Both women and men suffer verbal abuse but in the case of women, especially when the abuse involving sexual connotations comes from a man, it is not only insulting but causes psychological harm which can last a lifetime. Even if the case goes to court, unless there is a just compensation the pain may remain there. August marks the 11th anniversary of the first case of a verbal abuse on the workplace of which I was company doctor.
When I was the company doctor of a large local company, I was called to see a woman who had gone home from work. I had not been told the details of the case. Of course, I visited in my usual hours, not knowing the urgency, and when it was the turn of this lady, the husband opened the door and returned to the table where they had been sitting down. She looked distraught and had been crying. She immediately asked, or rather stated, whether I had been sent to check on her. I noticed something was wrong and asked for an explanation. I reassured her that as a company doctor, I had a dual obligation which meant I had a commitment towards the company as well as the patient, which to me she was, besides being an employee, and that I promised to be fair.
She related a horrible story that happened that morning. She worked as a sales person visiting shops – the company had decided to provide many outlets with fridges that can sell cold drinks and her job was to go check on these items and see that everything was OK and give advice. That morning these sales people had a meeting and she arrived a few minutes late and there wasn’t a chair. She obviously asked where she was going to sit down and the manager in charge of the meeting, known for his arrogance and vulgarity, told her to “sit between his legs” with the innuendos that this expression carries with it. Everyone laughed at the joke, including the women there who wanted to appear good in front of him. After the meeting some told her to ignore it but she felt very agitated and could not continue working. One can understand that the situation caused her a lot of embarrassment without an opportunity to reply or vent out. She therefore went home and called her husband.
I advised that they go report the incident to the police as I felt this was a major breach of conduct and indeed sexual abuse. She was not actually harassed in the sense of the manager trying to obtain sexual favours; indeed quite the opposite, when you publicly embarrass someone. But harassment nevertheless it was.
I made a written report to the Human Resources manager who called me back to tell me that the person involved was in fact the father of one of the secretaries.
Indeed we were summoned to court; I believe about a year later. The company lawyer questioned me about the case. I did the usual code for doctors giving testimony: dress up, stand up, speak up and shut up and that was it. It annoyed me to hear him ask that what I was saying was based solely on my visit and not fact. I told him that when I visited her she was agitated and still had a high blood pressure and pulse rate and gave her a tranquilizer but in deference to him I said that of course all doctors and lawyers have to base their testimony on what the client, in this case a patient, is saying.
What surprised me was that it was the company that was being sued instead of the individual. The company certainly was indeed found negligent in not having a proper policy and support mechanism in place. In fact, it seemed it ought to have defended the woman and penalise heavily, if not fire, the individual. But it seems this guy was known for his nastiness and was tolerated.
What followed was a subtle personal harassment. This HR manager started to tell me to go and visit clients twice in the same day. I did it once thinking that it was due to the fact that the worker had a new shift. In fact it was obvious when I arrived that the person was still ill. What they were trying to do is turn me into a guard of some sorts. I was not there to police. From then on I refused to go twice. Then he called me personally asking me to visit someone three times. I knew of course what was going on and told him that the law would not allow me to do so. He replied that he knew the law. I replied that I did not think so. If he was not happy with me all he had to do was say the word and not play games. In any case I understood I was not wanted any longer and my employment was terminated.
Unfortunately, many companies use doctors solely towards their ends rather than as an honest service to their worker, not realising that the doctor can point out faults which can and ought to be fixed. In any case, two years after this industrial tribunal my wife saw the case on the internet and told me I was mentioned. She said it had to do with that case of verbal abuse. In fact, the woman had called me some time before to thank me. The headlines said that it was historically the first case in Malta of sexual verbal abuse.
The woman received €2000 in compensation but of course she had decided to leave the company, so the company could not be blamed for her dismissal legally. But it is unfair that the victim should leave and the perpetrator gets away only with a warning. In my opinion this was a very lenient sentence by the law, which did not take into consideration that she could not possibly, under those circumstances, have remained with the company. I hope that she at least received also the expenses for the lawyer but the fact that she won the case proves a lot and was a start.
Although I was not expecting any public thanks, I was surprised that the women’s groups and the council for women did not publicly make their voices heard. The general manager of the company testified that there were no other reports of similar cases. Of course there weren’t – the company was found lacking in not having a policy. In fact, the perpetrator was (only) given a “verbal warning” which the lawyer said was the only thing advised under the law. Not even a written warning!? This person’s behaviour had been known and it is a well known fact that harassment of both men and women go unnoticed and are underreported because people fear stigma, further danger or even loss of their job – as happened in this case. The woman was not fired but she obviously did not feel protected and comfortable enough to remain there. In fact, the company lawyer, as reported by himself in The Malta Independent, actually said she was not an exemplary employee “having had minor disciplinary action taken against her in the past”.
The morale of all this is that companies are better off having a safe HR where they can report incidents with impunity and being able to discipline bad behaviour rather than have their names smeared in the papers (which of course is not my intention here – hence not mentioning names, although one can Google it). Proper mechanisms should be in place, even for doctors to feel safe to report incidents which can put the company at harm and not be harassed into resigning their post as well. I do not consider myself a victim like the woman in the case. Having stuck my head out on her behalf makes me sleep better at night. Like workers, doctors are not chattels.
Pierre Mallia is Professor of Family Medicine and Patients’ Rights and teaches at the University of Malta. He chairs the Bioethics Research Programme of the Faculty of Medicine and Surgery. He also chairs the Bioethics Consultative Committee.
This article is his personal opinion and does not represent the opinion of any committee or Board he serves on.
Email: [email protected]