This article will feature in the members 2009 Newsletter
Human Rights – Practitioners and Dignity
Over the years I have been struck by the problems faced by staff in organizations who are abused by their managers and management structures and find themselves totally dis-empowered.
The relevance of this reflection to PAVA is based on a simple assumption – namely if staff employed by an organization to protect/safeguard vulnerable adults from abuse are themselves subject to harassment, intimidation, humiliation, discounting behavior, bullying and general behaviors that degrade or undermine their self esteem and dignity, then that experience will potentially affect their own ability to safeguard.
It goes without saying however that this assumption relates to any work task but for those engaged in our particular field it has an added potency and undermines any moral authority/legitimizing the employing organization makes claim to.
Dignity we know is a core human value and indeed under Article 8 (ECHR) a human rights act organization have therefore no right to treat staff in a way that compromises that right. It remains to me disturbing that a manager, who will in all probability be aghast and allowing their family and friends to be bullied or humiliated find it acceptable, even a visitor in the workplace. Indeed some celebrity CEO's or business entrepreneurs are culpable for behaving in ways towards subordinates/employees that in any other circumstance or situation would be seen as totally unacceptable – abusive and at least a moral breach of human rights.
I was reminded recently how systematic abuse of an older person, dis empowers to such an extent that the individuals capacity to combat abuse and seek help is so undermined that they become trapped in their situation until 'somebody' exposes the abuse and steps are taken to protect the individual. Many organizations have 'Anti-Harassment' or bullying procedures in place but it is worrying that many do not, even if they do they remain ineffective in challenging management culture that finds abuse is still acceptable.
Dignity in care is in many ways not dissimilar to Dignity in the workplace. A Department of Health survey in 2006 highlighted the characteristics of Dignity:-
* Feeling effective engagement to listen to concerns and issue
Being Patient
Not patronizing the person
Providing a safe environment
Ensuring people to do not feel alone or isolated
Taking into account people's culture – religious views
Inherent in their character is of course compliance with good employee practice with a legislative framework in place (e.g. DDA) Respect, Communication, Rights and Equity. One term I came across sometime ago based on a three year European Commission funded project talked about 'The Dignity of Personal Identity'.
We spend a great deal of time and work – perhaps too much time – we work in diverse organizations with equally diverse management cultures. A Chief Executive, A Chair, a Board of Managers, an owner or a team leader, each have a responsibility to make a work place free from harassment, or abuse, or fear.
Fear corrodes, fear corrupts, fear disempowers, fear dis enables, fear turns a practitioner into someone they do not want to be! Dignity can only occur in cultures that respects each individual member of staff, offers a consistent framework of performance and is robustly scrutinized with regards to it's compliance with good managerial and human resource practices.
The 'Office' cannot be the template used to tolerate 'office' behavior. Gordon Ramsey cannot be a role model of appropriate treatment of staff – excused because of being able to cook or provide customers with a delightful dish of chicken breast with a morel veloute' or Lord Sugar's quips to would be apprentices that on many occasions are humiliating to entertain us. These cultures if they are considered as acceptable then we collude with behavior which can or does lead to abusive work practices.
Human Rights balances rights and responsibilities and in the work setting we face competing rights. For safeguarding work these can produce professional dilemmas. PAVAUK seeks to encourage that debate and using peer discussion seek ways of resolving as best or at least managing those tensions.
The new e forum which is still being developed by PAVAUK will allow members to post questions and debate practice or managerial dilemmas. We encourage members to be part of of those discussions.
The Board of Trustees welcome direct contact from PAVAUK members and examples where either dignity has been compromised in the workplace or where management decision making and organizational culture has enabled and empowered members to protect.
Dr Mervyn Eastman
President, PAVAUK
4th December 2009
