Charity's Helpline accused of breaching confidentiality

Nigel,

Exactly what ‘bullying’ is it that you refer to?

Is it the ‘bullying’ that appears only to exist in the mind of the thoroughly discredited Mrs Pratt – the ‘bullying’ that despite intense scrutiny hasn’t been confirmed or corroborated by anyone else at all?

Bullying, both in the workplace and in wider society is a disease that must be fought and defeated. Its effects are wide ranging and unpredictable, though always unpleasant and never positive. However I would venture that this debacle has set back the cause for genuine progress by some distance.

Victims of bullying may well now doubt the motives of the so called support available to them; are they indeed impartial or do they have a vested interest? Are they actually qualified and able to help, or are they unprofessional and even capable of making a situation worse? Does confidential mean confidential, and if, confidential for ever, or until someone decides to blab....?

Trial by media doesn’t do anything to eradicate the curse of bullying, and mud-slinging, innuendo and misinformation just muddies the waters, confusing genuine issues and providing distractions.

Wow, all a bit judgmental here and, what about the "occupational health" ?

For sure Ms Pratt has a PR cluster fuff on her hands and for sure the charities commission and others may have something to say but what about the "bullying"!

Once again in the palaver surrounding the behaviour and the tabloid sound bite opportunity the topic and issue is being marginalised and sort of swept under the carpet as not a good PR day to find out that no matter where one may be you are no less likely to be protected from knit picking than anywhere else.

Whatever the title, name or department there is no excuse for toxic culture.

Nobody should say they weren't warned about Christine Pratt. (Just HOW appropriate is that name?) This is what the homepage of the Andrea Adams Trust still says:

Disclaimer Notice: The Andrea Adams Trust National Workplace Bullying Helpline has no affiliation with, nor recommends the 'National Bullying Helpline Charity' or its affiliated sister service, The HR & Diversity Management Limited Company, run by Christine Pratt

What was good enough for the AAT should be good enough for anyone.

As John Humphries highlighted in his Today interview with Pratt, the "helpline" referred enquiries to the Company. Cheaper than a solicitor? Maybe, but at least you know before you begin that a solicitor will present you with a bill.

Off you pop, Christine, and stop the disingenuous activities that fudge what should be a very clear divide between charitable and commercial activities. You behaviour was and is disgraceful. The sooner your operation is closed down the better.

Mark
Although I have not worked in Downing Street I though Peter Mandelson's tight lipped denial on UK TV was fascinating! That said, I take your point.
We have worked with some government agencies doing audits and working with the people who fall off the perch. They are no different from large private organisations in that they have great policies, seldom implemented and massive pressures resulting in ill health, increased absence and even death.
Our audits (in line with the HSE requirements) identify the number of people who perceived they are being bullied and the result at senior level is a demand to knowwho these people are. Because the audit is confidential we are unable to provide the information and encourage senior staff to empower the managers of the area concerned to explore the results, identify which questions indicate targets are unrealistic and which other aspects of the work are causing concern and require innovative solutions to get the job done. A good HR department or senior manager will know who the bullies are (be they management or employees) and we sometimes get the opportunity to work with them to realise the effects of their behaviours.

Ann,

I wholeheartedly agree with your comments about bullying, its dreadful effects and the need to stamp it out.

However, with all due respect, unless you have first hand experience of the working environment in Downing St, you are making quite an assumption of conditions there. This assumption appears to be based on the widely discredited opinions of the politically motivated Mrs Pratt.

It is possible that Downing St is in denial, or even that there is a witch-hunt being conducted, but it could equally be the case that this is wide of the mark. Until we are sure of the reality, it isn’t fair to exacerbate the situation.

We have to be careful in repeating allegations, even those that are unproven / untrue, as they begin to take on an unwarranted credibility, almost as if they become true by being constantly repeated.

I totally agree with Ann McCracken I work in the voluntary sector dealing with debt and othe issues imagine what would happen if I revealed the rent or mortage arrears of some of our clients to the whole world. The stress of being in arrears on the top of a redundancy is bad enough but tell everyone is completely wrong she as to go

All whistle blowers have to accept potential marterdom to the cause of public interest where the stigma of discovery as a victim to harassment and bullying greater than the fear in the first place.

Something that the bullies count on, over time, as the insdious nature of harassment or 'approval deprivation' ensures the victim becomes sufficiently withdrawn and anxious enough to present as the standard doormat whilst they loose the capacity for self-advocacy before breaking down and escaping their tormentor through absence and/or sickness.

It's about time that the bullies were vilified and not the victims for being any more contributory neglegent than the bully for being weak and inadiquate in terms of poor relationship management where interpersonal communications have irrevokably break down.....

We are not here to acquesce or just pander to the irrassible, agressive and inapropriate behaviours of others to the detriment of all dismissed as a little office based banter and friendly fire that nevertheless results in a disporportionate level of collateral damage to the foot soldiers.

It's about time that everyone knew that it is not isolated but pervades all levels of hierarchy cascading down from the top most levels of government - so no good on you Christine Pratt - just a shame about your name...........

I totally concur with Cary Cooper as confidentiality is all with regard to helplines. thi scould cause huge lack of trust with other equally useful crisis lines.
As a stress management consultant and practitioenr I regularly hear from employees who perceive they are being bullied and in just a few one to one session we can usually develop their confidence so that they can deal with the situation better. However bullying should not be tolerated in the workplace and the HSE Management Standards for stress make this quite clear. Employees work much better when they are encouraged and valued and apologies are given if a manager looses his/her temper, or other emotional outburst. In my experience bullying is usually much more covert with insidious comment or malicious gossip usually between employees and it is the managemr's job to stop this. The responsibility is with the manager to discuss without judgement how the employee feels and agree a way forward. This is the type of ADULT behaviour we should all expect in the workplace.
The problem with the current Downing Street situation is that they are in complete denial of the excessive pressures that everyone is probably working under which can cause outburst, unacceptable behaviour and creates a workplace of 'yes' people who are often afraid to put their head above the parapet for fear of it being blown off. This situation is common in many large organisations but it does not mean it is acceptable.
Workplaces, including Downing Street should be applying their policies including the management standards not having a witch hunt.

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.

How can she defend this action - by its very nature its a confidential service.
She has lost all credibility not only in herself but in this service - what a pity.

I am dismayed at the actions of Mrs Pratt and her public outing of the Government. Does this mean she will go on national television and out every other employer that they receive complaints about or it this purely a publicity / policitcal move!!

What happened to confidentiality for both parties?? Who is to say that Gordon Brown is a bully? that is another persons opinion which does not always mean the person they complain about is a bully.

I don't expect a man to lead this country at this time not to loose his cool every now and again as he is after all human and not a machine.

Mrs Pratt has to go, whether she is pushed or jumps. Imagine if you were the victim in this instance and found that the confidential helpline had breach your trust and went public in naming and shaming the organisation. What will they be feeling walking into work?

What makes this worse is her arrogance in insisting that she hasn't broken confidentiality?

Another issue is by naming and shaming the employer without giving them an opportunity to respond. Dreadful decision by Mrs Pratt to conduct herself in this manner. The only way NBH can respond is to remove her immediately and apologise for her actions.