On @SkyNews The Sun’s @OliviaBUtley dismisses Priti Patel story as part of an “Establishment/Remainer/Civil Service agenda”. Why should the PM act on basis of “allegations with no evidence behind them”, she asks?
There IS evidence. From three dep’ts. Allegations ARE evidence.1/7
There IS evidence. From three dep’ts. Allegations ARE evidence.1/7
This isn’t semantics. It’s a vital point, central to a victim-blaming culture prevalent in tabloids: to discount the victim’s account as “not evidence”.
A public servant ending a 33-year career, in writing, for behaviour confirmed by others in three departments IS evidence. 2/7
A public servant ending a 33-year career, in writing, for behaviour confirmed by others in three departments IS evidence. 2/7
It may not be sufficient; may require corroboration; contemporaneous documents etc, depending on standard and burden of proof, but a victim’s account is CENTRAL evidence in such a case.
The issue is a pervasive view of bullying as “not real harm” and its victims as “weak”. 3/7
The issue is a pervasive view of bullying as “not real harm” and its victims as “weak”. 3/7
Transpose the harm to physical, and the arrogance of the PM’s position becomes clear:
Imagine an employee resigning after 30 years, alleging publicly and in writing they were beaten by their boss and that their boss regularly beats dozens of employees at the workplace. 4/7
Imagine an employee resigning after 30 years, alleging publicly and in writing they were beaten by their boss and that their boss regularly beats dozens of employees at the workplace. 4/7
Now imagine several employees come forward, independently, from two previous jobs come and say they were also beaten and one was compensated and told to keep quiet.
Now imagine the PM reacts by keeping that person in post, saying they’re brilliant and he has full confidence. 5/7
Now imagine the PM reacts by keeping that person in post, saying they’re brilliant and he has full confidence. 5/7
This behaviour would never be acceptable, if the issue was one of physical harm and part of the allegation was -this is crucial- that the behaviour is ongoing and other employees remain at risk.
But that’s what bullying is, at its most extreme: brutal, psychological assault. 6/7
But that’s what bullying is, at its most extreme: brutal, psychological assault. 6/7
Until we treat it with parity as the barbaric and harmful thing it is, as something that leaves scars long after bruises would have healed, as something that destroys (and often costs) lives, it will never be tackled.
The message from the very top is “whatever”. For shame. 7/7
The message from the very top is “whatever”. For shame. 7/7
