
Number
1-13

14-26

27-41

42-54

55-70

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

Leading in a Post-disaster Setting:
Practitioners

Guidance for Human Resource

VENKATARAMAN NILAKANT*, BERNARD WALKER**, KYLIE ROCHFORD***andKATE VAN HEUGTEN****
Abstract
Based on a qualitative study of four organisations involving 47 respondents following the extensive 2010 –2011 earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, this paper presents some guidance for human resource
practitioners dealing with post-disaster recovery. A key issue is the need for the human resource function toreframe its practices in a post-disaster context, developing a specific focus on understanding and addressingchanging employee needs, and monitoring the leadership behaviour of supervisors. This article highlights
the importance of flexible organisational responses based around a set of key principles concerning
communication and employee perceptions of company support.
Keywords: Human resources (HR), disaster, recovery, resilience

Introduction
Disasters present a major conundrum for organisations. Workers can experience significant losses andtrauma which affect their ability to work, with morale and engagement potentially declining (Pearson and
Clair 1998). Yet in the aftermath of a disaster, those workers are vitally needed to assist with businessrecovery. This tension between the personal needs of workers and the demands of organisations is asignificant challenge, yet there is little guidance available for human resource practitioners who have tomanage these situations (Byron & Peterson, 2002; Ferris, Hochwarter & Matherley, 2007; Goodman &Mann, 2008).
The city of Christchurch, New Zealand, experienced a major earthquake with loss of life and large scale
damage; this was accompanied by an extended period of ongoing, traumatic and damaging seismic activity.
The present study explored the experiences of management and workers in this situation, using in-depth
interview data from 47 respondents across four organisations. We discovered that pre-planned emergency
management procedures were of limited value, and instead organisations had to respond to the ongoingchallenges through a process of adaptation and learning.
We identified a set of core principles needed to drive this adaptive change; these centred upon identifying
and addressing changing employee needs and expectations. Van Heugten had also undertaken a groundedstudy with 43 managers and frontline workers, across a range of social services and other industries,
identifying some similar and complementary findings. In this paper, we draw on our core principles,
augmented with relevant findings from van Heugten’s study, to present a framework for understanding andaddressing the post-disaster needs of employees, and propose a series of suggestions for HR practitioners.

*

Associate Professor, College of Business and Law, University of Canterbury
Senior Lecturer, College of Business and Law, University of Canterbury***
Researcher, College of Business and Law, University of Canterbury****
Associate Professor, Department of Human Services and Social Work, University of Canterbury**

1New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

Research into Disasters
Disasters propel organisations into a situation that is rapidly changing and uncertain, where their usual
operating guidelines no longer apply. The organisational disaster literature has tended to focus on predisaster matters, emphasising the need for activities, such as identifying and minimising risks, anddeveloping business continuity plans to prepare organisations for the disaster phase. The post-disaster stage,
and particularly the longer term recovery processes, have, however, received less attention (Lettieri, Masella& Radaelli, 2009).
At the level of individual workers, people exposed to traumatic events can experience a range of negative
psychological reactions (Byron & Peterson, 2002; De Salvo & Hyre, 2007; Ferris et al., 2007; Leon, Hyre,
Ompad, Deslavo & Muntner, 2007). For employers, this has significant consequences. The immediatedemands of post-disaster living can make workers more focussed on self-preservation while thepsychological reactions adversely affect those workers’ ability to perform their roles, and absenteeism canincrease. These challenges occur at the very time that organisations most need their workers. While postdisaster support is a significant avenue for potentially mitigating the negative effects of a disaster,comparatively little research has been devoted to the organisational implications and post-disastermanagement of employees (Pearson & Clair, 1998; De Salvo & Hyre, 2007; Goodman & Mann, 2008).
The limited research does note a number of potential lines for action. Recent disasters illustrate the need for
employers to monitor workers’ stress and offer counselling (Norris, Friedman & Watson, 2002; De Salvo &Hyre, 2007; Leon et al., 2007). Other tangible types of assistance, such as housing, meals, and emergency
supplies, may lessen employee stress, reduce absenteeism, and foster positive work-related attitudes(Sanchez, Korbin & Viscarra, 1995; Byron & Peterson, 2002). Employees may also have expectations that
their companies will “step up to the plate” after a disaster (Byron & Peterson 2002: 906) while the perceived
fairness of employer actions also influences workers’ responses (Sanchez et al., 1995; Harvey & Haines,2005). Together, these findings indicate a need to explore post-disaster HR management issues and thiscreated the impetus for the current study.
Contextual Background
In September 2010, the city of Christchurch New Zealand experienced a magnitude 7.4 (Richter scale)
earthquake. During the two year period that followed, the city experienced 12,000 seismic events, including
52 major events of magnitude 5 or above. The most powerful event in February 2011 caused 185 deaths andwidespread damage. The prolonged nature of the recovery and the continuing aftershocks compounded thissituation, with further damage and the forced relocation of many residents. Many left the city while mental
health issues increased significantly among those who remained (Dorahy & Kannis-Dymand, 2012; Carville,2013). This situation provided a rare opportunity to observe the nature of the interactions between
management and employees following a major disaster.

Research Design
The study used a qualitative, grounded theory-based research design, utilising semi-structured interviews. A
total of 47 interviews were conducted across four large organisations in Christchurch in the latter part of2011. Respondents were asked to describe (a) their experiences during and subsequent to the February 2011
earthquake; (b) their subsequent experiences and needs, and (c) their experience of the nature of assistanceand support they received from their managers and the organisation. Employee responses were coded using
2

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

NVivo software and these codes were combined to form themes (Boyatzis, 1998; Auerbach & Silverstein,
2003; Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Saldana, 2011)

Findings
The organisations offered a range of support services for their workers, from primary assistance such as
food, water, showering and laundry, through to cash, counselling, and holidays. However, focussing on thespecifics of the assistance given in this situation may be of limited value as those details may not beapplicable in other types of disaster. Instead, the study sought to identify a more universal set of principles
and dynamics that could generalise to a variety of situations.
The findings revealed four themes relating to employee needs and expectations, which we now outline,
along with a series of applied issues for HR practitioners to consider. 1
The Initial Phase: Physical Needs and Communication
The initial phase concerned the first 12 hours following the disaster. The needs in this period centred on
physical and psychological safety, communication with partners and family, and necessities, such as food,shelter, and water. These are largely matters that require pre-disaster preparation.
Immediate priorities in many disasters are the evacuation of buildings and checking on employees.
Evacuation plans typically involve fire-safety assembly points, however, these can be unsuitable for events
such as seismic disasters if they are near buildings and exposed to falling debris during aftershocks. The
Christchurch disaster involved collapsed buildings and long lists of missing persons, so HR staff needed
emergency contact lists that were prepared in advance, updated, and readily accessible (Ferris et al., 2007;
Mann, 2011):
The leader of that, if it’s a branch or business unit, needs to account for all of their staff. Whether
they’re in at work or whether they’re on leave or away for the day sick, they needed to get hold of
those people. Some branches were coming through quite quickly with responses that everyone wassafe and then others took us until well into the night.
Organisations that were caught unprepared in the first quake learned from this experience and, subsequently,
developed more disaster-ready measures, including having multiple copies of key information both on-siteand off-site:
Every one of our team, and not just the exec management team…now carries a little thing called ago-pack in their car. I’ve got two. I’ve got one in the car here and one in the car at home. Which is
hard copies of all the contact lists. Batteries go flat and computers you can’t get your contact lists
Following the disaster, larger organisations looked to develop systems for the future which would expedite
the preliminary contact process, exploring options such as issuing staff with cards and an 0800 number sothat, in a disaster, staff could text or ring in and report their status. After these preliminary checks, however,there is still a need for more detailed assessment of employees’ status. We found that workers expected
employer-initiated contact. Workers, who were away from the workplace at the time of the disaster,interpreted a lack of contact from the employer as demonstrating a lack of concern, and this perception
shaped their perceptions of the organisation’s responses.
Workers, who had to remain at work, had an intense need to communicate with family. Uncertainty about
the safety of family members significantly influenced those workers’ own emotional state and their ability to3New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

concentrate on work. This need for communication also continued through the following months as theongoing aftershocks meant that workers regularly needed to check the well-being of significant others.
Employers had to create systems to permit such communication, as well as providing flexibility andallowing family needs to be addressed as a priority.
The basic, practical needs of water, food, and shelter were central. Severe damage to the infrastructure
meant that supplies of water and food ceased, and organisations were dependent on whatever reserves they
had. For essential-service organisations with staff working through the initial crisis period, a key lesson was
the need to provide food for their employees:
The army figured out years ago troops can’t fight on an empty stomach. We put a big kitchen in overhere at the emergency op centre and a couple of big deep freezers with plenty of food in it. We now
know when there is an emergency, somebody goes out and cooks up a storm and the troops eat.
Although most Christchurch workers were able to access their homes after work, in other disasters, it may
be difficult or impossible for workers to return to their homes. Preparing for this may require employers andworkers to prepare stocks of clothing, shelter, food and supplies (Mowll & Wellington Lifelines Group,2012).
Finally, as employees re-entered their workplaces, the need for a sense of safety became prominent. Safetymeasures, such as assessments to ensure the safety of buildings after major seismic jolts, and establishingclear procedures for aftershocks, significantly influenced workers’ readiness to return. These issues also
applied to other workers whose workplaces reopened in the following weeks. Where organisations failed to
do this, either because they failed to recognise the importance of this issue for workers, or because they did
not have arrangements to access suitable specialist services, this created long-lasting mistrust between
management and employees.
In summary, for this phase of a disaster, the key human resources issues centre on ensuring that theorganisation has:a) pre-written and rehearsed evacuation planb) staff emergency contact lists that are up-to-date and readily accessible, both on-site and off-site,while maintaining confidentialityc) pre-arranged systems to account for staff in the immediate post-disaster phase, contacting andchecking on staff safety as well as having pre-disaster systems for recording staff and visitor
movementsd) stocks of food, water and essential suppliese) systems, including arrangements with engineers and other specialists, for ensuring the safety of
workplaces before staff re-enterf) accurate communications to staff on practical matters such as the safety of buildings.
Recovery: Managing Expectations and Maintaining Equity
There was wide variation in the ways and extent to which employees were affected by the disaster. Somepeople lost family members in the collapse of city buildings. Geographically, the east of the city was much
more severely affected than the west, and even at the street-level, some houses suffered extensive damage
while others were unaffected. Intra-personal differences further influenced how individuals reacted to thesame situation (Byron & Peterson, 2002). Given this diversity, employees initially tended to see their own
level of need in comparison to others. They assessed their condition relative to their colleagues, especiallythose most negatively affected, so tended to understate their own situation. Managers later discovered that
4

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

workers who lost their homes did not report this for several days, even when talking with managers, as thoseworkers perceived that their situation was not as bad as that of others.
This influenced the employees’ willingness to articulate their own needs and the extent to which theyutilised the support services offered by the employer. In those early stages, although workers recognised theassistance that was available, they were reluctant to access this, believing that other people needed
assistance before them. The crux, however, was that although many did not utilise the services themselves,
they were aware that the support existed and they placed great value on knowing that support was offered,even though only a small proportion of staff utilised the specific supports.
To develop a more objective assessment of needs, some organisations created systems to identify andclassify employees’ situations:
We did a matrix sort of risk pattern of what’s happened physically to them, mentally - is their housedamaged, are their family okay. You know, so we were able to map that out quite quickly and thatallowed us to know who were kind of on our high-risk radar and that we stayed very, very close to
those people.
That gave us a bit of a heads-up particularly to those staff that would be too potentially proud tocome forward and say they needed something.
The nature of the information to be gathered needed to be determined in advance; some organisations started
the process and then later realised they omitted important issues. The assessment needed to becomprehensive, covering physical and psychological well-being of the employee, family, any extended
family, as well as damage to housing, the availability of essential services, and other urgent needs:
We definitely could have done that piece better in hindsight. You know after the September one, we
could have locked in some of those pieces better around what, in a crisis, would be the things thatyou need to ask if you were calling an individual because I felt we asked these ones, and then I
thought, oh, we could have asked these questions. You know, it could have been two or three things
that if we’d tagged them on, we would have got a much better picture.
The workers’ tendency to defer to the needs of others was confined to the very early stages though. As thecity moved into longer term recovery, people became more conscious of their own pressing needs. Fairness
and equity regarding support received became a contentious issue. Workers began to revise their views of
their own situation, particularly their needs and the assistance they expected. People became very aware of
the support that their friends, and even colleagues in the same organisation, were receiving. In the earlydisaster phase, public attention focussed on those people who had lost family members, and these people
were perceived as having the greatest need. After that initial crisis however, attention and sympathy
progressively moved through a variety of groups within the population. The focus shifted first to people who
had lost their homes; after that, sympathy moved to those who were battling insurance companies, thoseneeding major house repairs, and those who were not coping with the aftershocks. Each of these
progressions encompassed a much larger number of people, and gradually the contrast between the affectedgroup and other workers became less marked.
This created a dilemma for organisations that had assisted the most-affected employees in the initial period;
how long should this level of support continue, and what assistance should be given to the other employeeswith their own disaster-related needs? Almost all employees needed ‘stress days’, time off to look afterchildren, or time for dealing with agencies. Managers had attended to the immediate needs of the worstaffected employees but had not foreseen the more widespread, longer term needs that would emerge. They
had to find sustainable ways to provide ongoing support for the most needy while also acknowledging the5New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

needs of other employees. Staff and managers who were less dramatically affected began to exhibit lesstolerance for others who were still dealing with practical and emotional post-disaster issues. While
employees appreciated the concessions and support given, it was a challenge for organisations to avoid
perceptions of inequity or favouritism, especially when the situation continued to unfold in ways that had
not been anticipated.
An additional problem noted by van Heugten was that many workers, including managers and supervisors,
who had coped well in the weeks and months following each of the major earthquakes, were extremely
exhausted by late 2011. They had worked long hours and were coming to the end of their reserves, while
media attention was shifting away from the needs of earthquake-affected Cantabrians. Exhaustion, and a
growing sense of unfairness about their needs being neglected, led some to become more irritable, anddecision making could be impaired. Front line workers in van Heugten’s research, many of whom remained
sensitive to the needs of others and prone to downward comparison (“I am fortunate by comparison to...”),
attempted to shield their tired supervisors from workplace issues, including conflicts between staff, andresourcing problems. This could potentially lead to problem situations being left unattended until they
became major and critical.
When organisational leaders continued to check on the wellbeing of all staff in a personal, but not intrusive,
manner (Boullion, 2007), and when staff knew that support was needs-based, this knowledge moderated
their perceptions of unfairness. This was especially so when managers did identify the needs of people who
showed few visible signs of non-coping, and attended to these as a matter of importance. Several of van
Heugten’s participants also identified the helpfulness of post-disaster educational seminars. These seminars
had raised awareness of the diverse types of psychological and behavioural responses to stress that could
occur as well as the likelihood that conflicts might arise due to the differences in people’s responses. Thisawareness enabled the workers to take a step back and reflect on unexpected reactions from colleagues, andto be more tolerant of those.
The key HR tasks to address in this regard are:a) develop systems to thoroughly check on, and record the status of individual workers after thedisaster, covering their own safety and well-being, other family members, and their homesb) use methods, such as systems to identify and classify employees’ situations, to avoid potential underreporting in the initial stagesc) continue to monitor changes in employees’ needs and perceptions; stay directly in touch with
employees to gain their first-hand perceptions concerning the support-types that are of most valued) from the outset, attempt to look at both the short-term, and potential long-term needs; createtransparent and equitable systems that can both assist the most needy as well supporting larger
numbers of employees in the longer terme) provide indications of how long assistance can be expected to continue (while reserving themanagerial right to extend this, if appropriate)f) be ready to manage the tension that can exist between assisting severely affected employees andothers who may have lesser degrees of direct disaster-related harmg) avoid assuming that workers who have coped well initially will continue to do so, and ensure that
support is seen to be based on needs. When employees are generally aware that support is needsbased, they are less likely to perceive company actions as being unfairh) provide education, including information about the benefits of restorative relaxation and time-out for
all staff before exhaustion levels become critical. Encourage managers and supervisors to set
examples around self-care.

6New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

Recovery: Monitoring Changing Needs
The nature of employees’ needs also evolved as the situation progressed from the initial disaster response
into longer term recovery. In the first days after the disaster, employees’ needs included very tangible
provisions, such as food and water, ablutions, laundry, house-repairs and accommodation:
We put washing machines in here and…the practicalities of life that people needed – water, shower
facilities, and I could be here at 7 o’clock at night and people would bring their families in and theywould all have showers. The reality was it was just at such a basic level so there was no need to go
and do a whole load. I think we pitched it right. It was that we were pitching it in the right space forbasic needs
At work, in those early days after the disaster, there was a high level of energy with employees often
wanting to assist and feel they were contributing to the recovery, or to provide a sense of normality among
the chaos. Levels of engagement were high:The boys didn’t go home until they worked out how they could operate without that particularbuilding. They’re just focussed, highly engaged, resilient, almost driven by the challenge like call toaction, heroism. Man, a high performing team.
Van Heugten found that employees returning to work valued opportunities for colleagues to spend social
time together. Shared morning teas, lunches, or barbeques provided important opportunities for workers tocatch up, debrief, and provide social support. Informal gatherings also helped people, who had been
relocated due to damaged workplaces, get to know the other workers with whom they often had to share
cramped accommodation.
Communication of information continued to be a key priority. Van Heugten found workers valued
personalised inquiries into their needs from their immediate managers or supervisors. Amidst the ongoingaftershocks, workers required regular updates on the safety of premises. They wanted to know theiremployers’ expectations and allowances around work readiness, and needed reassurances about pay.
Workers generally accepted that this practical information could be delivered through generic companywide or divisional communications. However, frontline workers and managers noted that, unless the people
making these communications were located within the disaster zone, information was often out of date or
inaccurate, or lacking in sensitivity to the emotional impact of local happenings.
As the city moved into the long-haul of recovery, the situation changed. In the initial post-disaster phase,needs could be addressed in practical ways; however, as the recovery progressed the needs became more
subtle, with new pressures creating more stress. Workers confronted demands, such as caring for themselves
and extended family, living long-term in badly damaged homes and neighbourhoods, and job-losses amongfamily members. Prolonged and acrimonious negotiations with insurers were time-consuming and stressful,and could be accompanied by the need to find alternative accommodation during repairs. In some cases,
people were required to permanently relocate. Throughout this, there was a pervasive uncertainty regarding
their future (Sanchez et al., 1995).
The disaster also produced increased demands at work. The initial zeal faded and many employees
experienced higher than normal workload, working extra hours with fewer resources. In some sectors,
certain sites experienced vastly increased work volumes while others had less change. When companies did
not monitor this and act to redistribute the work, it produced both exhaustion and a sense of injustice among
workers.
7

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

Workers involved in the immediate rebuild efforts, including emergency services, demolition crews, local
authority staff, infrastructure workers and trades people, were vulnerable to burnout and work engagement
began to decline (Quarantelli, 1988). In service industries, there were added pressures from dealing withheightened customer stress levels. Van Heugten found that where the nature of the work allowed, options
such as varying or rotating work tasks, and providing regular opportunities for frontline workers to move“backstage” for breaks, could be effective in helping workers manage these demands.
It was a challenging task for organisations to gauge the evolving needs of employees; there was considerable
variation in the extent to which they achieved this and were in touch with the actual needs. The mosteffective organisations maintained some direct, two-way links between senior management and employees.
Van Heugten noted that communications from management to workers now needed to take account of
increasing employee weariness and wariness. Workers became critical of generalised messages of sympathy
and thanks that were emailed to all staff, dismissing these as platitudes that showed a lack of genuine
concern for workers’ ongoing plight. Workers could mistrust the motives for those communications,especially if they occurred when management were implementing top-down changes with little consultation.
Managers wrestled with the tension between meeting business demands while continuing to accommodate
workers’ needs. They were not sure when their organisations should resume ‘business-as-usual’:We’re in the long-run game, that’s when it’s really going to get a bit tougher when you’re starting tomanage additional workloads because you’ve got [case-types] coming through and red zone houses
and insurance queries. You know, layer on layer of issues and you’re asking staff to do more, things
are taking more time to get things done.
Some managers were accommodating, allowing people to recover at their own rate. Others, however,
became keen to shift the attention back to business performance. Eight months after the earthquake, aproportion of managers believed that the situation was returning to ‘normal’. Workers did not share thisview and suggested that those managers were overlooking their ongoing needs and well-being, particularlyin the long-term recovery. Although the organisations offered a lot of assistance immediately during andafter the disaster, workers felt their subsequent, less obvious needs were overlooked:
I think people have been stoic and got through this to a point but actually there’s not much on thesurface before you scratch below and actually get into some people with some real mental healthissues.
Providing assistance for employees to address outside-of-work demands on its own did not necessarily
address the overall situation confronting employees. For example, giving employees time off to deal withdisaster-related issues could compound work problems when this was not linked with managing work
demands, and there was need for a more comprehensive package for managing the employees’ situation.
Staff, who were allowed time to deal with matters such as housing and insurance, returned to find that theirwork had not been dealt with in their absence and this exacerbated matters.
In some essential-services organisations where staff worked rostered hours and had difficulty accessing
external services, their companies appointed coordinators who helped employees link with the range ofagencies and post-disaster services, and even arranged for those agencies to visit the workplaces.
Although it was difficult to balance the increased work and home demands, it was not inevitable that the
combination would lead to increased dissatisfaction. Hochwarter, Laird and Brouer (2008) collected datafrom five studies following hurricanes in the United States of America, and concluded that, even when work
demands are particularly high in the aftermath of disasters, workers can gain an increased sense ofsatisfaction from meeting these as long as they are adequately resourced for doing so. They found that, in
8

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

addition to requiring adequate practical resources, workers are better able and more inclined to rise to thechallenge of meeting high demands if they are afforded a degree of control over the organisation of work,and flexibility around matching workplace and personal needs (van Heugten, in press).
In this phase, management’s role involves attending to evolving employee needs, and key actions include:a) creating opportunities to enable workers to spend time together to reacquaint themselves with teammembers, debrief, and offer mutual social supportb) providing timely and appropriate communications on practical matters, as well as avenues for staff to
ask questions about matters that concern themc) establishing systems to continue monitoring individual employees’ changing needs as the recovery
progressesd) where possible, gathering the information directly from the employees themselvese) using this information to determine the types of assistance that is most needed, gathering feedback on
its effectiveness, and being prepared to keep on revising thisf) constantly monitoring workloads, acknowledging the extra pressure and, where possible, acting toredistribute uneven workloadsg) developing holistic plans regarding workloads, taking into account both work and outside-of-work
aspectsh) considering provisions that will facilitate employees’ access to support agencies; encouraging
employee participation in decision making and planning.
The Leadership Behaviour of Supervisors
In several organisations, the senior managers focussed the organisation’s attention on addressing theworkers’ well-being through both their instructions and their actions. Those managers explicitly directed
their leadership teams to attend to employees’ needs, doing everything the company could, and calling on all
the resources the company had in order to assist staff who were in need. They also set a very clear example
through their own actions, for example, going out and delivering assistance:
We had food, food parcels and things like that. We had water, so we were out and about to actuallysense and feel what was going on. You know, how they were coping. It was that immediacy of you’dwalk in and they’d give you big hugs. It was like that connection. It wasn’t like you were the boss
coming in to see how they were going.
The frontline workers did not always feel this level of support though. Their main contact with management
was through their immediate supervisor, and the way that supervisor treated them shaped their impression of
the organisation’s support. The immediate supervisor held a pivotal position. Senior management trusted thesupervisors to communicate their concern for the workers, to provide emotional support to workers, and also
inform workers of the support that was available. Supervisors were also relied upon for assessing
individuals’ needs, reporting back to senior management about the situation of workers and their needs.
Some performed these roles well but others were much less effective. In some parts of an organisation,
supervisors failed to inform employees of the support available, and this caused employees in those areas tofeel as if they were being unfairly treated compared to other workers, creating stress and dissatisfaction.
Supervisors could also have lower levels of interpersonal skills; they lacked ability in recognisingindividuals’ needs, acknowledging the stress affecting workers, communicating their understanding, oroffering flexibility in the work.
The managers themselves identified the need for empathy and emotional intelligence as attributes that they
had to cultivate during the disaster:9New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

The thing that I think you learn through that is that it gives you a new level of compassion for yourpeople because you think you’re compassionate as a leader to start with but, actually it’s so very
different when you’re in a situation where you’re in destruction mode and you know you’re justtrying to manage through.
Senior management had to create organisation-wide support provisions that were transparent and equitable.
When an immediate supervisor understood the intent of those provisions and implemented them in acompassionate but fair manner, employees felt supported and fairly treated by the organisation. Conversely,
when supervisors were unsympathetic and seemingly unfair in their responses, the workers formed anegative evaluation of the overall organisation. The emotional intelligence of supervisors, shown in theirawareness of workers’ well-being and their ability to be supportive, empathetic and fair was a significant
influence on how workers perceived the organisation’s support (Boyatzis, Goleman & Rhee, 2000).
Although supervisors’ emotional intelligence is often viewed as a personal trait, van Heugten found that thecontext also affected the ability to empathise, with supervisors and managers who had worked to exhaustion
becoming less able to offer empathy and support. Managers and supervisors could also find it extremely
difficult to declare their needs because this could lead to loss of face. Normalising the need for time out, andinsisting that all staff at all levels benefit from downtime and respite, even if they might be inclined todismiss their personal need for that, is a key preventive measure against burnout (Hochwarter et al., 2008).
The following key guidelines can assist in promoting appropriate leadership behaviours:a) educate senior management and supervisors regarding the changing nature of workers’ post-disasterneeds, and the necessity of keeping employee well-being as a central focus throughout all phases ofdisaster recoveryb) ensure that senior management know how to provide clear leadership during a disaster, articulating a
set of values that strongly emphasise acknowledging and supporting employees as well as modelling
appropriate ways of acting; this could include having direct contact with frontline workers so that
employees can see these behaviours and supervisors can follow their examplec) as part of pre-disaster preparation, assess the competencies and behaviours of supervisors with regard
to their leadership and emotional intelligence; coach and train them in this regard and consider
making it a central part of their performance criteria, then when a disaster does occur those abilities
will be a vital part of the organisation’s recoveryd) monitor the performance of supervisors during a disaster, gathering independent evaluations of what
is happening across the various sections within the organisation; this should include gathering some
information directly from the employees themselvese) ensure that managers and supervisors are able to have suitable rest and support for their own needs.

Conclusion
Under normal circumstances, HR managers can utilise well-established policies and procedures. In a postdisaster context, however, those procedures may no longer be appropriate and, instead, managers arechallenged to find new ways to address worker needs. A range of types of assistance are required as disasterrecovery progresses, ranging from help accessing tangible resources that meet primary needs, such as food,water, housing, laundry, and childcare – through to psychosocial assistance, including counselling, andaccess to social service agencies, and social support via informal gatherings, and opportunities for relaxationand fun (Sanchez et al., 1995). Workers’ needs vary between individuals, and change over time.
The HR function needs to be sensitive to this evolving pattern of needs in order to assist in organisational
recovery. The extent to which workers perceive the organisation’s actions as appropriate shapes workers’
evaluations of the organisation; irrelevant or inadequate supports are likely to be viewed as failings or lack10

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

of concern on the part of the employer. This includes the major challenge of ensuring that workers view thedecision processes for allocating resources and assistance as fair and equitable. Accompanying this is theneed for emotional awareness among supervisors and middle managers, including their ability to convey
empathy and support as well as their ability to recognise and respond to practical and emotional needs (Bies& Moag, 1986). When a supervisor exhibits higher levels of such emotional awareness, employees are likely
to perceive greater organisational support. These principles are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Key principles and their Implications in a Post-Disaster Context
Principle
Physical needs and communication

IssuesPhysical and psychological safety,
communication
withfamily,necessities (food, shelter, andwater).
Recovery: monitoring changing Identifying immediate and evolving
needs
needs, from tangible matters (e.g.
essential supplies, housing, laundry,and childcare) as well as social
support, (e.g. counselling, andaccess to agencies)
Recovery: managing expectations The equity and fairness of theand maintaining equity
processes for allocating assistance

Leadership behaviour of supervisors

The emotional awareness ofsupervisors and middle managers,
including their ability to empathise,
convey empathy and support,
recognise and respond to practicaland emotional needs

Implications
Evacuation, accounting for/contacting
staff, contact with families, safety,
essential supplies
Ongoing monitoring to identify
changing employee needs, and supply
assistance that matches those needs
Feedback from employees

Short and long-term post-disasterplanning to address current needs
anticipate emerging needs
Devise assistance measures that are seen
as fair and equitable
Ensure that assistance is sustainable andremains equitable across employees
Emotional awareness and competencyof supervisors and middle managers
Pre-disaster training and evaluation
Post-disaster monitoring of supervisors

If organisations fail in these types of areas, workers will view the organisation negatively, seeing it asuncaring and unsupportive. Employee perceptions of organisational support significantly affect work
engagement. In a disaster, this takes on new prominence with employees experiencing new, heightenedlevels of need, which makes them acutely aware of organisations’ responses. If workers believe they aresupported, then they are more likely to be productive, committed, willing to engage in organisational
citizenship behaviours, and less likely to quit (Harvey & Haines, 2005; Saks, 2006; Bakker & Demerouti,2008). In a disaster, this can assist the recovery of the organisation.
The findings from this study highlight the need for the HR function to adapt in a disaster, so as to foster aprompt and sustainable recovery for individuals and the organisation. Applying the set of principles andguidelines outlined in this paper allows the HR function to remain flexible and adaptive, mitigating theharmful effects of the disaster.

11New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

References
Auerbach, C.F. & L.B. Silverstein. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New
York, NY: NYU Press
Bakker, A.B. & Demerouti, E. (2008).Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development
International.13(3): 209-223
Bies, R.J. & Moag, J.S. (1986). International justice: Communication criteria or fairness. In R.J Lewicki,
B.H Sheppard and M. Bazerman, M. (eds). Research on negotiation in organizations.(pp. 43-55).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
Bouillon, M.T. (2007).Workplace implications for hurricane affected Gul Coast region industrial
companies. PhD Dissertation. Louisiana Tech University. Retrieved from:http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-04032007-163739/unrestricted/Boullion_dis.pdf
Boyatzis, R.E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Boyatzis, R.E., Goleman, D. & Rhee, K.S. (2000).Clustering competence in emotional intelligence: Insightsfrom the emotional competence inventory. In R. Bar-on, and J.D.A Parker. (eds). The handbook of
emotional intelligence: Theory, development, Assessment and application at home, school, and in theworkplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Byron, K. & Peterson, S. (2002). The impact of a large-scale traumatic event on individual andorganizational outcomes: Exploring employee and company reactions to September 11, 2001. Journal of
Organizational Behavior.23(8): 895-910
Carville, O. (2013, 15 April). Aftershock of depression, anger still felt. The Press. Retrieved from:http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/8549887/Aftershock-of-depression-anger-still-felt
Corbin, J.M. & A.L. Strauss (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures fordeveloping grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
De Salvo, K.B. & Hyre, A.D. (2007). Symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder in a New Orleans
workforce following Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Urban Health.84(2): 142-152
Dorahy, M.J. & Kannis-Dymand, L. (2012). Psychological Distress Following the 2010 Christchurch
Earthquake: A Community Assessment of Two Differentially Affected Suburbs. Journal of Loss andTrauma. 17: 203-217
Ferris, G.R., Hochwarter, W.A. & Matherly, T.A. (2007). HRM After 9/11 and Katrina In S. Werner, S.
Jackson and R. Schuler (eds.).Current issues in North American HRM. (pp. 172-185). New York: Taylor
and Francis.
Goodman, D. & Mann, S. (2008). Managing Public Human Resources Following Catastrophic Events:
Mississippi’s Local Governments Experiences Post-Hurricane Katrina. Review of Public Personnel
Administration.28(3): 3-19.
Harvey, S. & Haines, V.Y. (2005). Employer treatment of employees during a community crisis: The role ofprocedural and distributive justice. Journal of Business and Psychology.20(1): 53-68.
12

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 38(1): 1-13

Hochwarter, W.A., Laird, M.D. & Brouer, R.L. (2008). Board Up the Windows: The Interactive Effects of
Hurricane-Induced Job Stress and Perceived Resources on Work Outcomes. Journal of Management. 34(2):263-289.
Leon, K.A., Hyre, A.D., Ompad, D., Desalvo, K.B. & Muntner, P. (2007). Perceived stress among aworkforce 6 months following hurricane Katrina. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology.42(12):1005-1011.
Lettieri, E., Masella, C. & Radaelli, G. (2009). Disaster management: Findings from a systematic review
Disaster Prevention and Management.18(2): 117-136.
Mann, S. (2011). Building sustainable cities in a post-Katrina nation: HR’s role in mitigation and planning.
Public Works Management Policy. 17(1): 30-51.
Mowell, P.M. & Wellington Lifelines Group. (2012). Lifeline Utilities Restoration Times for Metropolitan
Wellington Following a Wellington Fault Earthquake; Report to the Wellington CDEM Group Joint
Committee from the Wellington Lifelines Group. Retrieved from:http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/Emergencies--Hazards/Emergency-Planning/12-11-13-WeLG-report-toCDEM-Joint-Committee-restoration-times-FINAL.pdf
Norris, F.H., Friedman, M.J. & Watson, P.J. (2002). 60,000 disaster victims speak: Part I. An review of theempirical literature, 1981–2001. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes.65(3): 207-239.
Pearson, C.M. & Clair, J.A. (1998). Reframing crisis management. Academy of Management Review. 23(1):59-76.
Quarantelli, E.L. (1988). Disaster crisis management: A summary of research findings. Journal ofManagement Studies. 25(4): 373-385.
Saks, A.M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial
Psychology. 21(7): 600-619
Saldana, J. (2011). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage.
Sanchez, J.I., Korbin, W.P. & Viscarra, D.dM. (1995). Corporate Support in the Aftermath of a Natural
Disaster: Effects on Employee Strains. The Academy of Management Journal. 38(2): 504-521.
van Heugten, K. (in press). Supporting human service workers following the Canterbury earthquakes.
Aotearoa NZ Social Work Review.

Notes

1

These themes are drawn from the settings observed in our study along with van Heugten’s findings,
however, they do not purport to be exhaustive guidelines. The application of the themes may also varyacross industries.

13

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26

Context-specific Stressors, Work-related Social Support and Work-Family
Conflict: A Mediation Study
STEPHEN T.T. TEO*, CAMERON NEWTON** and KARINA SOEWANTO***
Abstract
Understanding the antecedents of work-family conflict is important as it allows organisations to effectively
engage in work design for professional employees. This study examines the impact of sources of social
support as antecedents of work-family conflict. The hypotheses were tests using Partial Least Squares
modelling on a sample of 366 professional employees. The path model showed that context-specific stressors
impacted positively on job demand, which led to higher levels of work-family conflict. Contrary to our
expectation, non-work related social support did not have any statistical relationship with job demand andwork-family conflict. In addition, individuals experiencing high job demands were found to obtain more social
support from both work and non-work-related sources. Individuals with more work-related social support wereless likely to have less work-family conflict. Surprisingly, non-work social support sources had no statisticallysignificant relationship with work-family conflict.
Key words: professional service, stressors, social support, work-family conflict, mediation

Introduction
Professional employees are working longer hours than ever before, resulting in reduced time spent with theirfamilies. This is particularly the case for service-related professions (e.g. accountants, lawyers, etc). Thereexists a considerable body of literature that has investigated the potential negative impact of work interferingwith the family domain. One such example is work-family conflict (WFC). WFC has been shown to have anegative impact on organisational, family, and personal outcomes (Frone, Russell & Cooper, 1997; Yildirima& Aycan, 2008). WFC has also been shown to be the consequence of job stress (Pal & Saksvik, 2008) and be
negatively associated with job performance indicators (Gilboa, Shirom, Fried & Cooper, 2008). This is similar
to the same conceptualisation of WFC as Carlson and Perrewé (1999).
Social support from both work and non-work sources has been studied in relation to its effect in reducing thenegative consequences of work intensification. Various scholars such as Haar (2008) concluded that workrelated social support (such as a supportive supervisor) has a negative relationship with WFC. Social support
has been shown to reduce time demands, and thus, indirectly decrease WFC (Carlson & Perrewé, 1999).
While some studies show that social support has a mediation effect (e.g., Carlson & Perrewé, 1999), othersargue that it has a buffer effect, where social support is treated as a moderator (Lawrence, 2006). Despite thesestudies, there have not been any studies which simultaneously examine the mediation and moderation effects
in the same model. This will be the aim of the current study.
*

Stephen T.T. Teo, AUT University**Cameron Newton, Queensland University of Technology*** Karina Soewanto, University of Technology Sydney

14New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26

Stressors, Social Support and Work-Family Conflict
The literature shows that stressors related to service work have been well-documented. At the broadest level,some researchers have described the work of customer service employees as monotonous (e.g., in terms ofrepetitive tasks) and demanding (e.g., in terms of quality and quantity of tasks to complete), and ultimately asource of strain for those holding such positions (Lewig & Dollard, 2003). Stressors are situated at the
beginning of the causal relationships. In the current paper, we adopted Ganster’s (2008: 260) definition wherestressors refer to:…some environmental events or conditions, exposure to which is hypothesized to cause changes inmental and physical well-being... [the] concern is with events and conditions of a psychosocial nature,ones such as pressure to meet a deadline, conflicting role demands, verbal abuse, threat of layoff, workoverload, and lack of control.
Recent research showed that Australian public sector employees experienced a variety of stressors related toservice provision due to the introduction of service orientation (Noblet, Teo, McWilliams & Rodwell, 2005).
As a result, several stressors were identified, which impact negatively on employees’ work attitudes. Indeed,
there are a large number of empirical studies across all organisational settings that have investigated workstressors and employee outcomes, along with several meta-analytic reviews (see Abramis, 1994; Jackson &Schuler, 1985; Örtqvist & Wincent, 2006).
Hypothesis 1. Higher levels of Context-specific stressors are positively related to perceived job demands.
Occupational stress theories and related empirical studies suggest that the relationship between job stressors
and employee adjustment is not as simple and direct as purported by some models in the literature. Indeed,
researchers have identified a considerable number of potential intervening variables of the work stressoradjustment process that add complexity to the nature of the occupational stress process (see Perrewé &Ganster, 2002, for review). In particular, studies have shown that social support could have an important effecton employee well-being generally, including work-family balance.
Pal and Saksvik (2008) noted sources of social support at the workplace have been found to help employees
cope with the stress from work intensification. Indeed, it is well documented that high levels of demands that
result from workplace stress facilitate levels of social instrumental support (i.e., work-based support andassistance provided by colleagues and/or supervisors) as a cost effective way of assisting employees to meetdemands. Similarly, non-work social support is elicited when friends express feelings of being overwhelmedby their workload. From another perspective, it can also be noted that higher levels of stressors can signify that
support in the workplace or outside of the workplace is lacking, in line with Social Identity Theory (Tajfel &Turner, 1986). Hence, such a lack of support can mean that employees are missing a vital coping resource
which can magnify the perception of events that may be considered stressors in the workplace (see Levine,
Cassidy, Brazier & Reicher, 2002).
Hypothesis 2. Higher levels of Context-specific stressors are negatively related to work (H2a) and non-work(H2b) related social support.

15

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Hypothesis 3. Higher levels of job demands are positively related to work (H3a) and non-work (H3b) relatedsocial support.

Work-Family Conflict (WFC)
The advent of computer technology and mobile access, globalisation, and increasing work demands haveresulted in the increasing intrusion of our work lives on our family lives. This situation is described in theliterature as work-family conflict (WFC) and has attracted considerable research attention in non-customer
service domains. WFC is defined by Greenhaus and Beutell (1985: 77) as “a form of inter-role conflict inwhich the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect”.
Specifically, WFC exists when the time, strain and behaviours required by one role make it difficult to fulfil
the requirements of the other role (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Therefore, WFC is conceptualised as a strain(see Carlson & Perrewé, 1999).
More recently Shaffer, Joplin and Hsu (2011: 225) noted that researchers conducting WFC have recognised
the “bidirectional relationship between work and family life”. Meta-analysis undertaken by Allen, Herst,
Bruck and Sutton (2000) highlights the potential negative consequences of WFC. This role strain hypothesis
suggests that individuals have a limited amount of psychological resources, time, and energy, and that strain
occurs when the demands of multiple roles exceed these resources (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).
Inspection of the literature suggests that many antecedents of WFC include job demand, and work social
support. More recently, meta-analytic review by Michel, Kortrba, Mitchelson, Clark, and Baltes (2011)
identified antecedents of WFC including work role stressors (such as job stressors and time demands).
Similarly Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux and Brinley (2005) identified antecedents of WFC to include
work domain variables, such as job stress; non-work domain variables, such as family demands and maritalconflict, and individual and demographic variables. Empirical evidence has demonstrated that factors, such as
work pressure, and unpredictability in work routines (such as that which might be experienced by customer
service employees responding to multiple and unexpected client demands) have significant and positive
relationships to WFC (e.g., Fox & Dwyer, 1999).
Hypothesis 4. Higher levels of Context-specific stressors are positively related to WFC.
Hypothesis 5: Higher levels of job demands are positively related to WFC.
In general, differing levels and types of social support has been found to be an antecedent of different levels ofreported WFC (Seiger & Wiese, 2009). For instance, work-related social support, such as supportive
supervisor can reduce WFC (see Greenhaus, Bedeian & Mossholder, 1987; Haar 2008). Carlson and Perrewé(1999) found that social support at work may reduce perceived role stressors and time demands, and thus,
indirectly decrease WFC. More specifically, these authors found that work social support was related to lower
levels of job-related conflict, time pressures, and ambiguity, which, in turn, results in lower levels of WFC(Michel, Mitchelson, Pichler & Cullen, 2010). Meta-analysis by Kossek, Pichler, Bodner and Hammer (2011)
identified two sources of work-related social support. They noted that supervisor support and organisation
support were both found to be more strongly related to lower levels of WFC than general supervisor support.
Non-work social support sources, such as family, spouse and friends, have also been studied. Family (or nonwork) social support was found to be related to lower levels of family role conflict and ambiguity, andsubsequent lower levels of WFC (Michel et al., 2010).
16

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Hypothesis 6. Higher levels of work (H5a) and non-work social support (H5b) are negatively related to WFC.
Hypothesis 7. Higher levels of work (H6a) and non-work social support (H6b) mediates the effect of workstressors on WFC such that higher levels of Context-specific stressors will lead to higher levels of support andlower WFC.
It is important to note that a significant amount of research has been conducted investigating the ability ofsocial support to moderate or buffer the potential negative impact of job stress on job-related attitudes andhealth. Viswesvaran, Sanchez and Fisher (1999) conducted meta-analyses of research that investigated themoderating role of social support on the work stressor-adjustment relationship. Generally, the researchers
found that the interaction of work stressors and social support explained significant additional variance withthe presence of social support (in its various forms) reducing the negative effects of work stressors on
employee strain. Furthermore, a considerable body of literature has provided some support for Karasek andTheorell’s (1990) theorised strain-and-buffer hypotheses relating to the demand, decision latitude, and social
support interactions (see also Karasek, 1979; Theorell & Karasek, 1996; van der Doef & Maes, 1999).
Interestingly, however, some studies have found a reverse-buffering effect for social support, such that it canaccentuate the impact of a work stressor on strain (e.g., Glaser, Tatum, Nebeker, Sorenson & Aiello, 1999). To
this extent, Beehr and Glazer (2001) suggest that these results might be a function of cultural context, and thatdifferent cultures and cultural characteristics (ethnic, in this case) might be related to perceptions of social
support. Overall, there is a considerable amount of theoretical and empirical evidence supporting the notionthat the work stressor-adjustment relationship can be moderated by social support.
Hypothesis 8.Higher levels of work (H7a) and non-work social support (H7b) will buffer the negative
consequences of context-specific job stressors on WFC.
The present study develops a model to examine the influence of work and non-work social support on WFC in
the context of professional service. Partial Least Squares Modelling was employed to test the hypotheses
displayed in the path model (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Proposed Model of Professional Service Employees and Context-specific Job Stressors

17New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26

Methods
Sample and Procedure
Questionnaires were distributed to 592 employees, with 366 completed and usable questionnaires returned(response rate = 61.8 percent). Questionnaires were distributed to professional service employees working insmall and medium-sized profit and not-for-profit organisations in sectors, such as finance and insurance, legal
and business services. The participants were recruited from a postgraduate business course in a large,
metropolitan university in Australia. Surveys were completed anonymously in paper-based format andparticipants then posted the completed survey back to the researcher using a reply-paid envelope. Prior to thesurvey phase, we conducted five focus groups to validate the context-specific stressors developed by Noblet etal. (2005) and their applicability in the service context. A total of 25 participants working in a high customer
and/or client contact role participated in the sessions (note: reliability coefficients are reported in Table 1).
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Inter-correlations
Mean

SD

AVE

Alpha

1

2

3

4

3.28

.87

.53

.85

.73

2. Job Demand

3.68

.74

.54

.83

.43***.74

3. Work-related Social Support

4.30

1.08

.41

.83

-.21***.10.64

3. Non-Work-related Social
Support

4.87

1.08

.48

.90

-.04

.13*

.40***.69

5. Work-Family Conflict

2.86

.88

.56

.74

.45***.37***

-.12*

.03

5

1. Context-Specific Stressors

.75

Note:
N=366 professional employees*p<.05***p<.001
Underlined and italicised numbers represent the square of the average variance estimates. These were used todetermine the discriminant analysis (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Measures
Work-family conflict. We used four items reflecting work interference with family developed by Kopelman,
Greenhaus and Connoly (1983, cited in Gutek, Searle & Klepa, 1991). Following Judge and Colquitt (2004)
who used the same scale, they were used to operationalise work-family conflict. An example item is ‘Myfamily or friends dislike how often I am preoccupied with my work while I am at home’ with items rated from1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), so that a high value signifies more WFC.
Context-specific stressors. Respondents were asked to respond to a 33-item situation-specific stressors scalethat required them to indicate the extent that each of the factors listed was a source of stress in their job on a18

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
five-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (major source of stress). These were used to examine theContext-specific stressors of a sample of public sector employees employed in customer service roles.
Stressors that were rated by at least 70 percent of respondents as being a moderate, large or major source ofstress (that is, a score of three, four or five on the five-point scale) were retained for further analysis. These
items were ‘Lack of human resources to accomplish tasks’, ‘Unclear expectations’, ‘Unrealistic performancetargets’, ‘Heavy workloads’, ‘Not having enough time to do job as well as you would like’, ‘Other staff not
pulling their weight’, and ‘Insufficient staff to complete work on time and to standard expected’. These items
were incorporated into the path model as a formative scale as we argued that all seven context-specificstressors are necessary in inducing stress at work for professional service employees.
Job Demand. Job demand was measured by adopting the 11 item scale from the scale adopted from Caplan,
Cobb, French, Harrison, and Pinneau (1980). The first set of five items was rated from ‘1’ (rarely) to ‘5’ (very
often). Sample item included ‘How often does your job require you to work very fast?’. The second set ofstatements required respondents to apply each statement to their jobs and respond on a five-point scale ranging
from ‘1’ (hardly any) to ‘5’ (a great deal). Sample item included ‘What quantity of work do others expect you
to do?’. Discriminant analysis on SmartPLS resulted in a final set of six items. High score indicates high job
demand.
Social Support. Etzion (1984) identified two different types of social support. Participants were asked torespond to a statement and indicate the level of support presence in their work environment. An example itemof work-related support is ‘To what extent do you get appreciation and recognition for what you do in yourwork life and life outside of work?’. Each of these statements was rated on a seven-point scale ranging from 1(very little) to 7 (very much).
Data analysis technique
We utilised SmartPLS v.2, (Ringle, Wende & Will, 2005), a form of structural equation modelling, to analyse
the model. SmartPLS is a technique used for estimating path coefficients in causal models and the software
allows for the simultaneous testing of hypotheses. Survey data were input to SPSS v.17 to calculate
descriptive statistics and inter-correlations.
The path coefficients are standardised regression coefficients and the loadings are similar to factor loadings.
The significance of each variable to another is then determined according to the bootstrap procedure (note:bootstrap was undertaken with 500 samples). PLS differs from LISREL as it is suitable for the analysis ofsmall samples while the latter requires substantially larger samples. Another advantage of using PLS over
LISREL is that PLS does not require multivariate normal data. Given the number of variables in the proposedmodel, the sample size is within the range considered to be suitable for PLS analysis (Chin & Newstead,1999).
Validity and reliability Issues
Validity and reliability of the reflective constructs are checked by examining the average variance extracted(AVE). Most of the AVE computed are greater than 0.5. Furthermore, comparison of these reliabilities withinter-construct correlations display adequate discriminant validity as the square root of the AVE for eachconstruct is much larger than its correlation with any other construct (Venaik, Midgley & Devinney, 2005).
The quality of the proposed structural model was determined using R-square of the dependent variables andthe Stone-Geisser Q-square test for predictive relevance (see Chin, 2010). We ran two separate analyses with
19

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
10 and 25 omission distance in order to test the stability of the results. Since the values are stable for bothomission distances and the majority of the Q-squares were greater than zero, we were confident that the modelis stable and the predictive relevance requirement is satisfied.
Harman’s ex-post one factor test was also used to ensure that the current study did not suffer from common
method variance (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). All the variables used in the study were entered into an
unrotated factor analysis to determine the number of factors. If a single factor emerges from the factor
analysis, this would indicate that the data suffered from a common method variance problem. The analysis
showed that there were six factors (with eigenvalues greater than 1.0) which explained 64.1 percent of thevariance. This finding provided support that common method variance is not an issue in the current study.

Findings
366 professional service employees participated in the study. They were employed in industries including
Finance and Insurance (40.7 percent), Manufacturing (10.4 percent), and Agricultural, Forestry, and Fishing(9.8 percent). The three largest groups of nationalities were those born in Indonesia (34.4 percent), Australia(33.3 percent), and Hong Kong (29.8 percent). There was equal number of males and females who participatedin the study. Most of the respondents were employed by private sector organisations. Nearly half of the
respondents were employed in organisations with greater than 1,000 employees. Most of the respondents havemore than three years of full time equivalent working experience with their current employer. Nearly half ofthe respondents were employed in operational and non-supervisory positions and nearly half of the
respondents spent more than 50 hours per week on servicing internal and or external customers.
The model explained 19.4 percent of the dependent variable, WFC. The global goodness of fit index(Tenenhause, Vinzi, Chatelin & Lauro, 2005) was 0.26, which indicated that the model has a medium
goodness of fit (Wetzels, Oderkerken-Schröder & van Oppen, 2009). Results from the bootstrapping arereported in Table 2 and results of the path analysis are illustrated in Figure 2.
Table 2. Results of Path Analysis
Paths
H1. Stressors  Job Demand
H2a. Stressors  Work Social Support
H3. Stressors  Work-Family Conflict
H4a. Job Demand  Work Social Support
H4b. Job Demand Non-Work Social Support
H5. Job Demand Work-Family Conflict
H6a. Work Social Support Work-Family Conflict

Path
Coefficients
0.45
-0.32
0.33
0.26
0.19
0.25
-0.12

t-statistic
9.81175.50905.62913.7034
3.12804.4634
1.9825

Sig.
level
***
***
***
***
**
***
*

* p<.05** p<.01*** p<.001

20

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Figure 2.Final Model of Context-specific Job Stressors and WFC*p<.05**p<.01***p<.001

The path from context-specific stressors to job demand was positive and significant. There was support for
Hypothesis 1. The path from Context-specific stressors to work social support was negative and significant,providing support for Hypothesis 2a. However, the hypothesised path from Context-specific stressors to nonwork social support was not supported. The path from work context stressors to WFC was found to be positiveand statistically significant; thus, providing support from Hypothesis 3. There was a positive and significant
path from job demand to work social support and non-work social support, supporting Hypothesis 4. As
predicted by Hypothesis 5, job demand was positively associated with WFC. The path from work social
support to WFC was negative and significant. There was support for Hypothesis 6a. On the other hand, thehypothesised path from non-work social support to WFC was not supported.
To test for the mediation hypothesis, a Sobel’s test was conducted which showed that work social support
partially mediates the relation between context-specific stressors and WFC (Sobel’s=2.8970, p=0.004).
Hypothesis 7a was supported. A hierarchical regression analysis was undertaken to test the moderation
hypothesis, with stressors as the independent variable and work social support as the moderation variable. The
analysis showed that the interaction of stressors and work social support was not significant in the predictionof WFC.

Discussion and Implications
The present study sought to investigate the impact of Context-specific stressors and job characteristics on
WFC in a sample of 366 professional service employees. Overall, the path model is stable and the data showed
a medium goodness of fit. In the current study, two antecedents of WFC were identified. These were job
demand and work-related social support. Work-related social support was found to mediate and moderate therelationship between Context-specific stressors and WFC.
21

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26

Context-specific stressors were found to have a direct and positive impact on the WFC of professional service
employees. These stressors also have a positive impact on job demands, which subsequently increase the levelof WFC. The set of context-specific stressors that led to higher job demand tends to relate to situations where
there were insufficient staffing level, unrealistic performance target and expectations, and the fast pace ofworking in a service environment. In an era where firms rely on their frontline employees to be competitive, it
is crucial that work redesign activities be implemented to retain these professional employees.
Consistent with prior studies (Carlson & Kacmar, 2000; Kossek et al., 2011), there was support for thenegative consequences of an increase job demands on work-family domain. There was support for treating
work-related social support as an independent antecedent to WFC. In addition, work social support was foundto have a partial mediating effect on the relationship between context-specific stressors on WFC. This finding
highlights the critical role of work-related social support. This finding corroborates the finding by Carlson and
Perrewé (1999), Haar (2008), and Seiger and Wiese (2009).
Surprisingly, non-work social support sources were less important as professional service employees seek
assistance and support with WFC from their peers and supervisors. Non-work social support did not have any
effect on work-family conflict. This finding makes sense and can be potentially explained by the notion that
instrumental social support “at work” reduces potential ambiguity and professional service context-specificstressors on the job, and also affords an individual further informational and possibly the resources required tomeet the demand. As such, managers should ensure that team-based cultures are facilitated and promoted toensure employees value and behave in ways related to helping others and working together to get the work
completed.

Limitations and Future Research Implications
Overall, several limitations and, therefore, future research directions can be noted with respect to this study. In
particular, it would be beneficial for future researchers to explore the present model in a specific occupation(such as lawyers) and industry (e.g., frontline employees in manufacturing industry). Researchers can also
further unpack the impact of different types of stressors examined in this model and how professional service
employees cope with the stressors, similar to the study by Yagil, Luria and Gal (2008).
Our findings should also be interpreted with care as the results could be affected by common method bias.
Future study should collect the dependent variable from different time period in order to minimise the effect ofcommon method biasness. However, given the number of checks undertaken in the present study, we areconfident that the effect of common method bias is of no major concern.
Managerial Implications
A managerial implication of the current study is that a reduction in job demand may possibly lower the levelof stress experienced, which eventually also reduces any harmful effects of context-specific job stressors in a
professional service environment. In today’s market-driven economy, reducing job demand may appear
incompatible, especially when there is a requirement for high productivity. Excessive organisational
bureaucracy and poorly organised work systems resulted in employees having to work harder and faster inorder to cope (Keeley & Harcourt, 2001); hence, simplification of rules, structures and systems would result inhigher productivity and lower stress level.
22New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Another managerial implication is to provide flexible work opportunities (Haar & Roche, 2008) and ensure
supervisors can support them via strategies which encourage and recognise the needs for work-family balanceof these employees (Boyar, Maertz, Mosley & Carr, 2008). Strategies, such as provision of training ofsupervisors and or managers to be more work–family supportive, the creation of a work-family supportive
organisational culture, and the selection and development of supervisors/managers in providing positive
workplace social support for work-family specific issues (Kossek et al., 2011), could be implemented tominimise the negative consequences of context specific stressors. One cannot ignore the justice implications
when supervisors/managers are given charge to decide how motivational strategies (such as encouragement,
access to resources, etc) for employees (Judge & Colquitt, 2004). Hence, procedures for the distribution of
resources for flexible work should be documented and practised, taking into consideration of equity and meritprinciples.

Conclusion
In summary, this study showed that context-specific stressors and high job demand placed exceptionalpressures on professional employees and enhanced their perception of WFC. A path model which examines
the mediation and moderation effects simultaneously was developed in the current study. Professional service
employees experienced several context-specific stressors, which impacted on their job demands andsubsequently, WFC. Work social support was found to partially mediate the effect of context-specific stressors
on WFC. It is crucial for employers to constantly ensure these employees do not suffer the negative
consequences of context-specific stressors in performing their duties.

References
Abramis, D.J. (1994). Work role ambiguity, job satisfaction, and job performance: Meta-analyses and review.
Psychological Reports. 75: 411-1433.
Allen, T.D., Herst, D.E.L., Bruck, C.S. & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family
conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 5: 278-308.
Beehr, T.A. & Glazer, S. (2001). A cultural perspective of social support in relation to occupational stress. In
Perrewé, P.L. and Ganster, D.C. (ed.). Research in Occupational Stress and Well-Being: Volume 1: Exploring
Theoretical Mechanisms and Perspectives. New York: JAI Press.
Boyar, S.L., Maertz Jr, C.P., Mosley Jr, D.C. & Carr, J.C. (2008). The impact of work/family demand on
work-family conflict. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 23(3): 215-235.
Caplan, R., Cobb, S., French, J., Harrison, R. & Pinneau, S. (1980). Job Demands and Worker Health. The
Institute for Social Research: University of Michigan.
Carlson, D.S. & Kacmar, K.M. (2000). Work-family conflict in the organization: Do life role values make adifference? Journal of Management. 26(5): 1031-1054.
Carlson, D.S. & Perrewé, P.L. (1999). The role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship: An
examination of work–family conflict. Journal of Management. 25: 513-540.
23

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Chin, W.W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In W.W Chin. (ed.). Handbook of Partial Least
Squares Analysis: Concepts, Methods and Applications (pp. 645-688). Berlin: Springer.
Chin, W.W. & Newstead, P.R. (1999). Structural equation modelling: Analysis with small samples using
partial least square. In R.H Hoyle (ed). Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research. (pp. 307-341).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Eby, L., Casper, W., Lockwood, A., Bordeux, C. & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in IO/OB:
Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002). Journal of Vocational Behavior. 66: 124-197.
Etzion, D. (1984). Moderating effect of social support on the stress–burnout relationship. Journal of Applied
Psychology. 6: 615-622.
Fornell, C. & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables andmeasurement error. Journal of Marketing Research. 18: 39-50.
Fox, M.L. & Dwyer, D.J. (1999). An investigation of the effects of time and involvement in the relationshipbetween stressors and work-family conflict, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 4: 164-174.
Frone, M.R. Russell, M. & Cooper, M.L. (1997). Relation of work-family conflict outcomes: A four-year
longitudinal study of employed parents. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 70: 325335.
Ganster, D.C. (2008). Measurement challenges for studying work-related stressors and strains. Human
Resources Management Review. 18(4): 259-270.
Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y. & Cooper, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of work demand stressors and job
performance: Examining main and moderating effects. Personnel Psychology. 61: 227-271.
Glaser, D.N., Tatum, B.C., Nebeker, D.M., Sorenson, R.C. & Aiello, J.R. (1999). Workload and social
support: Effects on performance and stress. Human Performance.12: 155-176.
Greenhaus, J.H., Bedeian, A.G. & Mossholder, K.W. (1987). Work experiences, job performance, and feelingsof personal and family well-being, Journal of Vocational Behavior. 31: 200-215.
Greenhaus, J.H. & Beutell, N.J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles, Academy ofManagement Review.10: 76-88.
Gutek, B.A., Searle, S. & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work–family conflict.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 76: 560-568.
Haar, J.M. (2008). Work-family conflict and job outcomes: The moderating effects of flexitime use in a New
Zealand organization. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations. 33(1): 38-54.
Haar, J. M. & Roche, M. (2008). Employee perceptions of organisational support for work-family issues andoutcomes: The moderation effects of supervisor support. New Zealand Journal of Human Resource
Management. 9: 1-27.
24

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26
Jackson, S.E. & Schuler, R.S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity
and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 36: 16-78.
Judge, T.A. & Colquitt, J.A. (2004). Organizational justice and stress: The mediating role of work-family
conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology. 89(3): 395-404.
Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 24: 258-308.
Karasek, R. & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity, and the Reconstruction of Working
Life. New York: Basic Books.
Keeley, K. & Harcourt, M. (2001). Occupational stress: A study of the New Zealand Reserve Bank, Researchand Practice in Human Resource Management. 9(2): 109-118.
Kossek, E.E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T. & Hammer, L.B. (2011). Workplace social support and work–family
conflict: A meta-analysis clarifying the influence of general and work–family-specific supervisor andorganizational support. Personnel Psychology. 64: 289-313.
Lawrence, S.A. (2006). An integrative model of perceived available support, work-family conflict and support
mobilisation. Journal of Management and Organization. 12(2): 160-178.
Levine, M., Cassidy, C., Brazier, G. & Reicher, S. (2002). Self-categorization and bystander non-intervention:
two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Psychology. 32: 1452-1463.
Lewig, K.A. & Dollard, M.F. (2003). Emotional dissonance, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction in callcentre workers, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 12(4): 366-392.
Michel, J.S., Kotrba, L.M., Mitchelson, J.K., Clark, M.A. & Baltes, B.B. (2011). Antecedents of work-family
conflict: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 32: 689-725.
Michel, J.S., Mitchelson, J.K., Pichler, S. & Cullen, K.L. (2010). Clarifying relationships among work andfamily social support, stressors, and work-family conflict, Journal of Vocational Behavior. 76(1): 91-104.
Noblet, J., Teo, S.T.T., McWilliams, J. & Rodwell, J. (2005). Which work characteristics predict employee
outcomes for the public-sector employee? An examination of generic and occupation-specific characteristics.
International Journal of Human Resource Management. 16: 1415-430.
Örtqvist, D. & Wincent, J. (2006). Prominent consequences of role stress: a meta-analytic review.
International Journal of Stress Management. 13: 399-422.
Pal, S. & Saksvik, P.Ø. (2008). Work-family conflict and psychosocial work environment stressors as
predictors of job stress in a cross-cultural study. International Journal of Stress Management. 15(1): 22-42.
Perrewé, P.L. & Ganster, D.C. (2002). Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being. New York: JAI Press
Podsakoff, P.M. & Organ, D.W. (1986). Self-report in organizational research: Problems and prospects,
Journal of Management. 12: 533-544.
25

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):14˗26

Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (beta). Hamburg. Retrieved from www.smartpls.de
Seiger, C.P. & Wiese, B.S. (2009). Social support from work and family domains as an antecedent ormoderator of work–family conflicts? Journal of Vocational Behavior. 75: 26-37.
Shaffer, M.A., Joplin, J.R.W. & Hsu, Y-S. (2011). Expanding the boundaries of work-family research: A
review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. 11(2): 221-268.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin and S. Worchel(eds.) The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. (pp. 7-24). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelin, Y-M. & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modelling. Computational
Statistics and Data Analysis. 48: 159-205.
Theorell, T. & Karasek, R.A. (1996). Current issues relating to psychosocial job strain and cardiovasculardisease research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 1: 9-26.
van der Doef, M. & Maes, S. (1999). The Job Demand-Control (-Support) model and psychological wellbeing: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work and Stress. 13: 87-114.
Venaik, S., Midgley, D.F. & Devinney, T.M. (2005). Dual paths to performance: the impact of globalpressures on MNC subsidiary conduct and performance. Journal of International Business Studies. 36: 655675.
Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J.I. & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of work stress: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 54: 314-334.
Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G. & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing
hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly. 33: 177-195.
Yagil, D., Luria, G. & Gal, I. (2008). Stressors and resources in customer service roles: Exploring therelationship between core self-evaluations and burnout. International Journal of Service Industry
Management. 19: 575-595.
Yildirima, D. & Aycan, Z. (2008). Nurses’ work demands and work–family conflict: A questionnaire survey.
International Journal of Nursing Studies. 45: 1366-1378.

26

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41

Out of Step? The Efficacy of Trans-Tasman Law to Combat
Workplace Bullying
KATE BLACKWOOD *, TIM BENTLEY **, BEVAN CATLEY***,DAVID TAPPIN****, Darryl Forsyth*****
Abstract
Workplace bullying is of significant concern for organisations internationally. With increasing
understanding of the prevalence and consequences of bullying, research attention has turned to
exploring effective prevention strategies. Yet, whilst primary prevention is strongly advocated in
the literature, the role of the legislative context in supporting these initiatives has received little
attention. This paper examines the efficacy of three legislative approaches enacted in Australia and
New Zealand to reinforce workplace bullying interventions. The paper argues for occupational
health and safety legislation supported by a Code of Practice that encourages organisations to take apreventative approach to managing workplace bullying 1.

Introduction
In the last 20 years, a considerable body of international research has provided clear evidence of thewidespread extent and destructive nature of workplace bullying. Bullying can poison a working
environment and result in significant damage to both targets and witnesses. Alongside the damage
to individuals, workplace bullying can also result in substantial direct and indirect organisationalcosts. Recent research suggests that bullying may be relatively commonplace in many TransTasman workplaces (Askew et al., 2012; Bentley et al., 2012; Bentley et al., 2009a,b; Caponecchia,
Sun & Wyatt, 2012; Keuskamp, Ziersch, Baum & LaMontagne, 2012; O’Driscoll et al., 2011). On
the other hand, however, research indicates that many organisations, internationally, have a poor
understanding of workplace bullying with few having appropriate policies or prevention strategies
in place (Catley et al., 2011; Ferris, 2004; Hutchinson, Vickers, Jackson & Wilkes, 2006).
Parallels in legislative frameworks, organisational and societal cultures, and close economic
relationships afford the opportunity for comparisons to be made between New Zealand andAustralia in their approaches to addressing workplace bullying. In both countries, workplacebullying has received considerable media coverage that has resulted in a number of cases detailed in
the public arena. Regulatory agencies in both Australia and New Zealand have also begun to turntheir attention to providing resources to respond to workplace bullying. This ‘spotlighting’ of
workplace bullying has seen an increasing number of employees identify themselves as targets ofbullying and seek redress (Wells, 2011), often via legal action against their employer.

*

Graduate student, Department of Management, Massey University
Director of the NZ Work Research Institute, AUT***
Director, Healthy Work Group, Massey University****
Senior Lecturer, Massey University*****
Senior Lecturer, Massey University**

27

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
This paper provides further insight into the management and interventions of workplace bullying
from an employment relations and occupational health and safety perspective by examining theliterature on workplace interventions alongside a commentary of the Trans-Tasman legislative
context. In doing so, we endorse the multi-level approach to organisational interventions (Heames& Harvey, 2006; Vartia & Leka, 2011), but contend that this should be extended to the regulatory
context. Thus, our contribution is not intended to diminish the importance of work being done toidentify effective organisational interventions to prevent workplace bullying. Indeed, primary andsecondary interventions are critical to preventing and managing workplace bullying. In our view,the effectiveness of such initiatives will be enhanced if regulatory interventions are aligned toreinforce and complement organisational initiatives.
Our focus is, therefore, to examine the efficacy of Trans-Tasman legislation with respect toworkplace bullying. Australia and New Zealand share a common legal heritage and, while taking
somewhat different paths, both countries have found themselves considering the ability of theirrelevant legal statutes to respond to workplace bullying. In Australia, the process to harmonise
occupational health and safety laws at the federal level has provided an opportunity to be proactive
in responding to workplace bullying. Several Australian states have also taken bold measures,notably to criminalise workplace bullying, whilst proposed amendments to federal legislation are
also likely to hold employers directly accountable for failing to stop bullying as of January 2014. In
New Zealand, the response so far has been to retain the legal status quo and instead educate
employers and employees via Ministry of Business and Innovation’s (MBIE) guidelines. This paper
will, therefore, prove beneficial to potentially improving the legislative response, as bothjurisdictions can learn from the experiences of the other while at the same time being informative
for those working outside of Australia and New Zealand, who can potentially compare thejurisdictions’ responses to that of their own.
We provide an analysis of three key approaches adopted by Trans-Tasman legislation – therehabilitative approach of employment disputes legislation, the preventative approach of health andsafety legislation, and specific legislation to criminalise workplace bullying. We contend that eachof the existing legislative routes has significant limitations, not only in their alignment withorganisational intervention strategies, but also in their ability to provide the potential redress thattargets of workplace bullying seek. We propose that accessible health and safety legislation
supported by a Code of Practice best aligns with advocated organisational intervention measuresand is most likely to reduce or mitigate limitations of the existing legislative frameworks. We start,
however, by outlining the phenomenon of workplace bullying and the range of management
interventions posited.

What is workplace bullying?
Despite the wide range of definitions of workplace bullying (Rayner & Cooper, 2006), it isgenerally agreed that workplace bullying consists of systematic, inter-personal, potentially harmful
behaviours inflicted over a period of time that forces a target into a position where they feel unable
to defend themselves, and which may cause severe social, psychological and psychosomatic
problems in the target (Einarsen, Hoel, Zapf & Cooper, 2011). Bullying behaviours are typicallyconceptualised as person-related or work-related. Work-related behaviours include imposing
unreasonable deadlines and/or unmanageable workloads, excessive work monitoring and assigningmeaningless or degrading tasks (Einarsen, et al., 2011). Person-related bullying includes insulting
remarks, excessive teasing, gossip and/or rumours, persistent criticism, practical jokes andintimidation (Einarsen, et al., 2011). Workplace bullying can, therefore, be overt but also discreteand subtle, and heavily context dependent. Leading reviews of the literature emphasise, however,28

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
that it is the perceived intent of the behaviour coupled with its persistent and unwelcome exposurethat causes harm to targets (Einarsen et al., 2011; Rayner & Cooper, 2006).
Comparing prevalence rates between countries and industries is fraught with difficulties due to thevariety of definitions employed and the measurement methods used. Nielsen, Matthiesen andEinarsen (2010) conducted a meta-analysis of prevalence rates published in 86 different articles andconcluded that the mean prevalence of bullying varied between 11 percent and 18 percent. In New
Zealand, Bentley et al. (2009b) examined responses from 1,728 employees drawn from the health,education, hospitality and travel industries and reported that 17.8 percent of the sample had beenbullied. In Australia, there is currently no national data on the prevalence of workplace bullying,
with most research being conducted at organisational, occupational or sector level (Keuskamp, etal., 2012). For example, Keuskamp and colleagues (2012) reported 15.2 percent prevalence ofbullying from a study of 1,141 South Australian employees and another study of 747 participants in
the Australian medical workforce reported bullying prevalence of 25 percent (Askew et al., 2012).
As with the international literature (Einarsen et al., 2011), workplace bullying in Australia and New
Zealand has been reported to have a negative effect for both the targets of bullying and theorganisation. Targets of bullying commonly suffer from stress, anxiety and depression and havesignificantly lower levels of emotional well-being and higher levels of strain than non-targets(Bentley et al., 2009b; Einarsen & Mikkelsen, 2003; Keashly & Neuman, 2004). According tomedia reports, severe cases of bullying have resulted in suicide (Butcher, 2010; Chrisafis, 2012).
The personal costs of bullying flow on to the organisation, with both targets and witnesses
exhibiting a higher frequency of absenteeism, reduced organisational commitment, job satisfaction
and work motivation (Jennifer, Cowie & Ananiadou, 2003; Lutgen-Sandvik, Tracy & Alberts,2007). Other significant organisational costs include the opportunity costs of displaced time andeffort to help targets cope with bullying incidents and the costs associated with investigations andpotential court action.

Workplace bullying management and intervention
Increasing acknowledgement of workplace bullying as a global issue has seen recent action initiatedby global institutions and national and local governments throughout the western world. For
example, a group of European institutes have developed the European Framework for Psychosocial
Risk Management (PRIMA-EF) to encourage policy development at national and organisational
levels (Leka & Cox, 2008). Similarly, the World Health Organisation has published a report to raiseawareness of psychological harassment in the workplace proposing preventative action at a primary,secondary and tertiary level (Cassitto, Fattorini, Gilioli & Rengo, 2009). At national government
level, numerous European countries (e.g. Sweden, France, Norway, Denmark) have enacted
legislation that requires employers to prevent psychological harassment and several US state
governments (e.g. Washington, Oregon, Hawaii) have considered bills to criminalise bullying.
Following its origins in psychological research, interventions aimed at the characteristics ofindividual targets or perpetrators and their relationship offer one approach. However, the notion of
workplace bullying as an organisational problem that requires interventions aimed at work
structures and process that allow or encourage bullying is common (Baillien, Neyens, De Witte &De Cuyper, 2009; Salin, 2003; Vartia & Leka, 2011). Strategies for the prevention and managementof workplace bullying are typically categorised as primary, secondary, or tertiary preventions(Vartia & Leka, 2011). As Vartia and Leka (2011) explain the three categories; primary preventions
are proactive and aim to prevent the negative effects occurring by minimising the risk of exposure.
Secondary preventions seek to reverse, reduce or slow the progression, prevent recurrence, and to29

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
increase the resources of individuals to cope. Tertiary preventions are rehabilitative, aiming to
reduce the negative impacts, and restore individual and organisational health and well-being. These
different preventative measures can also be targeted at different levels of the workplace: individual;
job; and/or organisational (Vartia & Leka, 2011).
A widely advocated primary prevention strategy is to establish an anti-bullying culture where such
behaviour is deemed unacceptable (Duffy, 2009; Needham, 2003; Yamada, 2008). Yamada (2008)
contends that the necessary components of such a culture include a genuine organisational
commitment to culture change, effective education and policies, and attentiveness to people andbehaviour. The development and enforcement of a clear policy on workplace bullying is also widely
discussed as part of such a commitment and as a key primary prevention measure (Djurkovic,
McCormack & Casimir, 2006; Duffy, 2009; Holme, 2006; Pate & Beaumont, 2010; Rayner &Lewis, 2011). As Rayner and Lewis (2011) write, an organisational policy exists to serve twocentral functions: to communicate the organisation’s intent and to summarise the processes inrelation to workplace bullying. However, to minimise the costs of bullying, secondary and tertiary
measures are also required.
Despite a number of interventions posited as being effective, there are serious barriers to theirimplementation and potential effectiveness. As bullying can be subtle, procedural and open todebate around interpretation and meaning, it is less amenable to regulation and workplaceintervention than more overt forms of harassment, discrimination and violence (McCarthy &Barker, 2000). HR and Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) professionals may have considerable
difficulties managing workplace bullying where bullies are senior to them in the organisation.
Further, management may be reluctant to address workplace bullying when bullies are otherwise
perceived as effective and productive, and bullies may even be rewarded with promotion (Leck &Galperin, 2006). Finally, and perhaps most disturbingly, management may not understand thenature of bullying, nor how it should be prevented, with the inevitable result that employers are
failing in their duty of care towards employees. The result can be targets who are left to deal withbullies alone or resorting to other solutions such as leaving the organisation (Hoel & Beale, 2006;
Rayner, 1998; 1999). Targets whose experiences are not dealt with effectively by the organisation
may feel that their only option for retribution may be to enact grievance procedures, exposing
themselves to lengthy and uncertain processes with possibilities of further victimisation and stress(McCarthy & Barker, 2000). It is, therefore, imperative that bullying legislation not only results inbullying complaints being resolved fairly, but that it also encourages the adoption of organisationallevel strategies recommended for effective workplace bullying intervention.

Analysis of statutes in Australia and New Zealand
Although the legislation in Australia and New Zealand is not designed to be prescriptive, we
contend that there is room for progress towards statutes that complement the progress being made in
addressing workplace bullying at organisational level. To do this, it is imperative to consider not
only the intervention measures advocated at the organisational level but also the unique andcomplex nature of the phenomenon when trying to effectively address bullying complaints via
legislation. For example, despite the growing recognition and awareness of workplace bullying in
New Zealand, there is no specific legislation or policy to hold organisations or perpetrators legally
accountable for the harm caused by workplace bullying. The Human Rights Act 1993 wasdeveloped to promote respect and harmonious relations in New Zealand society, yet its emphasis ison harassment in the form of sexual and racial discrimination (Human Rights Commission, 2008).
Cases of workplace bullying typically lack such an underpinning (Needham, 2003) and, for thosethat do, these discrimination regulations are repeated in employment legislation. Hence, the Human
30

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
Rights Act appears to be less well suited for workplace bullying and other psychosocial hazards.
Therefore, two pieces of legislation – the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) and the Healthand Safety in Employment Act 1992 (HSE Act) – are the legal avenues for investigating anddetermining claims.
Although the Australian legislative framework is slightly more complex due to differing laws at theregional state level, significant progress has been made towards harmonising health and safety
legislation across the country and, in certain states, criminalising workplace bullying andintroducing specific Codes of Practice. The key statutes, however, align somewhat with the New
Zealand context. As with the Human Rights Act in New Zealand, the federal and state antidiscrimination legislation require a bullying complaint to be linked to an attribute covered by theActs (e.g. age, sex, disability). As this legal avenue excludes many bullying experiences, we limit
our analysis to three key pieces of legislation: the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act), enforced by thefederal government, state government health and safety legislation, and, in Victoria, the Crimes Act(1958) within which workplace bullying has recently been criminalised.
Employment disputes legislation
While the employment disputes legislation in Australia and New Zealand differ significantly in thebreadth of dispute they cover, there are distinct similarities to their legislative approaches. In New
Zealand, the ERA holds organisations accountable for failing to promptly and fairly act on an
employee complaint. Targets who believe they have suffered harm as a result of being bullied atwork can potentially lodge a personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage and, if the employment
arrangement has since been terminated, unjustified dismissal. The ERA is currently the mostcommonly utilised statute for employees seeking compensation for hurt and humiliation as a resultof the employer’s failure to adequately address a bullying-related complaint. The Australian federal
government’s FW Act currently holds organisations accountable only on the grounds of harsh,
unreasonable or unjust termination. Cases of workplace bullying are, therefore, only heard under
this legislation in circumstances where the applicant’s employment has been terminated. Under the
FW Act, enforced by the federal ‘Fair Work Ombudsman’, a target who has resigned as a result ofbullying can only be successful in a claim if they can show that the employer instigated theirresignation 2. Similar to the ERA, penalties for breaches of the FW Act may be awarded to theapplicant.
Despite these statutes being commonly utilised by targets of bullying, the contention is that theseActs are limited in their ability to deal with a complex phenomenon like workplace bullying where
the behaviour is covert and subjective and the harm inflicted is psychological and cumulative.
Although researchers have attempted to objectively measure bullying prevalence, bullying is asubjective phenomenon in which the cause of harm is based largely on the target’s perceptions(Mayhew et al., 2004; Neidl, 1996; Saunders, Huynh & Goodman-Delahunty, 2007). Further, theharm experienced by a target of bullying is often unable to be located in a single episode and isinstead inflicted as an accumulation of numerous systematic behaviours that, experienced inisolation, are unlikely to cause significant harm (Keashly & Neuman, 2004). Thus, behaviours, suchas being given unmanageable workloads or unreasonable deadlines, are unlikely to provide strong
evidence towards a target’s case unless the accompanying context is considered (Archer, 1999;
Cowie, Naylor, Rivers, Smith & Pereira, 2002; Hoel & Beale, 2006).As one such determination
stated, “many of the incidents about which [the applicant] complained were capable of being
interpreted in a manner other than that in which he perceived them” (Bachu v Davie Motors Ltd[2009] NZERA 503). A similar Australian case stated “[the applicant] is being bullied but cannot
prove how this is being done because it is a subtle form of bullying that is hearsay” (Saunders v OSIInternational Foods Pty Ltd [2012] FWA 6147). Consequently, the often discrete and subtle nature
31

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
of bullying is such that the target’s ability to provide sufficient factual evidence to support theirclaim is likely to be problematic in cases of other than extreme bullying.
Unlike many other complaints that are likely to be heard in the legal system, a target of bullying has
likely been exposed to numerous discrete and subtle behaviours over a period of months or evenyears. Concerns regarding the accuracy of recalling historical events as evidence are highlighted inseveral cases, especially considering the nature of bullying is such that, to parties other than thetarget, the behaviour at the time may have been perceived as trivial, or even ‘normal’. Cases
demonstrating conflicts of evidence provided by the parties are common and the legal body isrequired to determine the facts based on the balance of probabilities (see for example Corneal v
General Distributors Ltd trading as Woolworths at Gull [2007] NZERA 395). However, reluctanceof witnesses to speak out (Paull, Omari & Standen, 2012; van Heugten, 2011), coupled with theoften covert nature of bullying, may mean few witnesses to corroborate the target’s account but anumber of witnesses to corroborate the bully’s account of ‘normal’ or ‘unintentional’ behaviour
towards the target.
As the existing legislation stands, a large amount of responsibility for addressing bullying is placedon the target who is required to report and provide evidence sufficient to prove that the perpetrator’s
intentions were harmful. One significant problem in this regard is that workplace bullying isseverely underreported. For example, Keashly and Neuman (2004) found that only 53 percent oftargets reported the bullying to their direct supervisor and only 15 percent lodged a formal
complaint. Similar studies have identified that few targets of bullying voice a complaint for fear of
being subjected to further harm and/or because they perceive the organisation as being unable andunwilling to resolve the complaint in a fair and timely manner (Bentley et al., 2012; Djurkovic,
McCormack & Casimir, 2008; Ferris, 2004; Huntington et al., 2011). A further concern is that, inmany contexts, the alleged perpetrator is in a position of greater formal or perceived power and, insome cases, the reporting channels are such that the target is required to report their complaint to thebully themselves (Rayner & Keashly, 2005). Researchers also suggest that underreporting is a key
factor influencing organisations limited understanding of the phenomenon and its prevalence(Bentley et al., 2009b; Keashly & Neuman, 2004). Accordingly, managers often dismiss bullying asa personality clash and a problem to be resolved by the individuals involved rather than theorganisation (Ferris, 2004). Lack of legislative guidance on workplace bullying not only contributes
to underreporting but may allow employers to be apathetic in managing bullying in theirorganisations.
Hence, although the approaches of the ERA and FW Act are to encourage effective secondaryintervention in employment disputes (i.e. dealing effectively and fairly with complaints andterminations), there are clearly a number of concerns regarding their efficacy in determining
complaints of bullying. Unlike many of the general disputes heard under employment disputes
legislation, workplace bullying is often covert and harm is incurred as a result of the target’sinterpretation of numerous systematic behaviours over a period of time. This, alongside the question
marks over the ability and willingness of witnesses to recall historical events that may have seemed
trivial at the time, acts as a complexity that the existing approach of the employment disputes
legislation often struggles to accommodate. Further, considering the prevalence of underreporting
and lack of knowledge about workplace bullying and effective intervention often present, in manyorganisations, the responsibility on the target to provide sufficient evidence of their experience islikely to result in the target’s inability to be successful in a personal grievance.
Health and safety legislation

32

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
The approach of health and safety legislation to determining claims of workplace bullying differs
significantly from that of employment disputes legislation. In New Zealand, claims can be brought
against organisations or individuals under the HSE Act (1992) for a breach of duty by failing to takeall practicable steps to ensure the safety of employees while at work. The legislation requires
employers to have in place methods for systematically identifying existing and new hazards andregularly assessing the risk posed by those identified hazards. Furthermore, the legislation requiresorganisations to eliminate, isolate or minimise hazards deemed ‘significant’. Amendments to the
Act in 2002 integrated “physical and mental harm caused by work-related stress” into the definitionof harm along with a broader definition of a hazard to include “a situation where a person’s
behaviour may be an actual or potential cause or source of harm”. These amendments represented asignificant step forward in acknowledging psychosocial hazards in the work environment. In
Australia, the occupational health and safety legislation are the only Acts broadly addressing claimsof workplace bullying. A model Work Health and Safety Act (WHS Act) was developed by Safe
Work Australia in 2011 in an attempt to harmonise occupational health and safety legislation
between the different jurisdictions. Currently, the WHS Act, or an amended version has beenenacted by the Parliaments of most of the Australian jurisdictions. Although the Act does notdirectly address psychosocial hazards in the workplace, it is similar to New Zealand’s HSE Act inthat employers can be held accountable for failing to prevent bullying under the duty to provide asafe and healthy working environment and safe work systems (Safe Work Australia, 2013).
As previously discussed, the extant literature strongly advocates the need for primary measures in
effective workplace bullying intervention. As such, a strong ‘zero-tolerance’ message, supported byrelevant policy, training for managers and employees, and on-going monitoring and policy
enforcement are considered effective in preventing bullying. Unlike employment disputes
legislation, which takes a compensatory and, thus, rehabilitative approach, health and safety
legislation in Australia and New Zealand provide a mechanism for holding organisations
accountable for deficiencies in primary prevention. This technically makes organisations liable forpreventing bullying from occurring in the first place, or subsequently recurring. New Zealand’s
HSE Act and Australia’s model WHS Act feature strong similarities in what is deemed to be‘reasonably practicable’ steps in protecting employees’ from harm. Both statutes consider theseverity of the harm, the employer’s current state of knowledge about the risk, and the current stateof knowledge about the means available and the costs of those means in eliminating or minimising
the risk of harm.
However, unlike a personal grievance under the employment disputes legislation that can be lodged
by an individual employee at minimal cost, the expense and complexity of bringing a private
prosecution under the health and safety legislation would usually outweigh the level ofcompensation awarded. In New Zealand, the target can lodge a complaint with MBIE, but it is
MBIE who determines whether or not the claim warrants an investigation of the organisation’s
health and safety standards. For MBIE to pursue legal action, the requirement is often theoccurrence of a serious incident or a significant number of complaints. Therefore, many claims areunlikely to meet the threshold for action or have to become serious incidents before they are
investigated, by which time significant harm has already occurred. Similarly, in Australia, eachjurisdiction has a regulator (often WorkSafe or WorkCover) responsible for assessing complaints ofbullying and investigating complaints if deemed sufficiently serious. Hence, an employee cannot
seek compensation for a breach of the WHS Act by lodging a grievance directly to a court or
tribunal. Instead, each jurisdiction has a form of workers compensation legislation under which acompensation scheme is operating. When an employee lodges a bullying complaint to theregulatory authority, they can also claim for compensation for harm incurred as a result of thebullying.

33

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
An additional constraint is that, although the approach of the health and safety legislation seemingly
alleviates much of the responsibility on the target to provide sufficient factual evidence of acomplaint, the organisation cannot be held accountable for failing to take all reasonably practicalsteps to prevent the harm should their current state of knowing about the risk be the cause of theirinaction. Research suggests that managers are often unaware of the severity of bullying in theirorganisations (Bentley et al., 2009b; Ferris, 2004) which is likely to be indicative of the covert anddiscrete nature of bullying and, subsequently, its ability to often go unnoticed. The limited
protection offered by the law’s requirement to consider the employer’s current state of knowledge
potentially lowers the efficacy of the legislation in protecting targets and allows employers to takean apathetic approach to the management of bullying and, thus, continue the invisibility of bullying
within the organisation. Therefore, it would seem that the current requirement of an employer toobtain knowledge of the hazard still lies with the target or witnesses in bringing the hazard to theemployer’s attention.
Further, research in Australia, New Zealand and beyond suggests that organisations generally havea poor understanding of the phenomenon and its prevalence and consequences (Bentley et al.,2009b; Einarsen et al., 2011; Ferris, 2004). Employers often acknowledge that bullying is
considered normal in organisational culture and that any resulting harm is due to a lack of personal
resilience, or they see bullying as a personality clash and often deny that the situation is relevant tothe business, leaving the parties to settle the conflict (Ferris, 2004). Due to this lack of clarity andunderstanding around workplace bullying, the intentions of the health and safety legislation are lostin the existing protections for employers meaning that employees are often not provided with theprotection from harm under the health and safety statutes. However, it is not only employers who
exhibit a lack of clarity and understanding around workplace bullying. In the year leading up to July
2011, WorkSafe Victoria received 6000 complaints from employees claiming to have been bullied
at work. Of these complaints, only 10 percent were referred to the bullying response unit, withmany dismissed on the grounds that the complaint did not constitute workplace bullying. Further, of
these 10 percent, only one in 10 were deemed sufficiently serious to warrant further investigationfrom a labour inspector (Wells, 2011). These figures are of concern and emphasise the importanceof clarity around workplace bullying to ensure the effective operation of the current health andsafety legislative system.
Criminalising workplace bullying
Criminalising workplace bullying is an approach gaining international attention in recent years,
with much debate over the efficacy of introducing such legislation. Victoria is the only state
government to have specific legislation to hold perpetrators legally accountable for the harm caused
by workplace bullying. Recent amendments to the state’s Crimes Act (1958) have seen thedefinition of stalking extended to criminalise workplace bullying and hold perpetrators accountable
for their behaviour. This came as a result of the bullying-related suicide of a teenage café worker.
Although these amendments mean that a bully can be held criminally liable for their behaviour, nocompensation is awarded to the victim as a legal remedy (Bornstein, 2012).
However, although workplace bullying was traditionally viewed as an interpersonal phenomenon,
more recently bullying is viewed as a problem of the organisation with risk factors including role
conflict and ambiguity, poor leadership, organisational change, reward systems and high workloads(Baillien et al., 2009; Salin, 2003). Criminalising workplace bullying discourages organisations
from viewing bullying as a problem of the organisation and further removes the onus from theorganisation to address the root causes of bullying. Hence, although criminalising workplacebullying sends a strong message that bullying will not be tolerated, the message it sends toemployers in regards to their organisational obligations contradicts that identified in the research
34

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
literature and enforces the common existing view that bullying is simply a heightened interpersonal
conflict to be resolved by the individuals involved (Ferris, 2004). As Australian law firm MauriceBlackburn point out, the significant majority of bullying cases are not nearly as severe as that of thecase that led to the development of the amendments to the Victorian Crimes Act and should not be
considered criminal matters (Bornstein, 2012). Although imposing harsh penalties aroundworkplace bullying sends an effective symbolic message, introducing a further legislative approachheightens the already complex legislative frameworks and potentially enhances the ambiguity
around the responsibilities and obligations of the parties involved. We contend that this approach
fails to address any of the concerns with existing employment disputes and health and safety
legislation and, instead, as discussed above potentially reinforces common misunderstandings thatare inconsistent with our knowledge of bullying.

Where to from here?
This analysis draws attention to several key limitations of the existing legislative approaches. There
would seem to be significant misalignment between the legislation and the nature of workplacebullying, a cumulative and subjective phenomenon often occurring covertly, being scrutinised andexamined under a lens requiring clear factual and objective evidence. As the strength of thisevidence usually increases with the duration and severity of harm, the consequence of existinglegislative approaches is that they are retrospective rather than preventative. Further, it highlights
concerns around the accessibility of the legislation and their ability to compensate victims for hurt
and humiliation, and the approaches of the legislation in relation to the intervention
recommendations of recent research.
The primary focus of the employment disputes legislation is not whether the applicant is able toprovide sufficient evidence to prove that they have been exposed to behaviours that constitutebullying, but instead whether they can provide sufficient evidence that the organisation has
subjected them to disadvantage by taking unjustified actions in investigating and resolving theircomplaint, or in the case of the FW Act, by terminating their employment. The outcomes of theemployment disputes legislation are, therefore, rehabilitative and at a tertiary level in that itcompensates targets for the harm and humiliation suffered and disciplines employers for inadequate
intervention and resolution processes after a complaint has been raised. However, neither theemployment disputes legislation or criminalising workplace bullying prevents the target from
suffering harm or the organisation incurring harm-related costs, nor does it encourage organisations
to be proactive in implementing primary preventions.
Although the existing health and safety statutes have weaknesses concerning their efficacy inprotecting targets of bullying, they have been developed to encourage a preventative approach to
managing health and safety in the workplace. This approach is aligned with recent research thatencourages primary prevention through the lens of impacting organisational structures andprocesses (Duffy, 2009; Needham, 2003; Yamada, 2008). As it stands, the legislation only requiresorganisations to reasonably identify hazardous situations conducive to the bully; yet, the perspectivefrom which the statues have been developed has the potential to send a strong message ofencouragement to employers to take a proactive approach to primary prevention. However, current
health and safety legislation in Australia and New Zealand is unable to address many of theconcerns identified in regards to the lack of clarity around bullying, the perceptions of bullying as
an interpersonal phenomenon, and in encouraging the utilisation of preventative measures atorganisational level. Due to the protections in place that require organisations to intervene only
within their ability according to their current state of knowledge, the preventative approach of thehealth and safety legislation has little prescriptive effect.
35

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41

Although the employment disputes and health and safety legislation both have similar weaknesses
in the context of workplace bullying, they each capture a well-recognised concern of the academic
literature; respectively, the need for organisations to resolve conflict promptly and fairly, and theneed for a preventative approach to the management of bullying. Initial thinking around workplacebullying has shifted from where bullying was thought to stem from individual risk factors of those
involved to acknowledgement of the role that organisational structures and processes play in its
development (Hauge, Skogstad & Einarsen, 2009; Hoel & Salin, 2003; Notelaers, De Witte &Einarsen, 2010). Therefore, health and safety legislation parallels the recent literature in its viewthat bullying is a problem ‘of’ the organisation, not simply a problem ‘for’ the organisation, and itis, therefore, management’s responsibility to identify, investigate, and resolve. However, current
legislation and government policy does not recognise workplace structures and processes thatencourage bullying to develop. The health and safety legislation appears to be most suitable forrecognising these risk factors but, as it stands currently, organisations are rarely held accountablefor bullying under these Acts due to the law’s requirement to consider the current state ofknowledge about the risk and the considerably higher burden of proof required by the district
courts.
It becomes clear that, to increase the efficacy of existing health and safety legislation to determine
cases of bullying, more information is required around workplace bullying for both organisations
and their employees. We contend that an accessible and authoritative medium through which tocommunicate such information would be in the form of a Code of Practice specific to a jurisdiction.
A typical Code of Practice includes information on what workplace bullying consists of, why itgoes unreported, what employers should do to prevent it (including developing a policy, consulting
employees, training and monitoring) how to respond to incidents, and how it fits within thelegislative framework. Such a Code, designed to support existing health and safety legislation in
determining claims, outlines best practices for all stakeholders, informing them of the nature andrisk factors associated with workplace bullying and recommending a preventative approach to its
management.
In September 2011, SafeWork Australia released a draft Code of Practice for public consultation
titled ‘Preventing and responding to workplace bullying’, which was designed to complement the
recently developed model WHS Act. Although the Code is still in its draft stages, the federal
government recognised, through a national inquiry into workplace bullying completed in November
2012, the urgency with which the Code needs to be finalised and implemented. Despite the Codenot yet being finalised, the Australian Capital Territory has already formalised the Code under thestate’s WHS Act. The presence of a Code has the potential to reduce the number of unsubstantiatedclaims, educate employers about workplace bullying and encourage the implementation of
prevention initiatives. Organisations that may have previously feigned ignorance under health andsafety legislation may now be held accountable for failing to protect employees from harm throughworkplace bullying. Although in New Zealand there is no sign of a Code of Practice being
developed in the near future, MBIE have recently developed guidelines to educate practitioners
about workplace bullying and its management.
We contend that the development and implementation of a Code of Practice to complement healthand safety legislation in Trans-Tasman jurisdictions is likely to minimise or mitigate many of theidentified concerns with the existing legislation as it relates to determining claims of bullying. Not
only does it provide employers with the knowledge to prevent workplace bullying and, thus, be held
accountable for failing to do so, it provides clarity around bullying for employees, reducing the riskthat the increasing popularity of the term is resulting in unsubstantiated claims causing disputes atboth organisational level and in the legal system. Finally, a Code of Practice that is admissible as36

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
evidence of what is known about bullying in legal proceedings is likely to enhance clarity for thelegal bodies tasked with determining claims in so far as their ability to infuse the subjective andlongitudinal elements of the definition of bullying into their determinations.

Conclusion
Despite a growing body of research and interest from practitioners, many organisations are
seemingly unable or unwilling to effectively investigate and resolve bullying complaints. As aresult, a number of organisations are finding themselves before legislative authorities for subjecting
targets of bullying to an unjustified disadvantage (ERA) or termination (FW Act) or failing toprovide a safe working environment. The findings of Trans-Tasman prevalence studies are a clear
indication of a significant problem, yet legislation and government mechanisms are currently
deficient when addressing the unique and complex nature of workplace bullying. Not only do thecurrent legislation and government mechanisms appear to have weaknesses in their efficacy inprotecting targets of bullying, organisations are being shielded by protections within the legislation
and an ensuing onus on the victim to provide the organisation with sufficient information about thecomplaint. Such protection is not only unhelpful, but does not protect targets from harm or theorganisation from harm-related costs.
In this paper, we focussed on three legislative approaches – the employment disputes legislation,
health and safety legislation, and criminalising workplace bullying. Specifically, we drew attention
to the covert and systematic nature of bullying, witnesses’ ability and willingness to recall historicalevents, underreporting, and considerations of the employer’s current state of knowledge andcontended that these are key factors hindering the efficacy of existing legislative frameworks andthe target’s ability to seek redress. Further, the employment disputes legislation approach captures
ineffective management at the stage of secondary intervention and, thus, fails to encourage bullying
prevention whilst criminalising bullying, although attractive on the surface, encourages a focus on
individual perpetrators rather than wider organisational issues. Although the health and safety
legislation, as it stands, is unable to overcome many of the issues identified, a Code of Practicedesigned to support the legislation offers a potential solution to many of these obstacles. The
argument for a Code of Practice to complement accessible health and safety legislation is not only
supported by recent research that encourages a holistic preventative approach to addressing
workplace bullying, but also informs employers of the nature of bullying and thus moderates the
weaknesses observed in determining claims under the existing legislative framework.

References
Archer, D. (1999). Exploring ‘Bullying’ Culture in the Para-Military Organisation. International
Journal of Manpower. 20(1/2): 94.
Askew, D. A., Schluter, P. J., Dick, M.L., Rego, P. M., Turner, C. & Wilkinson, D. (2012).
Bullying in the Australian medical workforce: cross-sectional data from an Australian e-Cohort
study. Australian Health Review. 36(2): 197-204.
Baillien, E., Neyens, I., De Witte, H. & De Cuyper, N. (2009). A qualitative study on thedevelopment of workplace bullying: Towards a three way model. Journal of Community & AppliedSocial Psychology. 19(1): 1-16.
37

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
Bentley, T., Catley, B., Cooper-Thomas, H., Gardner, D., O’Driscoll, M P., Dale, A. & Trenberth,L. (2012). Perceptions of workplace bullying in the New Zealand travel industry: Prevalence andmanagement strategies. Tourism Management. 33(2): 351-360.
Bentley, T., Catley, B., Gardner, D., O’Driscoll, M., Trenberth, L. & Cooper-Thomas, H. (2009a).
Perspectives on Bullying in the New Zealand Health and Hospitality Sectors. The Journal of
Occupational Health and Safety - Australia and New Zealand. 25(5): 363-373.
Bentley, T., Catley, B., Gardner, D., O’Driscoll, M., Trenberth, L. & Cooper-Thomas, H. (2009b).
Understanding Stress and Bullying in New Zealand Workplaces. Final Report to OH&S Steering
Committee.
Bornstein, J. (2012). The Myths and Misconceptions about Workplace Bullying. Paper presented at
the Legalwise Seminar, Australia.
Butcher, S. (2010, 8 February). Workers fined $115,000 over bullying of café waitress. The Age.
Retrieved from: http://www.theage.com.au/national/workers-fined-115000-over-bullying-of-cafewaitress-20100208-nlrj.html
Caponecchia, C., Sun, A.Y.Z. & Wyatt, A. (2012). ‘Psychopaths’ at Work? Implications of Lay
Persons’ Use of Labels and Behavioural Criteria for Psychopathy. Journal of Business Ethics.
107(4): 399-408.
Cassitto, M.G., Fattorini, E., Gilioli, R. & Rengo, C. (2009). Raising awareness of Psychological
Harassment at Work. Retrived from http://who.int/occupational_health/publications/en/pwh4e.pdf
Catley, B., Bentley, T., Forsyth, D., Cooper-Thomas, H., Gardner, D. & O’Driscoll, M. (2011).
Managing Workplace Bullying in New Zealand: Perspectives from Occupational Safety and Health
Practitioners. Paper presented at the 25th ANZAM Conference ‘The Future of Work andOrganisations’, Wellington.
Chrisafis, A. (2012, 5 July). France Telecom boss faces judicial inquiry into workplace bullying.
The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/05/france-telecomjudicial-inquiry-workplace-bullying
Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Rivers, I., Smith, P.K. & Pereira, B. (2002). Measuring Workplace Bullying.
Aggression and Violent Behavior. 7(1): 33-51.
Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D. & Casimir, G. (2006). Neuroticism and the Psychomatic Model ofWorkplace Bullying. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 21(1): 73-88.
Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D. & Casimir, G. (2008). Workplace Bullying and Intention to Leave:
The Moderating Effect of Perceived Organisational Support. Human Resource Management
Journal. 18(4): 405-422.
Duffy, M. (2009). Preventing Workplace Mobbing and Bullying with Effective Organizational
Consultation, Policies and Legislation. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research.
61(3): 242-262.
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D. & Cooper, C. (2011). The Concept of Bullying and Harassement at
Work: The European Tradition. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf and C. Cooper (eds.), Bullying and38

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed). pp. 3-39).
Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Einarsen, S. & Mikkelsen, E. (2003). Individual Effects of Exposure to Bullying at Work. In S.
Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf and C. Cooper (eds.). Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace:
International Perspectives in Research and Practice. (pp. 127-144). London: Taylor & Francis.
Ferris, P. (2004). A Preliminary Typology of Organisational Response to Allegations of Workplace
Bullying: See no Evil, Hear no Evil, Speak no Evil. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling.
32(3): 389-395.
Hauge, L., Skogstad, A. & Einarsen, S. (2009). Individual and Situational Predictors of Workplace
Bullying: Why do Perpetrators Engage in the Bullying of Others? Work & Stress. 23(4): 349-358.
Heames, J. & Harvey, M. (2006). Workplace bullying: a cross-level assessment. Management
Decision. 49(9): 1214-1230.
Hoel, H. & Beale, D. (2006). Workplace Bullying, Psychological Perspectives and Industrial
Relations: Towards a Contextualized and Interdisciplinary Approach. British Journal of Industrial
Relations. 44(2): 239-262.
Hoel, H. & Salin, D. (2003). Organisational antecedents of workplace bullying. In S. Einarsen, H.
Hoel, D. Zapf and C.L. Cooper (eds.). Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace:
International perspectives in research and practice (pp. 203). London: Taylor & Francis.
Holme, C.A. (2006). Impact not Intent. Industrial & Commercial Training. 38(5): 242-247.
Human Rights Commission. (2008). Enquiries and Complaints Guide: What can I complain about?
Retrieved from: http://www.hrc.co.nz/enquiries-and-complaints-guide/what-can-i-complain-about
Huntington, A., Gilmour, J., Tuckett, A., Neville, S., Wilson, D. & Turner, C. (2011). Is anybody
listening? A qualitative study of nurses’ reflections on practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 20(910): 1413-1422.
Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M., Jackson, D. & Wilkes, L. (2006). Workplace bullying in nursing:
towards a more critical organisational perspective. Nursing Inquiry. 13(2): 118-126.
Jennifer, D., Cowie, H. & Ananiadou, K. (2003). Perceptions and experience of workplace bullying
in five different working populations. Aggressive Behavior. 29(6): 489-496.
Keashly, L. & Neuman, J.H. (2004). Bullying in the Workplace: Its Impact and Management.
Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal. 8(2): 335-373.
Keuskamp, D., Ziersch, A., Baum, F. & LaMontagne, A. (2012). Workplace bullying a risk forpermanent employees. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 36(2): 116-119.
Leck, J.D. & Galperin, B.L. (2006). Worker Responses to Bully Bosses. Canadian Public Policy.
32(1): 85-97.
Leka, S. & Cox, T. (2008). The European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management: PRIMAEF. Retrieved from: http://www.prima-ef.org/prima-ef-book.html

39

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
Lutgen-Sandvik, P., Tracy, S. & Alberts, J. (2007). Burned by Bullying in the American
Workplace: Prevalence, Perception, Degree and Impact. Journal of Management Studies. 44(6):837-862.
Mayhew, C., McCarthy, P., Chappell, D., Quinlan, M., Barker, M. & Sheehan, M. (2004).
Measuring the Extent of Impact from Occupational Violence and Bullying on Traumatised
Workers. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 16(3): 117-134.
McCarthy, P. & Barker, M. (2000). Workplace Bullying Risk Audit. Journal of Occupational
Health and Safety – Australia and New Zealand. 16(5): 409-417.
Needham, A. W. (2003). Workplace Bullying: The Costly Business Secret. Auckland: Penguin
Books.
Neidl, K. (1996). Mobbing and Well-Being: Economic and Personnel Development Implications.
European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology. 5(2): 239-249.
Nielsen, M.B., Matthiesen, S. & Einarsen, S. (2010). The Impact of Methodological Moderators on
Prevalence Rates of Workplace Bullying. A Meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology. 83(4): 955-979.
Notelaers, G., De Witte, H. & Einarsen, S. (2010). A job characteristics approach to explain
workplace bullying. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology. 19(4): 487-504.
O’Driscoll, M.P., Cooper-Thomas, H.D., Bentley, T., Catley, B.E., Gardner, D.H. & Trenberth, L.
(2011). Workplace bullying in New Zealand: A survey of employee perceptions and attitudes.
[Article; Proceedings Paper]. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 49(4): 390-408.
Pate, J. & Beaumont, P. (2010). Bullying and harassment: a case of success? Employee Relations.
32(2): 171-183.
Paull, M., Omari, M. & Standen, P. (2012). When is a bystander not a bystander? A typology of theroles of bystanders in workplace bullying. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 50(3): 351366.
Rayner, C. (1998). Workplace Bullying: Do Something! Journal of Occupational Health and Safety- Australia and New Zealand. 14(6): 581-585.
Rayner, C. (1999). From Research to Implementation: Finding Leverage for Prevention.
International Journal of Manpower. 20(1/2): 28.
Rayner, C. & Cooper, C.L. (2006). Workplace Bullying. In K.E. Kelloway, J. Barling and J.J.
Hurrell Jr (eds.). Handbook of Workplace Violence. (pp. 121-145). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Rayner, C. & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at Work: Perspectives from Britain and North America.
In S. Fox and P.E. Spector (eds.). Counterproductive Work Behaviors: Investigations of Actors andTargets (pp. 271-296). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Rayner, C. & Lewis, D. (2011). Managing Workplace Bullying: The Role of Policies. In S.
Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf and C. Cooper (eds.), Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace:40

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 27-41
Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed). (pp. 327-340). Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press.
Safe Work Australia. (2013). Bullying, harassment and discrimination. Retrieved from:http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/swa/model-whslaws/guidance/volunteers/pages/bullying-organisations
Salin, D.M. (2003). Ways of Explaining Workplace Bullying: A Review of Enabling, Motivating
and Precipitating Structures and Processes in the Work Environment. Human Performance, 56(10):1213-1232.
Saunders, P., Huynh, A. & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2007). Defining Workplace Bullying
Behaviour Professional Lay Definitions of Workplace Bullying. International Journal of Law andPsychiatry. 30(4-5): 340-354.
van Heugten, K. (2011). Theorizing active bystanders as change agents in workplace bullying ofsocial workers. Families in Society. 92(2): 219-224.
Vartia, M. & Leka, S. (2011). Interventions for the Prevention and Management of Bullying at
Work. In S. Einarsen,H. Hoel, D. Zapf and C. Cooper (eds.), Bullying and Harassment in the
Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed). (pp. 359-379). Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press.
Wells, R. (2011, July 24). Most workplace bullying claims fall short. The Sydney Morning Herald.
Retrieved from: http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/managing/most-workplace-bullyingclaims-fall-short-20110725-1hw1c.html
Yamada, D. C. (2008). Workplace Bullying and Ethical Leadership.Legal Studies Research Paper
Series (Research Paper 08-37). Boston, Massachusetts: Suffolk University Law School.

Notes
1

A version of this paper was presented at the Australia and New Zealand Academy of Management
Conference in December 2012, and awarded Best Paper for the HRM stream. The paper has since
been substantially revised to account for changes in Trans-Tasman legislation and policy and iscurrent as at November 2013.
2

Amendments to the FW Act from January 2014 will allow employees to apply to the Fair Work
Commission for an order to stop an experience of workplace bullying.

41

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54“Work stimulates you to think about your future”: The importance of
employment during social integration from the perspectives of young
Somali men living in Australia and USA
YUSUF SHEIKH OMAR*
Abstract
This is a qualitative study investigating the importance of employment for young Somali men living inAustralia and USA. The study, based on 30 young men participants, explores their experiences andperspectives about the role of employment during the transitional period of social integration into thereceiving countries. The paper also compares young men’s experiences and perceptions of theimportance of employment with their parents’ experiences. Scholarly findings on refugee employment
are compared to the observations discussed in this research. Some differences between the young
participants and their parents have emerged, yet, most of the respondents shared similar views about
the importance of employment.
Key Words:
Somali, young men, parents, employment, integration, Melbourne, Minneapolis.

Introduction
People have been on the move since the beginning of human existence (Berry, Phinney, Sam &Vedder, 2006). The movement of ethnically, racially and religiously diverse migrants across continents
is a relatively new phenomenon, and has been on the increase since the beginning of the twentiethcentury (Binder & Tosic, 2002). This presents “both opportunities and challenges for migrants, andreceiving societies alike” (Berry et al., 2006: 1). Some of these people migrate voluntarily, hoping for abetter life, but many are forced to migrate because they face persecution due to their beliefs, politicalopinions, or membership in a particular social group (Binder & Tosic, 2002).
Along with the nomadic way of life that still remains in the Somali blood, people are afflicted withprolonged civil war which creates hardships and the need to move. As a result, hundreds of thousandsof Somalis fled from their homeland seeking a refuge and shelter in countries such as Australia and theUSA. Due to ongoing violence and conflict,
Somalia remains one of the countries generating the highest number of displaced people andrefugees in the world. There are more than 1.4 million Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in
Somalia while over 560,000 Somalis live as refugees in neighbouring and nearby countries(UNHCR, 2010 online)
The paper draws on the findings from my 2011 PhD thesis and, in doing so, presents a story of theexperiences of young Somali men who have fled Somalia and are now living in the Australia and the*Yusuf Sheikh Omar, PhD in Refugee Studies at La Torbe University; a Researcher at Victorian Transcultural Mental
Health, St Vincent’s Hospital; and a Former Member of African Ministerial Consultative Committee for the AustralianFederal Government (2012-2013).

42

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
USA, explaining their perspectives of the importance of employment in their receiving countries. The
overall aim of this paper is to investigate and compare the perspectives and experiences of young
Somali men living in Australia and the USA in relation to the importance of employment during theirsocial integration. The specific objectives are to:
1. Identify young Somali men’s experiences and perceptions of the importance of employment inAustralia and USA.
2. Identify their parents’ perceptions of the importance of employment in contrast to young people’s
point of view.
The paper commences with a brief literature review which provides the context for study. Next, themethodologies used in the study are explained, describing briefly Somali community profiles in
Melbourne and Minneapolis. The qualitative findings are discussed and focus on young men’s
experiences and perceptions of the importance of employment in Australia and USA. The paper
specifically explores the importance of employment in fulfilling an individual needs, health and wellbeing, understanding cultures and developing negotiation skills and language acquisition, preventing
crimes and providing a sense of direction, instilling a sense of belonging and providing positive rolemodels.

Literature review
Having a job has constantly been identified as a major factor positively influencing many issues related
to the social integration of refugees such as: self-reliance, restoring self-esteem and confidence,
engaging with the host society, improving language and social skills and planning for the future (Ager& Strang, 2008; Phillimore, Craig, Goodson & Sankey, 2006). Employment structures their
psychological make-up and the cycle of their daily life activities in positive and productive ways
(Bloch, 2002; Colic-Peisker & Tilbury, 2007; Giddens, 1993). It develops a sense of security and senseof belonging to the receiving country (Phillimore et al., 2003). Due to its importance in the adaptation
to new milieu, the refugees must, first and foremost, find employment, which then paves the way forbetter social integration (Carmon, 1981). Refugees’ employment and integration into the labour market
are crucial points in their integration into the host society (Heimonen & Julkunen, 2006; Schedler &Glastra, 2000).
On the other hand, the consequences of unemployment for refugees, particularly youth, include agreater risk of mental health, a greater likelihood of criminality, lack of confidence in finding work,
poverty, low social mobility and social status (Heimonen & Julmkunen, 2006; Melia, 2004). For
instance, Heimonen and Julkunen, (2006) find that, while migrants and refugees employed in Germany
are satisfied with their health, unemployed migrants and refugees are less satisfied with their health andwith their lives in general (Heimonen and Julkunen, 2006). Similarly, Bloch (2002) finds that,regardless of the types of jobs they have, the majority of refugee employees in the UK were generally
more satisfied with their life than unemployed ones. Recent studies show that refugee youth with
unemployed parents have negative experiences from their peer groups, such as teasing or being paid noattention by their teachers (Montgomery & Foldspang, 2007). Refugees who are unemployed are more
likely to be marginalised from the wider community than those who are working (Bloch, 2002; ColicPeisker & Tilbury, 2007).

43

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

Methodologies
Ethnographic researchThis study is a qualitative investigation comparing the experiences of young men living in
Minneapolis, USA, with their counterparts living in Melbourne, Australia. The study was carried out in
two field sites, the northwest suburbs of Melbourne, Australia, and the Cedar Riverside neighbourhoodof Minneapolis, USA. The total number of formal interviews conducted as part of the study was 80
representing 30 young participants aged 16-25, and 50 other interviewees, including parents and key
community members. This study is informed ethnographically. This type of research is particularly
well suited for studying “hard-to-access groups”, such as refugees and immigrants, or groups resistantto survey methods (Hudelson, 1996).
At the beginning, the research plan aimed at keeping the balance between female and male participants
but during the pilot project in stage one, it was evident that girls were not comfortable discussing somematters related to gender relationships with me while boys did not mind. Islam teaches that interactions
between men and women, who are not related, should be restricted in both the public and private
spheres. Culturally, it is often taboo (especially by elders) for a woman to have a relationship with anunrelated man, but there is more flexibility for an interviewer’s instructions with Somali men. These
gender divisions made it difficult for the researcher to discuss a range of issues with young women. For
that reason, the researcher decided to drop young women.
Methods of data collection and samplingPrimary data was mostly gathered through oral/narrative methods, which are best suited to Somali
culture as well as to the participant parents’ levels of literacy. Data sources included audio recorded
unstructured and semi-structured interviews, focus groups and field participant observations. The
sampling strategy of this study was purposive, using a range of specific strategies including snowball
sampling, and key informant sampling through community networks.
Young participants’ socio-demographic characteristics
Among those living in Melbourne, all but two of the young people were born in Somalia. One was bornin Australia and the other in Saudi Arabia. Their ages ranged from 16 to 25. Eight of the 15 young
participants lived with both parents, and four young participants lived with their mothers only. One
young man lived alone, one was married, one lived with his siblings and one lived with his mother andhis uncle, who was also his stepfather. Most young people were from large families.
Melbourne participants had lived in Australia for an average of 11 years. In terms of length ofresidence, all but one has been in Australia for between seven to 15 years. One young man was born inAustralia and lived here almost all his life, and one young man had lived in Melbourne for two and ahalf years. Eight out of 15 participants were studying at the time of the interview; one was studying atuniversity, one at TAFE, one at ESL and the rest at high school. Two of these students had part-timejobs at the time of the interview. Seven out of 15 were not studying at the time of the interview and fiveof these seven who were not studying had full time jobs and two had part-time jobs. Again, guardiansof the young people had jobs, four did not and one did not state his guardian’s employment situation.

44

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
In the Minneapolis study, all but one participant was born in Somalia (one young participant was bornin Kenya). Their ages ranged from 17 to 25. Only three out of the 15 young people lived with both theirparents, six young participants lived with their single mothers, a young man with his father who wasmarried to another woman, two young participants with their older siblings, two with their uncles, onewith his aunt and one lived alone. Most of these young people were from large families ranging fromseven to 12 members.
In terms of lengths of residence in the USA, all of them except three young participants had lived in
USA for between seven to 16 years. One young man lived there three years, another young participant
lived there almost three years and one young man for four years. In terms of education, all of themwere studying either at high school, colleges or university. Five did not work, three worked during
summertime and school holidays, three worked fulltime, one worked part-time and one worked as avolunteer. Regarding their guardian employment, 10 out of 15 participants’ parents/guardians had jobs;
for one, his mum was sick, and another one, his aunt did not work. Two participants, who lived with
their old siblings, and one who, lived alone, did not mention if their siblings had jobs.
Methods of data analysis
I began my analysis early in the research process during the formal and informal interviews, whichgave me time to reflect on and discuss the topic of research with participants. Ongoing observations,
filed notes, interactions with the community members, particularly young people, and attendance atcommunity gatherings and congregations were also important to my analysis, and to understanding the
topic deeply. Moreover, I transcribed the interviews myself, which gave me the opportunity to analyseinterviews individually and then to analyse cross-case data, comparing their similarities anddifferences. I then coded and categorised interviews under themes.
Data analyses are presented here both directly and indirectly. Sometimes I present direct quotations
from participants; sometimes I conceptualise participants’ data in my own words; and sometimes I
compare the qualitative data with views expressed in the literature. The main comparison is, however,between the qualitative data itself, for example, comparing data from Melbourne with Minneapolis
data. Youth interviews are also sometimes compared with parent and adult views. The findings cannot
be generalised to the whole researched population or to the targeted community (Patton, 2002).

Somali communities in Australia and the USA
Australia
A significant number of Somalis arrived in Australia, especially Victoria, under the Refugee andSpecial Humanitarian Program and the Family Reunion program, particularly during the period of
1991-2001 (Jupp, 2001; Clyne, and Kipp, 2005). As the 2011 Census shows, the Somali population inAustralia numbered around 14000 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011). The largest concentration
was in Victoria, particularly in Melbourne (61 percent). The majority of Somalis have settled in
Melbourne’s northwest although there are communities in the inner city suburbs and in the west. The
northwest suburbs are culturally diverse and the specific areas where Somalis have settled can becharacterised as low income areas with a high proportion of public housing. The Somali community inAustralia is highly urbanised – 98.7 percent live in capital cities (Victorian Multicultural Commission,2007).
45

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

The USAAs a result of the civil war, the Somali community has become the largest group of African refugees in
the USA. It is:
one of the unique sets of newcomers to ever enter this nation … the uniqueness of these
newcomers and the fact that relatively little is known about them makes it imperative to study
and understand their situation (Goza, 2007: 255).
The most recent estimates of the total population of Somalis living in the USA ranges from 150,000(Shio, 2006) to 300,000 (Sonsalla, 2003).
Since 1991, the number of Somalis has increased rapidly, concentrated in the mid-western states,
particularly Minnesota (Goza, 2007, Kusow, 2007). The largest Somali community in the USA lives in
the Twin Cities, Minneapolis and St Paul, with a combined population of more than 50,000; the Twin
Cities are regarded as the de facto capital of the Somali community in the USA (Schaid & Grossman,2004). Many Somalis, especially new arrivals live “in the Cedar-Riverside areas between downtown
Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota where you can easily see women wearing the hijab or agroup of Somali men lingering outside a coffee shop” (Roble and Rutledge, 2008: 135). Somalis havealso been drawn to almost all cities of Minnesota including small ones. Thus, they can also be found in
Rochester, St. Cloud, Owatonna, Waseca, Marshall, Faribault and Mankato (Shio, 2006, Minneapolis
Foundation, 2009). Pull factors for Somali resettlement to these cities include good services, educationand employment opportunities, a good social welfare system, a well-established Somali community,
and word-of-mouth among the Somali diaspora about the benefits of living there (Horst, 2006).

Results
The importance of employment
This paper discusses the employment experiences of young men in Somali communities in Melbourne
and Minneapolis, and compares their experiences to their parents’ experiences, and scholarly findings
on refugee employment. The main themes discussed are participants’ perceptions of the importance of
employment. Although there are some differences between young men and their parents in theperceptions about the importance of employment, most participants in Melbourne and Minneapolis
share similar views about the importance of employment for themselves and for Somali communities infulfilling an individual’s needs; maintaining their health and well-being; and facilitating them to learn
both the English language and the mainstream cultures. According to our participants’ point of view,
employment helps them to develop the sense of belonging to the mainstream and organisational skills,
and buffers them against the risk of involvement in crime since it provides them with a sense of
direction in their daily life. These issues are discussed below.
Fulfilling an individual’s needs
Almost all participants in both Melbourne and Minneapolis confirm that the importance of employment
is to earn money in order to fulfil personal needs and become self-sufficient and confident, which helps
one to establish a life in the new country and to integrate economically and socially in positive ways.
46

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

As the interviewees noted:
Money makes you man (a young man3 from Minneapolis)
I think everybody is going to make money that is why you work. So, you can pay off what you
like, you can pay off shoes, you can pay off for rent, for the bills, I mean [work] from thatperspective is beneficiary [beneficial] (a young man9 from Minneapolis).
You get money and you can help your family, you can save money and later on you can do yourown investment…you are a young single man so if you like to get married you can do it because
you have money (a young man5 from Melbourne).
Without an income from a regular job, anxieties about coping with daily life tend to multiply (Giddens,
1993). Unemployed people become dependent on others or on social welfare, which results in loss of
independence and social status. Studies of 1,770 refugees in Birmingham, UK, showed that participants
stressed that having a good job meant material self-sufficiency (Phillimore et al., 2003). As well as
fulfilling personal needs, employment is perceived by many participants in this study as a criticalmeans to help family and relatives, particularly those who need it the most in Somalia, the war-torncountry.
Health and wellbeing
A number of participants also linked the importance of employment with using their time in positiveand productive ways, which improves their physical and psychological fitness and well-being. Suffice
to say that a healthy person has a better chance of integrating and interacting with others than an
unhealthy person.
You will intellectually and psychologically become fit, because work stimulates you to think
about your future (a young man6 from Melbourne):
Work gets you up in the early morning because we can all tend to sleep [and] there is no
production. So, I think work itself is another way that [is] saying: hi get up this morning. You
have to do something. Take an advantage of the day. Be active (a young man4 from
Minneapolis).
According to the young man cited above, working migrants and refugees are generally healthier thanjobless ones. A popular Somali proverb makes a strong connection between a working body and wellbeing. “Cududii fayowbaa maskax caafimaad leh” – a healthy mind is in a healthy and working body.
“Employment has been found to be crucial to the psychological well-being of ethnic minority
migrants” as work significantly enhancing the psychological well-being of migrants compared with the
unemployed (Phillimore et al., 2006: 19).
Understanding cultures and developing negotiation skills
Employment is also considered by participants, particularly by parents in Minneapolis, as a means ofunderstanding other cultures, which facilitates both refugees’ and mainstream employees’ negotiation
skills, shared understanding and mutual respect. Guerin, Guerin, Diiriye & Abdi (2005: 10)
47

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
acknowledge the importance of acquiring the knowledge and culture of the new country including “thesubtle interpersonal…colloquial English and informal…communications skills” which enable newarrivals to establish networks and social advancement in the new country. A mother2 from Minneapolis
talked about her experience saying:
I know other cultures. I learnt other cultures because I work with different backgrounds like
Mexicans, and African Americans. I learnt how to deal with non-Somalis. I think I am more
active and socially more connected than many [Somali] people who don’t work…even if I go toother countries, I know how to live and how to work with other people, and [I can] easily adapt
to other cultures.
This view is endorsed by Phillimore et al., (2003) and Giddens (1993), who explain that employment isa mechanism for economic advancement for refugees as it helps them to establish social connections,
make friendships among the mainstream, improve their language skills and cultural understanding anddevelop a sense of security through participating in shared activities with others. Working refugees areobserved to adapt more quickly and easily to the new culture than unemployed ones, who experiencesocial isolation (Phillimore et al., 2006).
Language acquisition
Somali parents’ perceptions of the importance of work are connected to language acquisition throughcommunicating with mainstream Australians and Americans. Craig et al.,’s (2006) findings reinforce
these views, asserting that employment enables refugees to increase learning opportunities, particularly
the new language of the host society. It also enables them to rebuild shattered lives and regain selfconfidence:
At the beginning of this job, I did not know any word…I did not understand at all unless people
use a body language and pointed things with their fingers. Now, I know everything and if the
manager addresses something I can understand easily what he says (a mother2 from
Minneapolis).
Parents’ emphasis on language and cultural acquisition through work could be attributed to the fact thatthey often start work without any English or with insufficient English soon after they arrive in the USA
or Australia. By communicating and interacting with other employees whose common language isEnglish, they learn English practically and develop an understanding of the new culture. In contrast to
their parents, young people learn English and about mainstream cultures through schooling. Youngmales rarely talk about the workplace as a critical place to learn English and the new culture.
Interestingly, most Somali parents interviewed in Minneapolis mentioned frequently the importance of
employment to language and cultural acquisition while their counterparts in Melbourne did not.
According to my interviews with participants in the USA, the majority of Somali adults, including
parents, have paying jobs which connect them to mainstream people. In comparison, most Melbourne
participants believe that a large number of Somali adults in Melbourne, including parents, areunemployed. However, a few participants did believe that most Somali adults do work, but at casual
jobs or self-employed jobs or jobs that isolate them from intermingling within, and negotiating withother Australians. These casual or self-employed jobs include those in day care and factories. For thatreason, adults in Minneapolis may have greater communication about opportunities and interaction
with the mainstream than those in Melbourne; because of their regular interaction with the mainstream,48

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
those in Minneapolis can improve their language skills and cultural understanding faster than those in
Melbourne.
A buffer against crime and providing a sense of direction
Another reason why employment is important is that it serves as a buffer against crime, such as drug
dealing, fighting and association with gangs.
Work keeps me out of trouble, like instead of being involved in wrong things, you keep busy
your time with something that is worthy (a young man1 from Minneapolis).
Work protects you from a lot of bad things. For example, if you have job you don’t waste yourtime and you don’t be on streets, because you get started early morning and you finish lateafternoon or evening…Job puts you in right direction. It prevents you from involvement into
trouble. It protects you to clash with police. In this country, if you are not studying or notworking you get lost…and if you go through that, you know, stage of you know ‘I am notworking’ and stuff like that you cannot build mentality ways you know, ‘I am part of thiscountry’ and that can lead you to dissolution, disenfranchise and you become at risk you know,
and can commit crime, take drugs you know…[and] you hurt others and hurt yourself (a young
man13 from Melbourne).
As these responses show, young men believe that employment means that they put their time to good
purpose, keeping them out of criminal activities and trouble. At the same time, they spend their time on
meaningful things, indicating that young Somali men in work are able to integrate into the wider
society in a more positive way.
Both parents and young men in the USA and Australia confirm that work enables them to discover
their talents and what kind of job they are good at. Additionally, participants emphasise that work helps
them gain local experiences, makes them motivated, disciplined, well organised in their ordinary lives,and behave responsibly. Employment also encourages people to plan for the future because
You have a sense of direction when you work (a young man8 from Minneapolis).
When you work you have aim, and long vision and you think a lot of things to do but when you
don’t work you have no aim and you will remain in the same position without going forward.
When you have work you can establish your life in this country and buy house (a young man2from Melbourne).
This perspective accords with Giddens’ (1993) view that regular employment provides employees therhythm of organisation on a daily basis and a sense of direction while unemployed people endureboredom and develop a sense of apathy about time.
Instilling a sense of belonging
Most Somali parents in Minneapolis and a few young men in both countries highlighted that having a
job gives them a sense of belonging to the new country and makes them respected by the wider society.
A working person is perceived by the host society as a good citizen and a contributor to the newcountry.
49

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

You are a taxpayer and that gives you good record and credit. To have good record, you haveto work hard (a mother1 from Minneapolis).
The issue of employment’s contribution to the development of a sense of belonging is elaborated byyoung man9 from Melbourne:
Personally before I had job, I was kind of disillusion you know, I was Australian but I wasn’t
you know…I believe there are a lot of stereotypes out there. I believe that you know, being
young African [man] living in Australia I have seen a lot of people, older [men] most drive
taxis [because of] that we will never gonna to be able to get you know, jobs, certain jobs
because of, you know, we don’t belong here. But when you’re working hard or if you do get theopportunity, then you know, you say to yourself I am a tax payer you know, I can do some sortof you know, and you build. It doesn’t get overtime but the longer you work the longer you start
to believe that ‘I am part of this community [the wider Australia community] I am part of thiscountry’…when you are not working, people will say to you, you are not contributing to thissociety which you know kind of puts you back you know, which means ‘I am not part of thisnation’.
As mentioned, the reason for Somali parents’, in Minneapolis, frequent mention of the benefits of
employment can, in part, be explained by the fact that most Somali parents interviewed in this study in
the USA do work, and the work culture is clearly observed in the Somali community in Minneapolis.
For that reason, the spirit of the community in Minneapolis is very high. In contrast, a work culture isless observable among Somalis in Melbourne and, accordingly, the level of community integration
seems not to match that in the USA. In Minneapolis, the Somali community’s high motivation was
described by a participant mother who believes that Somalis in Minneapolis are now becoming houseowners, and popular and powerful in Minnesota. She says that there is a community perception thateven though the Somali community has been in Minneapolis 13 years, many American people believethat the Somali community is at the same level of development as other immigrants who came morethan 40 years ago. She predicts that one day there will be Somali senators in Minnesota.
Rageh Omaar, a British of Somali background and former reporter with the BBC, recently made adocumentary for the Al-Jazeera channel. He investigated the situation of Muslim communities in theUSA, including the Somali community in Minneapolis. Omaar compares the Somali communities in
the UK to their counterparts in Minneapolis and concludes that the Minneapolis community is going
forward, in contrast to the Somali communities in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, and every place hehas visited since. The following is excerpted from the documentary:
My adopted home England has a bigger Somali community than Minneapolis and it has been
settled for longer. But they don’t tend to think of England as home. My parents are typical.
Their mental bag is still packed to return to Somalia, but that is not true here. These Somalis [inMinneapolis] are no less scarred or traumatised by their experiences. They are planted theirroots deeper and faster than any Somali community I have seen in the world. They don’t talk of
returning home. They are home (Omaar, 2008).
In Omaar’s interviews with Somalis in Minneapolis regarding their feelings towards the USA, his
respondents highlighted the way in which the USA society fostered their positive adaptation, as thequotation below indicates:
50

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

Here in America, if you don’t organize, if you don’t vote, if you don’t participate [in] American
way of living you lost…you have to be American first, you have to do what other Americans
do. You sacrifice your life to defend America because this is our country…because of theopportunities I get, the welcoming I get compared where I came from, how we were, how I
was…this is home (cited in Omaar, 2008).
Positive role models
Both parent groups in Minneapolis and Melbourne believe that working parents make positive rolemodels for their children. Work also enhances their relationships with their children and puts them in aposition to be able to help in their children’s education. The opposite is assumed to be true when
parents have no jobs:
Children feel satisfaction when their parents go to work every morning to help them…that
encourages children to do similar thing when they grow up. Kids say: I want to become like myparents, work hard and help people (a mother1 from Minneapolis).
I am father and I have experiences both being unemployed or employed. As a parent, when you
work, you get more time with your children in meaningful ways. For example, when you finish
job, you directly go home and then you see your children that they have just come back fromschool and they are doing their homework. So you can sit with them and help. When you work
you are either at work or at home, and your children in both situations, see you as a
responsible father, but if you don’t work, you become careless, and you will be less involved
into your children’s homework…when you work, even if you personally cannot help yourchildren, you can help them in other ways such as taking them to private school or bringing ahome tutor and pay him/her (a father1 from Melbourne).
Religious encouragement
Finally, some parents and young male participants in both countries attribute the importance of
employment to Islamic perspectives, stressing that Islam urges people to work hard. For that reason,
they see work as worship. They explain that the ultimate goal of Islam is to enable every person towork and become self-sufficient, helpful to others and, at the same time, avoid dependence on others.
It is narrated from Prophet Mohamed that he said: the Prophet Daud [David] used to eat what
he earned by his hands (a young man1 from Melbourne).
Another young man from Melbourne also alluded to Prophet Mohamed’s teaching that the ‘upper handis better than the lower hand’, meaning that the giving hand is better than the taking hand.

Conclusion
This qualitative investigation compared the experiences of young men living in Minneapolis, USA,with those living in Melbourne, Australia. According to information gleaned from our participants,
employment is seen, first and foremost, as fulfilling personal needs to be self-sufficient. Lack of work
51

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
can lead to loss of independence and social status. This view correlates with Giddens’ (1993)
assumption which emphasises that, without an income from a regular job, anxieties about coping witheveryday life will be multiplied.
Employment is also viewed by young participants as improving physical and psychological wellbeing.
Additionally, both groups of young people stressed that employment serves as a buffer against crime,
drug dealing, fighting and gang activity. It also protects youth from clashes with police, enables themto discover their talents and makes them well-disciplined, as it provides them with a sense of purpose
and a daily routine.
Moreover, some parents and young men from USA and Australia expressed the view that employment
gives them a sense of belonging to the new country; makes them respected; and helps them to be seenby the mainstream as good citizens because they are contributing to the new country in positive ways.
Employment earns people a good reputation in the wider society as well as in the Somali community.
Furthermore, employment provides, for refugees, opportunities to establish social connections, makefriends among the mainstream and develop a sense of security and sense of belonging throughparticipating in shared activities within the host society. Working parents make positive role models fortheir children and are in the position to provide for their children’s material needs.
Despite identifying the similarities mentioned above among participants in regard to the importance of
employment, there were, on the other hand, some differences. For example, employment is consideredby parents, particularly those in the USA, as an important factor in understanding mainstream culture,acquiring English and rebuilding their shattered lives. Young people did not mention these factors,
because they acquire culture and learn English at school.

References
Ager, A. & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of
Refugee Studies. 21(2): 166-192.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2011). Somali-Born. Retrieved from: http://www.abs.gov.au/
Berry, J., Phinney, J., Sam, D. & Vedder, P. (2006). Migrant youth in cultural transition:acculturation, identity and adaptation across national contexts. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
AssociatedBinder, S. & Tosic, J. (2002). Refugee studies and politics: human dimensions and research
perspectives. Vienna: WUV Universitatsverlag
Bloch, A. (2002). Refugees Opportunities and Barriers in Employment and Training. Leeds,
Department for Work and Pensions Research Report 179.
Carmon, N. (1981), Economic Integration of Immigrants. American Journal of Economics andSociology, 40(2): 149-163.

52

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54
Clyne, M. & Kipp, S. (2005). On the Somali Language in Melbourne. Migration Action. XXVII(1): 1922.
Colic-Peisker, V. & Tilbury, F. (2007), Refugees and Employment: The Effect of Visible Difference on
Discrimination, Perth, Centre for Social and Community Research, Murdoch University.
Giddens, A. (1993). Sociology. London: Blackwell Publishers.
Goza, F. (2007). The Somali Diaspora in the United States: A Socio-Economic and Demographic
Profile. In A.M, Kusow and S.R Bjork. (eds.) From Mogadishu to Dixon: The Somali Diaspora in a
Global Context. (pp. 255-274). Trenton, NJ: The Red Sea Press.
Guerin, B., Guerin, P., Diiriye, R. & Abdi, A. (2005) What Skills do Somali Refugees Bring with
Them? New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations. 30: 37-49.
Heimonen, I. & Julkunen, I. (2006), Out of employment? A comparative analysis of the risks andopportunities long-term unemployed immigrant youth face when entering the labour market. Journal ofYouth Studies. 9(5): 575-592.
Horst, C. (2006). Connected lives: Somalis in Minneapolis dealing with family responsibilities and themigration dreams of relatives. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency. Retrieved from:http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4ff15d5e2.pdf
Hudelson, P. (1996). Qualitative Research for Health Programs. Geneva: World Health Organisation.
Jupp, J. (2001). The Australian People: An Encyclopedia of the Nation, its People and their Origins.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kusow, A. (2007). Africa: East. In M. Waters and R. Ueda. (eds.).The New Americans: A Guide to
Immigration Since 1965. (pp. 295-306). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Melia, M.J. (2004). Transatlantic dialogue on integration of the immigration children and adolescents.
International Migration. 42(4): 123-139
Minneapolis Foundation. (2009). Africa-Focus on Somalia. Retrieved from:http://www.minneapolisfoundation.org
Montgomery, E. & Foldspang, A. (2007),.Discrimination, Mental Problems and Social Adaptation in
Young Refugee. London: Oxford University Press.
Omaar, R. (2008). Islam in America. Aljazeera. Retrieved from:http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/general/2008/10/200810179817753730.html
Patton, M. (2002).Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Phillimore, J., Craig, L., Goodson, L. & Sankey, S. (2006). Employability initiatives for refugees in
Europe: looking at and learning from, good practice.Report for EQUAL and the Home Office. The
University of Birmingham, CURS, School of Public Policy.
53

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1):42-54

Phillimore, J., Goodson, L., Oosthuizen, R., Ferrari, E., Fathi, J., Penjwini, S. & Joseph, R. (2003),
Asylum Seekers and Refugees: Education, Training, Employment, Skills, and Serivces in Conventry andWarwickshire. Learning and Skills Council, Birmingham.
Roble, A. & Rutledge, D. (2008). The Somali Diaspora: A Journey Away, Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press.
Schaid, J. & Grossman, Z. (2004).Somali Immigrant Settlement in Small Midwestern U.S Communities:
The Case of Barron, Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin
Schedler, P. & Glastra, F. (2000). Adult education between cultural assimilation and structural
integration: Settlement programs for newcomers in Netherlands. Journal for Comparative Education.
30(1): 53-66
Shio, T. (2006). Housing Experiences of Somali Immigrants in the Twin Cities, Minnesota – A Housing
Careers Perspective. PhD thesis, The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Sonsalla, D. (2003). Identity in Architecture: A Somali Community Center in Minneapolis. MA thesis,
The University of Minnesota.
UNHCR. (2010). Thousands fleeing
http://www.unhcr.org/4b9a3c0f6.html

deadlyclashesin

Mogadishu.

Retrievefrom:

Victorian Multicultural Commission, (2007). Victorian Community Profiles: 2006 Census. Somali
Born.
Retrievedfrom:
http://www.multicultural.vic.gov.au/images/stories/documents/2013/Censusfactsheetscommunityprofil
es/commprofiles/64-somalia.pdf

54

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70

Workplace conflict management: legal intentions versus managers’
experiences
GAYE GREENWOOD* and ERLING RASMUSSEN**
Abstract
The Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2000 aims for early resolution of employment relationshipproblems (ERPs) and good faith behaviour to “build mutual trust and confidence in all aspects of theemployment environment”. The policy intentions for problem solving, facilitation and mediation havenot been evaluated. Drawing on conflict events and ERPs, this paper investigates relational trust fromongoing PhD research in the primary education sector. These preliminary findings emerged duringcoding of first order themes from 33 semi-structured interviews. While identifying positive outcomesof conflict and ERPs, participants reported trust was easily damaged and complaints fuelled conflict.
On one hand, ERPs were resolved collaboratively; on the other hand, settlement of ERPs bytermination and financial exit packages were reported. These findings are discussed in the context ofinternational literature about conflict management.

Introduction
Workplace conflict management could act as a savings account for dispute prevention. Employers andemployees both make deposits and withdrawals from the good faith trust account. However,transactions that foster or diminish trust are not clear. School principals believe they manage complex
workplace relationships by building and maintaining trust. Our research delves into employment
relationship problems in primary schools to investigate how they are managed.
Over the last decade, New Zealand research about the employment relations dispute resolution system
has focussed on state-created employment institutions, processes for collective bargaining, rates ofgrievance handling, the relationship between unions and employers, union density, strikes andlockouts. Academic literature (McAndrew, 2010; Walker & Hamilton, 2010) and state commissioned
research (McDermott Miller Limited, 2007; Woodhams, 2007) identified a lack of understanding
about workplace resolution of employment relationship problems.
In the institutional setting, aggregated frequencies of disputes have been indicators of workplace
conflict in previous literature (Department of Labour, 2002a, b; Waldegrave, Anderson & Wong,
2003). Little is known about the substance and context of ERPs settled during state-funded mediation
or resolved in the workplace. The costs and benefits of employer/employee problem resolution havenot been measured (Shulruf, Woodham, Howard, Johri & Yee, 2009). Walker and Hamilton (2010)
confirmed the need for in-depth analysis of conflict management within organisations because
institutional satisfaction surveys painted an incomplete picture. Conducting case study research on
mediation, Walker and Hamilton (2010) concluded investigation of organisational culture, values andways of operating would provide deeper understanding of grievances. Good faith negotiation andearly assistance mediation have been enshrined in legislation for over a decade, but a significant gap
in conflict management research remains. We do not know what types of conflict and employment*

Senior lecturer, AUT University
Professor of Work and Employment, AUT University**

55

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
relationship problems emerge within the workplace nor do we understand how employers manage
processes that resolve, escalate or settle conflict, problems and grievances.
This paper reports preliminary insights from PhD research (Greenwood, 2014) which aims tounderstand what types of conflict and ERPs are experienced, how, and why conflict and ERPs areresolved, settled or escalated. Participants in this project included school principals, leaders in senior
management teams, dispute resolution practitioners, members of boards of trustees, education experts
and representatives of interest groups. We analysed findings by looking for patterns and connections
between conflict, employment relationship problems, dispute resolution processes and outcomes.
The paper begins by outlining the background to conflict management in New Zealand with a focus
on the duty to negotiate in good faith and build mutual trust in all aspects of the employment
relationship. We link good faith obligations with the conceptualisation of the psychological contract
as a conduit for trust in the employment relationship. Examining international conflict management
literature, we identify assertions about the growth of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes in
the workplace and the rise of individualism. In the second section of the paper, we outline the research
journey to date. Reporting preliminary findings, we posit a connection between formal complaint andescalation of ERPs. Identifying stories of early resolution by interest-based problem solving, we
compare those stories with exit settlement negotiations. In the discussion section, we question the link
between confidential exit negotiations and complaints. Connecting emerging propositions to literature,
we discuss the significance of building relational trust with particular regard to strengthening thepsychological contract.

The New Zealand policy context
The Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2000 signalled a fundamental ideological shift: from theformer neo-liberal, ‘free market’ transaction between the employer and employee of the Employment
Contracts Act (ECA) 1991 to a relational approach, one of social exchanges (Rasmussen, 2009). The
policy goal was to view the employment agreement as more than a contract of service. The
employment ‘agreement’ acknowledged the human relationship where people contributed effort andparticipation in return for formal and informal reward. The ERA required both employers andemployees to act in good faith during their day-to-day interactions in order to build relational trust.
The obligation of communicating in good faith in the workplace was an attempt to influence
negotiation behaviour, normalise conflict and embed open communication during the bargaining ofwages, conditions and conflict management processes.
The requirement for good faith behaviour in the ERA 2000 is outlined by the Ministry of Business,
Innovation and Employment (MBIE 2013) to mean “in broad terms, that both employers andemployees must: act honestly, openly, and without hidden or ulterior motives
 raise issues in a fair and timely way
 be constructive and cooperative
 be proactive in providing each other with relevant information and consider all information
provided respond promptly and thoroughly to reasonable requests and concerns keep an open mind, listen to each other and be prepared to change opinion about a particularsituation or behaviour, and treat each other respectfully”

56

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
Good faith behaviour provided a conceptual and pragmatic process framework for communication that
aimed to enhance trust and normalise conflict in the employment relationship.
The ERP construct encompasses disputes between an employer and employees; employee, a union
and its members; unions in the workplace, unions and employers or employers and other employers
during multi-employer bargaining. The language of the Act signposts the intention for resolution
close to the workplace at section 101(ab) “to recognise that employment relationship problems are
more likely to be resolved quickly and successfully if the problems are first raised and discussed
directly between the parties to the relationship”. The language directs parties to early informal
processes for resolution. “ERPs were no longer to be defined by reference to the legal causes ofaction; it was possible to resolve employment relationship conflict before it was defined legally or
escalated to a dispute” (Public Policy Academic cited in Greenwood, 2014). Workplace conflict
management was to be supported by the state-funded ‘fast, free and fair’ mediation service (Wilson,
2000), to reduce litigation. The free provision of negotiation education and information through astate-funded call centre aimed to enhance productivity by resolving ERPs early, thereby strengthening
joint commitment to an ongoing relationship. The legislation stated the innovative goals of building
relational trust through good faith behaviour and problem solving relational conflict in its object thus:
a. to build productive relationships through the promotion of mutual trust and confidence in all
aspects of the employment environment and of the employment relationship –i) by recognising that employment relationships must be built on good faith behaviour; andii) by acknowledging and addressing the inherent inequality of bargaining power in
employment relations; andiii) by protecting the integrity of individual choice; andiv) by promoting mediation as the primary problem-solving mechanism; andv) by reducing the need for judicial intervention, andb. to promote observance in New Zealand of the principles underlying International Labour
Organisation Convention 87 on Freedom of Association, and Convention 98 on the Right toOrganise and Bargaining Collective(Section 3, ERA 2000).
Setting the workplace stage for open communication, good faith negotiation and free accessible
mediation without reference to legal causes of action was an ‘innovative’ attempt to enable early
resolution of conflict and disputes by mutual agreement. Where possible, it was hoped parties would
resolve problems as close as possible to the workplace. However, international conflict management
literature has debated the fairness and effectiveness of conflict and dispute resolution processes in theworkplace, claiming these processes are symptomatic of the rise of individualism.

International literature on conflict management
This section reviews international literature on early dispute resolution practice and process. The
predominant focus has been on whether individualised informal interest based processes disempower
unions (Stone, 2002; Lipsky & Seber, 2003). According to Rousseau (2004), there is pressure onorganisations to engage in innovative conflict management practices to strengthen relational
psychological contracts. The psychological contract is “an individual’s belief in mutual obligations
between that person and another party such as between the employee and the employer” (Rosuseau &Tijoriwala, 1998: 679). The conceptualisation of the psychological contract has been debated fromMarch and Simon’s (1958) reference to exchange behaviour; Argyris’s (1960 cited in ibid) focus on
57

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
an evolving relationship; Levinson, Price, Munden & Solley’s (1962) reference to mutual
expectations; Kotter’s (1973) focus on implicit reciprocity; Schein’s (1980) illumination of unwritten
expectations; and Rousseau’s (1989) application of transactional promissory principles of contract
formation. The term, therefore, encompasses the principles of mutual obligation, promise andexpectation, often unwritten or implicit. The substance of these principles, or taken for granted
assumptions about appropriate conduct in the workplace (Rousseau, 1995; Guest, 2004) rely on themutual understanding of expectations in order that both parties act in accordance with their
psychological contract. Here, we posit that, as parties make sense of their obligations, promises andexpectations in the psychological contract, they are in an ongoing complex process of building trust in
the employment relationship. Lewicki and Wiethoff (2000) identified that repeated positive
expectations of good faith negotiation behaviour and collaborative conflict management built, what
they termed, ‘calculus-based’ trust over time. The idea that calculus-based trust strengthens
psychological contracts mirrors the good faith requirements of the ERA 2000. In this paper, we assertthat requirement for good faith behaviour embedded in the ERA 2000 provided a process framework
for the ongoing negotiation of the psychological contract by directing parties to communicate openly
and manage conflict by problem solving. However, international researchers have been less optimistic
about the intentions of interest-based conflict management processes.
The design of conflict management policies and systems in organisations has been consistentlyaligned with individualism, competitive non-union labour market strategies. Osterman (1994) claimed
that high performance workplaces supported competitive strategies focussed on innovation and quality
hence, organisations were diffusing new conflict management policies to remain competitive. Colvin(2003) reported growth in individualised innovative conflict management practices in North American
non-union workplaces that enjoyed the support of employees. Lewin (2004) in the United Kingdom
and Roche and Teague (2011) in Ireland suggested a lack of union trust in mutual gains, interest-based
approaches to employment negotiation and innovative alternative dispute resolution (ADR), such as
mediation.
More recent discussion of ADR by Roche and Teague (2012) suggested international growth ofinnovative interest-based conflict was shifting to include collective disputes. ADR as an alternative tocourt litigation encompassed a wide set of procedures for non-unionised workplaces, public sector
systems, court affiliated judicial and non-judicial mediation and arbitration, conflict resolution
processes for interest based bargaining, collective mediation as well as hybrid mediation-arbitration(med-arb) processes. Roche and Teague (2012) argued that workplace conflict management risked“multiple forms of ADR, or the so-called ‘interest based’ practices, taking precedent over rights based
fall back procedures, such as formal grievance processes” (p.448). In New Zealand, an employment
relationship problem (ERP) encompasses grievances. How people have made sense of grievances asproblems and whether rights and interests are mutually exclusive is at the heart of the research project
which underpins this paper.
Whether ADR at the level of the workplace undermines the power of unions; strengthens commitment
and relational trust in the psychological contract between the organisation and individual employees in
the workplace is unclear. Roche and Teague (2011) claimed individualism and labour market changes
had pulled systems in different directions. They identified a lack of data to provide adequate
understanding of how the individualised innovative ADR and traditional collective approaches would
coexist and serve the needs of employees in the future. Lewin (2004) had reported that non-union
firms adopted a battery of conflict management policies so that employees felt their needs andinterests were being catered for by the firm. Colvin (2012: 459) recently asserted the “rise of ADR
procedures represents a major, yet ‘undertheorized’ development in employment relations.” So far,research has focussed on the growth in individualised ADR, the reduction in union density andwhether or not interest-based processes posed a threat to union bargaining power. Survey research has
focused on comparative inquiry about union and non-union workplace grievance procedures, and58

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
interest-based ADR practices compared with traditional formal stepped or positional bargaining
procedures (Lewin, 1987; 1999; Fueille, Chatchere & Delaney, 1992; Lipsky & Seber, 2003; Colvin,
2003; Cutcher-Gershenfeld & Kochan, 2007; Roche & Teague, 2011). More recently, there has been acall for “more sharpened research” into the shift to individual employment rights cases (Roche &Teague, 2012: 457). The need for research in the following areas was also identified; formalisation oflegal processes, such as legal representation in mediation, increased costs of tribunals, the impact of
employment contracts with clauses that stipulate mediation in the workplace for settlement ofdisputes, and the relationships between the decline in unionism and rise of individual grievances(Roche & Teague, 2012).
Other streams of literature have focussed on circumstances under which processes, such as mediation
and arbitration in collective bargaining (Dunlop & Zac 1997; Ury, Brett & Goldberg, 1989) or
negotiation (Lewicki, Saunders & Minton, 2000; Fisher & Ury, 1999; Walton, Cutcher-Gershenfeld &McKersie, 2000) should be implemented. Research about the rise of individualism and decline incollectivism has fuelled research inquiry. Academics have been less interested in researching ADR
and conflict management systems that respond to individual conflicts and disputes at the level of theworkplace.
In the 1980s, Ury, Brett and Goldberg (1989) warned that the organisational context shaped the way
conflict was managed. Ostrom (2006) noted that researchers had still not researched mediation styles.
Roche and Teague (2011) questioned whether there was a link between what they defined as
innovative conflict management systems, the rise in individualism and high performance
management. They surveyed firms in Ireland categorising innovative ADR conflict management
practices as external arbitration
 engagement of external experts as early as possible to assist early brainstorming and problem solving to resolve problems
 use of formal interest based win/win negotiation techniques intensive formal communications regarding change and consultation as ADR practice toprevent conflict.
The procedures above reflect the ADR processes embedded in the ‘innovative’ New Zealandlegislation. Roche and Teague (2011) asserted 'innovative’ ADR conflict management practices“reflected a broad based attempt to foster commitment by aligning non-adversarial and consensus
focussed approaches to dealing with disputes or contentious issues” (p.454). The aim of the New
Zealand legislation was to prevent dispute escalation and protect the ongoing employment
relationship. Colvin (2004) had identified a relationship between team-based working conditions andinnovative conflict management practices and Lipsky and Seber (2003) had asserted that highperformance workplaces had driven innovative ADR conflict management practices. Whether teambased work and high performance organisations share the same goals for embedding ADR in theworkplace is not the subject of this paper, however, there is an emergent question about therelationship between early resolution of disputes and high performance. The ERA makes a link
between ‘problem solving by mediation’ and ‘building productive relationships’ in its object, but
empirical evidence of positive or negative relationships between those constructs remains anecdotal.
Claims of positive change due to individual ADR intervention has been common in professional ADR
practitioner literature (Cloke, 2006; Cloke & Goldsmith, 2000a,b; Tillet & French, 2009; Bush &Folger, 2005; Bowling & Hoffman 2003; Winslade & Monk, 2008). There is an increasing focus on
workplace dispute systems design (Ury et al., 1989; Constantino & Merchant, 1996; Donais, 2006;
Bingham, 2012). However, systems, policies and processes for resolving workplace conflict early
have proven difficult to compare and evaluate. Researchers (Felstiner, Abel & Sarat, 1981; Bingham
59

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70& Chatechere, 1999; Antes, Folger & Della Noce, 2001; Bingham, 2004), and mediators (Mayer,
2004; Bush & Folger, 2005) have articulated a gap in international research about the phases of
emergence, transformation, resolution, settlement, or escalation from conflict to problems, grievanceand dispute.
There has been a response to calls for empirical research that identifies dimensions comparison
between interest based negotiation (Mayer 2004; Budd & Colvin, 2008) and transformative mediation(Bingham & Chatechere, 1999; Bingham, 2004). Bingham (2012) found that transformative processes
were more effective for fostering perceptions of interpersonal justice between disputants, and that
there was a need for more research on styles of mediation. International comparative research has
been hindered by differences between internal and external dispute resolution systems, and thosedelivered through the private and public sectors as well as across federal or nation states and different
legal and policy contexts (Walker, 2009; Bingham, 2004; Donais, 2006; Bingham & Chatechere,
1999; Fueille et al., 1992). Roche and Teague (2011) noted research on conflict management systems
had predominantly focussed on internal systems design in large organisations (Bingham, 2004:
Jameson, 2001; McDermott, 1995; Ewing, 1989; McCabe, 1988; Lewin, 1987). One dispute systemdesign that has been extensively evaluated and reported by Bingham (2012) found that organisational
context shaped how disputants responded to perceptions of justice in the REDRESS transformative
mediation programme. While systems were embedded in the organisation, mediation was provided byexternal third party neutral independent, contract mediators in a highly unionised environment. A
significant body of empirical work has followed the mediation of disputes in the US postal service
REDRESS (Bingham, 1997; Bingham, Chessmore, Moon & Napoli, 2000; Bingham & Novac, 2001;
Bingham & Pitts, 2002; Bingham, 2012). That body of research has investigated process, substanceand outcome. It is seminal work that reports on actual mediated disputes, mediator training and theefficacy of a range of approaches to negotiation, mediation and early conflict resolution.
It is clear there is an international research gap on workplace conflict management, and the reasons
are too methodologically complex to explain in this paper. Suffice to say that the power imbalance
inherent in the employment relationship and principles of voluntary participation, confidentiality andwithout prejudice nature of ADR pose ethical and methodological problems for research design.
Situational factors impact on real-time and longitudinal studies. There are serious ethical issues forresearchers to consider. For those who seek to conduct interpretive field research, data collection
could be harmful to both parties and the organisation. The researcher risks influencing the dispute andis vulnerable to accusations of breaches of confidentiality. Simulated experimental research design
cannot replicate organisational context or spontaneous communication which often explains theinterests in dispute. Access to organisations is problematic because institutions engage in ADR toprotect the reputation of individuals and the organisation; they are unlikely to share data without
rigorous conditions and requests for publication embargos. These issues have influenced the design of
the PhD research reported in this paper. The next section explains that research.

Significance of conflict management in the education sector
During conceptualisation of the PhD project, conflict management in the education sector was in the
spotlight. Workplace conflict and employment relationship problems were reported to be particularly
vulnerable to escalation. In Lewis v Howick Board of Trustees. Colgan J, the Chief Employment
Court Judge, claimed the management of ERPs required caution in regard to procedural legalism.
Judge Colgan associated the instigation of formal legal processes by the board of trustees early in thedispute with escalation of conflict involving the whole school community. The commentary of theJudge in Lewis reflected earlier secondary research across industry sectors (Waldegrave, et al 2003;
Wyse, 2006) which suggested some lawyers, parties and advocates favoured more adversarial
60

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
processes than mediation to resolve or settle employment relationship problems. Adversarial
approaches to negotiation and conflict resolution are deemed to damage trust in relationships andcreate perceptions of procedural unfairness. Lewis provided questions for inquiry at the level of thesector, the workplace and the individual.
The sector operates in a highly unionised environment with a wide range of legislative requirements,
regulations and processes for the delivery of education to New Zealand children. There are tensions
related to the special interdependent relationship between governance by boards of trustees and their
management of staff and the principal. The governance structure emerged from reforms in the
education sector in 1989 where boards of trustees were established by the Tomorrow’s Schools’
policy under the Education Act 1989. Boards became the employer responsible for recruitment,
discipline and dismissal. This governance/management structure treats the principal, who is also amember of the board of trustees, as an employee of the board in the same way the teaching staff areemployees of the board of trustees. Each school’s board of trustees is a democratically elected groupof community representatives who usually have children attending the school. The research reported
in this paper is concerned with the complex employment relationship between boards, principals,
teachers and parents. Ethical considerations have included the safety of participants when gaining
access to schools and conducting interviews with members of boards of trustees, principals and senior
management teams. All parties to specific conflict episodes or ERPs were not interviewed because
there was a potential risk of escalating conflict and subsequent harm when conducting interviews,
given the power imbalance between employer and employee. Thus, one limitation of the research isthat it only reports the management and governance perspectives on relational conflict and ERPs in
the primary school workplace.

The research questions and design
The goal of the ongoing PhD research reported in this article is to build theory about the nature of
employment relationship problems and how to manage conflict in the workplace. We wished to findout: what types of workplace conflict and employment relationship problems had been experienced;
what organisational conflict and dispute resolution policies, processes and practices were implemented
at the workplace level; how participants made sense of ongoing employment relationship problems;
how conflict and ERPs had been resolved and why problems had been avoided, managed, escalated,
resolved or settled.
Workplace conflict was conceptualised as defined by Roche and Teague (2011: 442):
Workplace conflict involves differences of view and conflict between individual employees
and their employer; among individuals; and between groups of employees, whether unionised
or not, and their employer. It is recognised that the management of workplace conflict canhave beneficial effects for employers, employees and other stakeholders in the business.
A social constructivist approach was taken in this research because the study aimed to understand anddescribe how participants made sense of conflict episodes according to differing values and world
views (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Cooperrider & Barrett, 1990; Crotty, 2003; Cresswell & Plano-Clark,
2006; King & Horrocks, 2010). Studying the emergence and transformation of conflict events
required studying the social process in which they occurred (Felstiner et al., 1981). Relational
problems, conflicts, and disputes are social constructs, stories reflecting different understandings,
negotiation strategies and styles of communication between individuals and groups. In the education
sector, the interplay between pedagogical beliefs (theories of thinking, learning and teaching)61

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
suggested that philosophical tensions and relational conflict could be common place in the negotiationof workplace relationships.
While the research process is inductive and iterative with data collection, analysis and application ofextant literature occurring simultaneously, 33 qualitative semi-structured, face to face in-depth
interviews were conducted during the summer and autumn of 2011-2012. Participants were asked torecount recent stories of conflict and or ERPs they had experienced. The interviews were digitally
recorded and transcribed. There have been in excess of 200 conflict episodes or ERP cases recounted
which were transcribed, read line by line, coded and tabulated by participant across types of episodes,
the chronology of ongoing actions, social and organisational context, relationships, interests, issues,
rights, management processes, cues to sense making, outcomes and relevance to extant literature.
Memos of observational data about settings, processes, policies, communications and relationships
within schools were noted directly following the interviews. From analysis of the coded, categorised
and tabulated data four themes emerged. In the voices of the participants these are: 1) Building theemotional bank account: relational trust, 2) Power and percolating problems, 3) Quiet discontent: aculture of complaint, 4) Earning and learning through conflict.

Findings
This section reports one emergent theme, Building the emotional bank account: relational trust. For
the purposes of this paper the (pseudonym) voices of participants from principals, team leaders anddispute resolvers provide exemplars that illustrate the theme of mutual trust building throughcollaborative interest-based problem solving. Following the discussion of favourable outcomes, whererelationships have been strengthened and conflict resolved, the paper moves to a comparison with
employment relationships that have been severed by negotiated exit packages. The importance ofgood faith processes for trust and the role of parental complaints in the escalation of employment
relationship problems inform the final discussion.
Catherine, the principal of a fast growing urban school, recounted her management by walking about
as one approach to building good faith and preventing escalation of conflict:
Every morning I walk around every class in the school and touch base with people andcomment I mean I think that is a really, even though it is not directly related to conflict
management, to me it’s your building good will and trust so it’s like your emotional bankaccount is quite full, so that when something comes up, or when you don’t handle somethingquite as well or there’s a conflict…I mean I’m thinking about potential conflicts between me
and staff or me and parents, there is quite a bit of good faith coming to the table so I think thatis a really important antecedent for keeping things at bay really.
Martin, a young male team leader, tells the story of his interest-based collaborative approach to
managing a difficult team
I inherited a pretty septic team. The reason the septic culture had occurred was because there
had been some relationship breakdowns. There had been a guy in my role who had played
good cop bad cop with a woman co-leader; she was the one who had to make the hard calls. I
wanted it to be more of a problem solving approach. If there is an issue then I go to the person
and we talk about their story. For me it is about reassurance and giving people the confidence
to know they are trusted enough as professionals that issues are not about them as a person….
my goal this year has been around creating trust in relationships. And um it’s gone woosh it’samazing, when people feel safe people are engaged people feel empowered it’s all about a62

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
collaborative reflective process. I'm reporting comments that staff and management have madeabout my team…and that is… those… um are um the values and the relationships of practicewhich are very much evident in the way my team is now.
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2000) described interdependence in a trust relationship required
benevolence, reliability, competence, honesty and openness. The advice Tschannen-Moran (2004)
offered a principal was to walk the talk of modelling, reflective coaching, managing, negotiating andmediating. We found several examples of a similar approach. Lisa, a principal of 15 years, said:
Sometimes a staff member can feel really aggrieved by something – one example might be that
two teachers go for the same job in a senior role and one ends up not getting it. So you haveto have empathy for them and really work with that person. One staff member wrote me aletter and said “I feel this, this and this”- they said they couldn’t talk about it so we sat down;
I had the letter in front of me and for the purposes of reflective coaching it was a talking
document and the teacher remained on the staff.
Schuman (2005) focussed on consensus for building trust by allowing individuals to explain theirreasoning and intent, focus on interests rather than positions, combine advocacy and inquiry, allow for
discussing un-discussable issues, ensure that every person is heard, and promote authentic listening.
When Thomas arrived as principal at a suburban decile 1 school, he said conflict and illegal behavior
was “embedded throughout the culture of the school”:
I’d uncovered a huge amount of fraud within the school the DP was stealing money andresources and laptops, a whole range of things that’d been going on for yonks. At the board
level we were re-envisioning the school and looking at the mission statement and the visionstatement .The motto of the school was when I started, and had been since the school opened
to “be honest”. So that used to make me laugh, all these rules they had “do not, do not”, theirvision statement “be honest”, all the things they weren’t doing. It took us a whole year todevelop a new vision statement and our values and where we wanted to head. And I thought
this is going to be a joke we’re not going to get parents involved in this process compared tohigh decile schools. But it was the best experience I’ve ever had. Out of all my schools as aprincipal I had the most buy in and involvement here. It might have taken a lot of talking and a
lot of time but it was unbelievable. It was amazing. They came to the focus group meetings andthe conversations went on for ages …and… they were such sad stories… “My older boy cameto the school and principals and the teachers did not care” they were telling all these stories
which seemed irrelevant to what we were doing now but it was good for them and fed into
what we needed to become trusted.
One mediator found negotiation coaching contributed to the resolution of conflict. Redburn’s (2009)case study research identified facilitation strategies of active listening and summarising skills were
important in conflict and communication coaching. Sarah, a mediator, facilitated successful resolution
in a complex employment relationship problem between a board member employed as a teacher aide
and the classroom teacher:
While in the classroom an aide took direction from the teacher, the aide was not only an
employee of the school but was on the board of trustees and a strong contributor to the local
community in a number of roles. She was well educated and well informed about educational
issues. The teacher was a relative ‘new comer’ to the community and not involved in as many
local groups and committees as the aide. They made several complaints about each other. I
met with both parties separately, twice each for about an hour per session. We then met all
together for a joint session during which the participants made commitments to each otherabout their future behaviour which were further negotiated and confirmed by email. The first63New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
individual session was an opportunity to get to know the participants and the problem. The
second joint session was an opportunity to ‘coach’ the participants in active listening for the
final ‘joint’ session. The relationship improved and both parties remained employed.
While the above exemplars illustrate resolution of issues and good faith behaviour to protect ongoing
relationships, positive outcomes were not reported where parents had filed formal complaints aboutteacher competency that led to negotiation or termination of the teacher’s employment. This was
identified as a trend common to all participant data sets, by principals and senior team leaders, dispute
resolvers, education experts and leaders of interest groups. Peter is a principal in an urban area
experiencing fast gentrification in a decile 8 school. He understood the confidential settlement
negotiation process as one of face saving:
We had six parents come in and complain about one teacher they had a meeting to see me
about the reports because they thought they weren’t accurate and they didn’t know where theirkids were at. We did have in-class support going on for the teacher concerned so we werealready in the process before they came in….so we were moving down toward competency, butwhen the six came in, the board chair had a word to the union and said look this is going to go
really badly, but we can come to some sort of negotiated or mediated agreement and well thisis what we’re prepared to offer, and so…everybody saved face. Everybody saves
face…everybody has dignity. It’s about everyone having dignity.
Lawyers and mediators consistently commented that this settlement approach was common. An
employment lawyer described it as a systemic problem:
Within the education sector there is a strong kind of settlement culture of, if there’s a problem
you pay something and the teacher moves on. There is not a strong culture of actually
addressing problems in the workplace, so there is a sense that you pay someone some money
and they go. They get a settlement and also there is a sense that if you do things quickly the
Teachers Council need not become involved and if things get defensive that’s sometimes used
to put pressure on people to settle.
Principals in fast growing urban schools observed they had begun to experience more parental
complaints which they believed were influenced by demographic factors. Lisa, a principal in a decile
10 school, said:
I mean if I compare complaints and problems to when I worked in a low decile school, parents
are scared stiff of the teachers in a really big way, they think we are godly things, you knowthat aren’t to be taken on. Decile 10 is the whole other end of the spectrum. You’ll get takenon over every little wee thing.
The observation above was common and several principals in urban areas claimed evidence that
gentrification and an influx of professionals in the community corresponded with a rise in parental
complaints about teacher competency and performance. These issues are the subject of further
investigation in the third theme; ‘quiet discontent: a culture of complaint’ where the relationshipbetween formal complaints, the appointment of lawyers, notification of potential employment
problems to insurers, legalism and escalation of disputes are analysed.

64New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70

Discussion
Collaborative, interest-based conflict management in schools has a logical relationship to relational
trust. Deposits in the ‘emotional bank account’ may be implicit in the psychological contract between
boards of trustees, principals and teachers, but explicit in the objectives of the ERA. While positive
outcomes from interest-based processes are highlighted here, there were also inconsistencies. These
preliminary findings indicate the objectives of the ERA to build productive relationships through goodfaith behaviour and promote mutual trust can be met in situations where an explicit problem solving
approach is embraced by colleagues. However, the interviews demonstrate risks and barriers whenformal complaints escalate problems.
Employment relationships were strengthened by the interest-based, collaborative, empathetic,reflective processes that Catherine, Martin, Mary, Sarah and Thomas implemented. On the other hand,during bargaining of exit packages between the union and chair of the board of trustees at Peter’s
school, good faith processes were not apparent. If parental complaints increase pressure on boards oftrustees before competency and performance processes have concluded, this raises importantquestions for this research. How can teachers have trust in their employers if there is a culture ofsettlement, a taken for granted assumption that parental complaints risk severance? When teachers
have lost their job at one school and move to another school, are issues of professional development
resolved? Is there repetition of the alleged competency and performance problems in the next school?
The findings here illustrated the importance of good faith processes. It is notable that a discourse ofcomplaints not problems featured strongly in conflict events reported by the participants. This infers
workplace dispute resolution is understood as a process for discerning fault rather than a process ofmutual problem solving. The good news is trust building through problem solving strengthened thepsychological contract in the cases of Catherine, Sarah, Lisa and Martin. We assert that negotiating
the psychological contract is an ongoing complex process of building trust in the employment
relationship. We claim Catherine’s metaphor “building the emotional bank account” reflects ourconceptualisation of strengthening the “psychological contract” and the goals of the ERA 2000, for“good faith behaviour” to “build mutual trust and confidence in all aspects of the employment
environment and the employment relationship”.

References
Antes, J.R., Folger, J.P.& Della Noce, D.J. (2001). Transforming conflict interactions in theworkplace: Documented effects of the USPS REDRESS PROGRAM. Hofstra Labour and
Employment Law Journal. 18(2): 429-467
Bingham, L.B. (1997). Mediating Employment Disputes: perceptions of REDRESS at the UnitedStates Postal Service. Review of Public Personnel Administration. 17(1): 20-30.
Bingham, L.B. (2004). Employment dispute resolution: the case for mediation. Conflict Resolution
Quarterly. 22(1-2): 145-174.
Bingham, L.B. (2012). Transformative mediation at the United States Postal Service. International
Association for Conflict Management and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 5(4): 354-366.
65

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70

Bingham, L.B. & Chatechere, D.R. (1999). Dispute Resolution in Employment: The need forresearch. In A.E. Eaton and J.H. Keefe. (eds.). Industrial Relations Research Association Research
Volume: Employment Dispute Resolution and Worker rights in the Changing workplace. Campaign,
Ill: Industrial relations Research Association.
Bingham, L,B. Chessmore, G., Moon, Y. & Napoli, L-M. (2000). Mediating Employment Disputes at
the United States Postal Service: A comparison of in house and outside neutral mediators. Review of
Personnel Administration. 20(1): 5-19.
Bingham. L.B. & Novac, M.C. (2001). Mediations impact on formal discrimination complaint filing:
Before and after the REDRESS programme at the United States Postal Service. Review of Personnel
Administration. 21(4): 308-331.
Bingham, L.B. & Pitts, W. (2002). Highlights of Mediation at Work: Studies of the National
REDRESS Evaluation Project. Negotiation Journal. 18(2): 135-146.
Bowling, D. & Hoffman, D. (2003). Bringing peace into the room: How the personal qualities of themediator impact the process of conflict resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Budd, J. & Colvin, A. (2008). Improved Metrics for Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures:
Efficiency, Equity and Voice. Industrial Relations. 47(3): 460-479.
Bush B.R.A. & Folger, J.P. (2005). The promise of mediation: Responding to conflict throughempowerment and recognition. (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Cloke, K. (2006). The Crossroads of conflict: A journey into the heart of mediation. Canada: Janis
publications.
Cloke, K. & Goldsmith J. (2000a). Resolving Personal and Organisational Conflict: stories oftransformation and forgiveness. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Cloke, K. & Goldsmith J. (2000b). Resolving conflicts at work: a complete guide for everyone on thejob. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Colvin, A.J.S. (2003). The dual transformation of workplace dispute resolution. Industrial Relations.
42(4): 712-735.
Colvin, A.J.S (2004). Adoption and use of dispute management practices in the non-union workplace.
Advances in Industrial and Labour Relations. 13: 71-93.
Colvin, A.J. (2012). American workplace dispute resolution in the individual rights era. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management. 23(3): 459-475.

66

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
Constantino, C.A & Merchant, C.S. (1996). Designing conflict management systems. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Cooperrider, D & Barrett, F. (1990). Generative Metaphor Intervention: A new approach for working
with systems divided by conflict and caught in defensive perception. Journal of Applied Behavioural
Science. 26(2): 219-239
Creswell, J.W. & Plano-Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.
London: Sage.
Crotty, M. (2003). The Foundations of Social Science Research: Meaning and Perspective in the
Research Process. (2nd ed). London: Allen & Unwin.
Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J. & Kochan, T.A. (2004). Taking Stock: Collective Bargaining at the Turn of
the Century. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 58(1):3–26.
Department of Labour. (2002a). The Employment Relations Act: A Summary of the First Eighteen
Months (2 October 2000 to 31 March 2002). Wellington, NZ: Department of Labour Employment
Relations Service.
Department of Labour. (2002b). The Employment Relations Act: A Summary of the First Two Years (2October 2000 to 30 September 2002). Wellington, NZ: Department of Labour.
Donais, B. (2006). Workplaces that work: A guide to conflict management in union and non-union
work environments. Aurora, Ontario: Canada Law Book
Dunlop, J. T. & Zac, A. (1997). Employment Dispute Resolution Mediation and Arbitration of
Employment Disputes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Ewing, D.W. (1989). Justice on the job: Resolving grievances in the Non Union Workplace. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Felstiner, W.L.F., Abel, R.L. & Sarat, A. (1981). Emergence and transformation of disputes, naming,
blaming. claiming. Law & Society Review. 15(3-4): 1980-1981.
Fisher, R. & Ury W. (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating an Agreement without giving in. Boston/New
York: Houghton Mifflin Company
Fueille, P. Chatchere, D.R. & Delaney, J.T. (1992). The individual pursuit of organisational justice:grievance procedures in non union workplaces. Research in Personnel and Human resourcesmanagement. 10:187-232.
Greenwood, G. (2014, in progress). Transforming employment relationships: conflict management inprimary schools. Unpublished PhD Thesis. AUT University
67

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70
Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Guest, D.E. (2004). The psychology of the Employment Relationship: An analysis based on thepsychological contract. Applied Psychology: an international Review. 53(4): 541- 555.
Jameson, J. K. (2001). Employee perceptions of the availability and use of interest based, rights based
and power based conflict management strategies. Conflict resolution quarterly. 19(2): 163-195.
King, N. & Horrocks, C. (2010). Interviews in Qualitative Research. Los Angeles: Sage.
Kotter, J.P. (1973). The Psychological Contract: Managing the Joining-Up Process. California
Management Review. 3: 91-99.
Levinson, H., Price, C.R., Munden, K. J. & Solley C.M. (1962). Men, Management and Mental
Health. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M. & Minton, J.W. (1999) Negotiation. (3rd ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lewicki, R.J. & Wiethoff, C. (2000). Trust, Trust Development, and Trust Repair. In. M. Deutsch and
P.T. Coleman (eds.). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (p. 86-107). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lewin, D. (1987). Dispute Resolution in the non-union firm: a theoretical and empirical Analysis.
Journal of Conflict Resolution. 31(3): 465-502.
Lewin, D. (1999) Theoretical and empirical research on the grievance procedure and arbitration: acritical review. In A.E and J.H O’Keefe. (eds.) Industrial Relations Research Association Research
Volume: Employment Dispute Resolution and Worker Rights in the Changing Workplace. (pp. 95-136)
Champaign, Ill: Industrial Relations Research Association
Lewin, D. (2004). Dispute management in non-union organisations. In S. Estreicher and D. Sherwyn(eds.). (pp. 379-403). Alternative Dispute Management in the Employment Arena. New York: Kluwer.
Lipsky D.B. & Seber, R.L. (2003). The Social Contract and Dispute Management: the transformationof the social contract and dispute management in the US workplace and the emergence of new
strategies of dispute management. International Employment Relations Review. 9: 87-109.
March, J.G. and Simon, H.A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons
Mayer, B.S. (2004). Beyond Neutrality: Confronting the crisis in conflict resolution. San Francisco:
Jossey- Bass.
McCabe, D.M. (1988). Corporate Non Union Complaint Procedures and Systems. New York: Praeger
68New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70

McAndrew, I. (2010). The Employment Institutions. In E. Rasmussen. (ed). Employment Relations in
New Zealand. (2nd ed). (pp. 74-93). Auckland: Auckland University Press
McDermot, E.P. (1995). Survey of 92 Key Companies: Using ADR to settle Employment Disputes.
Dispute Resolution Journal. 50(1): 8-13.
McDermott Miller Limited. (2007). Social & Economic Costs and Benefits of Employment
Relationship Problems: Technical Report. Wellington: Department of Labour.
Ministry of Business Innovation, and Employment, (2013). Good Faith. Retrieved from:http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/solvingproblems/keyprinciples/goodfaith.asp
Osterman, P. (1994). How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it? Industrial andLabour Relations Review. 47: 173-88.
Ostrom, E. (2006). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rasmussen, E. (2009). Employment Relations in New Zealand. Auckland: Pearson Education.
Redburn M. (2009). Developing relational trust in schools through a consensus process, International
Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation. 10(1): 1-9
Roche, W.K. & Teague, P. (2011). Firms and Innovative Conflict Management Systems in Ireland.
British Journal of Industrial Relations. 49(3): 436-459.
Roche, W.K. & Teague, P. (2012). The growing importance of workplace ADR. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management. 23(3): 447-458.
Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organisations. Employee Rights andResponsibilities Journal. 2: 121-139.
Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organisations: understanding written andunwritten agreements. Sage, New Berry Park, CA.
Rousseau, D.M. (2004). Mutuality and reciprocity in psychological contracts of employees andemployers. Journal of Applied Psychology. 89: 52-72.
Rousseau, D.M. & Tijoriwala, S. (1998). Assessing psychological contracts: Issues, alternatives andmeasures. Journal of Organizational Behaviour. 19: 679-696.
Schein, E.H. (1980). Organizational psychology. 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Schuman, S. (2005). The IAF handbook of group facilitation: Best practices from the leadingorganization in facilitation. (ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
69

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 38(1): 55-70

Shulruf, B., Woodhams, B., Howard, C., Johri, R. & Yee, B. (2009). Grievance Gravy Train Picking
up Speed: Myths and Reality around Employment Disputes in New Zealand. Journal of Industrial
Relations. 52(2): 245-260.
Stone, K. (2004). From Digits to Widgets: Employment Regulation for the changing Workplace. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Tillet, K. & French, B. (2010). Resolving Conflict. (4th ed). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Principals’ sense of efficacy: assessing a promising construct. Journalof Educational administration. 42(5): 573.
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, W.K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, andmeasurement of trust. Review of Educational Research. 70(4): 547-593.
Ury, W.L., Brett, J.M. & Goldberg, S.B. (1989). Getting disputes resolved: Designing systems to cut
the costs of conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Waldergrave, T., Anderson, D. & Wong, K. (2003). Evaluation of the Short term Impacts of the
Employment Relations Act 2000. Wellington: Department of Labour
Walker, B. (2009). For Better or For Worse: Employment Relationship Problems under the
Employment Relations Act 2000. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Christchurch: Canterbury University.
Walker, B. & Hamilton, R. (2010). Grievance process: research rhetoric and directions for New
Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations. 34(3): 43-64.
Walton, R.E, Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J.E. & McKersie, R.B. (2000). Strategic Negotiations: a theory ofchange in labour management relations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press
Wilson, Hon M. (2000). ‘Free, fast and fair – a new Mediation Service for New Zealand businesses
and employees’. Media release, 13 July 2000.
Winslade J. & Monk, G, (2008). Practicing narrative mediation: Loosening the Grip of Conflict. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Woodhams, B. (2007). Employment
Wellington: Department of Labour.

relationshipproblems

cost

benefits

andchoices.

Wyse, K. (2003). The Employment Relations Act 2000: A failed attempt? Special Topic. Departmentof Management & Employment Relations. University of Auckland.

70