The Raab bullying case has brought the matter of bullying to a head. Indeed, there seems to have been more debate about this important question since publication of the Tolley report, than almost anything else to do with the case. And there is, in fact, a solution.
In an article for the Telegraphย on 21 April, Raab complained that โnormal rules of evidence and procedural fairnessโ were not applied in his case. As an example, he cited the โthree-month time limit for bringing bullying claims in an employment tribunalโ.
How to bring bullying claims to the tribunal?
But that is exactly the point. There is no three-month time limit for bringing โbullying claimsโ before the employment tribunal here in the UK. There is no statute or regulation that specifically prescribes such behaviour. Instead claims of bullying have to be brought by other means.
Often that is by complaining ofย discriminatory treatment. But shoehorning a bullying claim into one that alleges sex, race, disability or age discrimination, may or may not fit with the facts when really it should be the allegation of bullying itself that should lie at the heart of the case.
Recognising the problem posed by what behaviours were or were not acceptable in Raabโs case, Adam Tolley dealt with the issue carefully.
It took up five of the 48 pages of his report. He drew particularly from a decision of the High Court in 2021. This was in the context of the Judicial Review of then prime minister Boris Johnsonโs approach to theย complaints made against the previous Home Secretary, Priti Patel.ย
Tolley’s definition of bullying in the workplace
That case was brought upon the basis that bullying meant the following; either โoffensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviourโ (whether intendedย to have that effectย or not). Orย โabuse or misuse of powerย in waysย that undermine,ย humiliate,ย denigrate or injure the recipientโ.
Crucially,ย this was theย definition of โbullyingโย that Tolley used for the purposes of his report into Dominic Raab. As such this is likely to be the standard used inย bullying casesย in the future.
It may be different to 25 years ago, but we have seen in the field ofย sex harassmentย how standards can change, and how important it is to ensure behaviours in todayโs workplaces match the standards of today.ย
So given all the publicity the Raab case has attracted over the last few days, is this a seminal moment in the history of dealing with bullying cases in the UK?
In the same wayย thatย #MeTooย has proved to be such a watershed momentย in relation toย sexual harassment in the modern workplace.
Before we get too carried away with the importance of this case, there does remain a critical issue. Although Tolleyโs report may read for some like a formal judgment, to be followed in subsequent cases as if it constitutes some sort of โbinding authorityโ, it is not. In that sense it shows how wrong it has been that successive governments have ignored calls for a new, fit-for-purpose, bullying bill to be brought before parliament.
We need clarity and anti-bullying legislation
Thatย could provideย much neededย clarity around what behaviour does or does not cross the line when making comment (as all employers have to do from time to time) about a workerโs performance.
There will always beย shades of grey on the matter of bullying,ย and one can never be definitive about what sort of behaviour in every given circumstance should or should not be prescribed.
However, it is no longer fair for employers and their workersย toย be left with uncertaintyย around one of the most important issues that we face today. Anti-bullying legislation must surely now be a priority.
