ACCforum: Harassment Law And Acc - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 34 Pages +
  • « First
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Harassment Law And Acc Discussion/Resources & Should ACC provide for this?

#661 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3346
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 07 December 2018 - 02:30 PM



It would be interesting to do a follow up on this survey/ report and establish if education and good manners are maybe contributing factors why these men perceptions are what they are.

Perhaps they were raised in environments, work and circulate in places where sexual harassment of anyone is frowned upon and honestly doesn't happen as they have been brought up to treat people with respect.

Not all men treat women and vice versa with disrespect thank gooodness for that.

Please click on the link for the full article and links


Sexual harassment

Men underestimate level of sexual harassment against women – survey

Campaigners shocked that public awareness is low despite #MeToo movement


https://www.theguard...st-women-survey



Pamela Duncan and Alexandra Topping

Thu 6 Dec 2018 07.00 GMT

Men greatly underestimate the level of sexual harassment experienced by women, according to a new survey.
#MeToo founder Tarana Burke: ‘You have to use your privilege to serve other people’
Read more

When asked what proportion of women had experienced any form of sexual harassment, both male and female respondents across the US and 12 European countries, including Great Britain, underestimated the levels experienced by women.

The biggest misconceptions were held by Danish, Dutch and French respondents, who underestimated the actual level of sexual harassment in their countries by 49, 35 and 34 percentage points respectively.

The question was part of the pollster Ipsos Mori’s Perils of Perception survey, which measures the gap between the public’s understanding of issues and reality.
0

#662 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10185
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 07 December 2018 - 03:27 PM

What if anything does sexual harassment have to do with the ACC legislation?
0

#663 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3346
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 17 December 2018 - 12:39 PM

Law Society working group releases report into harassment, inappropriate behaviour

17 Dec, 2018 11:00am

https://www.nzherald...jectid=12178150


Michael Neilson
By: Michael Neilson
General/Māori Affairs reporter, NZ Herald
[email protected]

Female lawyers have been subjected to "sexual objectification" for decades and new rules are needed to address unacceptable behaviour, a review has concluded.

The New Zealand Law Society is planning changes to reporting and is taking action on sexual harassment and bullying in the legal profession following the comprehensive report.

A working group, chaired by Dame Silvia Cartwright, was set up to look at the processes for reporting and taking action on harassment and inappropriate behaviour in legal workplaces.

It considered if improvements could be made to enable better reporting to the Law Society of harassment in the legal profession.
Recommendations included new rules for lawyers which specifically require high personal and professional standards with specific reference to sexual harassment, bullying, discrimination and other unacceptable behaviour.

The report also called for specific prohibition on victimisation of people who report unacceptable behaviour in good faith, and a specialised process for dealing with complaints of unacceptable behaviour.

The working group was established in mid-April following widespread allegations of sexual harassment, bullying and discrimination within the legal profession, combined with a culture of silence and under-reporting of such misconduct.

Former staff members of top law firm Russell McVeagh had spoken out about sexually inappropriate behaviour by lawyers towards summer law clerks, and controversy also arose around the Otago University law camp following a series of allegations of nudity and jelly wrestling.

The working group found sex discrimination and sexual objectification of women lawyers was not new, and had taken place in the New Zealand legal profession since at least the 1950s. In a national survey in 1992, 38 per cent of women lawyers reported sexual harassment.

The Law Society's board has accepted the recommendations made in the report on the regulatory processes for lawyers where unacceptable workplace behaviour occurs.
"We wanted to know what was wrong with the current system and have received compelling independent answers including that conduct and reporting standards are unclear and must be addressed so to remove any confusion over what is expected of all lawyers," president Kathryn Beck said.

"The Law Society will now develop a programme to determine how they can be put into effect.

"Some of the recommendations are currently outside the mandate of the Law Society and require legislative change.

"The Law Society will work in consultation with the Government, the profession and other organisations to achieve the appropriate outcome."

Justice Minister Andrew Little
had been advised of the report's recommendations and the Law Society would be seeking a meeting in the New Year, Beck said.

The four other members of the working group included Jane Drumm, Philip Hamlin, Joy Liddicoat and Elisabeth McDonald.


Planned New Zealand Law Society changes:

• New rules for lawyers which specifically require high personal and professional standards with specific reference to sexual harassment, bullying, discrimination and other unacceptable behaviour.

• A specific prohibition on victimisation of people who report unacceptable behaviour in good faith.

• The imposition of minimum obligations on legal workplaces or lawyers who are responsible for workplaces. This will include auditing and monitoring of compliance and a prevention on the use of non-disclosure agreements to contract out or conceal unacceptable behaviour.

• A more flexible two-stage approach to confidentiality for complaints about sexual violence, bullying, sexual harassment, discrimination and related conduct.

• Creation of a specialised process for dealing with complaints of unacceptable behaviour.

• Changes to the procedures of the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal.

• Investigation of mandatory training and education of lawyers to address culture problems in the legal profession.
0

#664 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3346
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 17 December 2018 - 12:53 PM


The New Zealand Law Society also need to ensure that the much needed work to be done is done in respect of the manner in which women are treated in general terms within the wider Legal Systems when it comes to Harassment in the community outside of the home and workplaces which is included under The Harassment Act and grant them Restraining Orders, especially where the harassers have known histories of pyschological and other violence and have Protection Orders against them as has been in the case involving XYZ where an offender undertook an insidious trail of destruction, knew how to beat the legal systems and took his rot to his grave without been held to account.

Google and Legal databases are our friends to help us in situations like this.

Shall we name names of those who should know and act better who have endorsed Sexual and other Harassment of women, women who have taken courage to report unsolicited behaviors that are unacceptable to those who are normal law abidding citizens in society?

We understand that the Police know who they are and have evidence that should be used to prosecute the said members of the Legal Fraternity for there abhorrent behaviours of causing further distress to the said complainaints - note plural not singular.


Grace Millane and The Harassment Act 1997

As an aside,
It would be very fitting if we all ensured that there is a greater awareness to all that The Harassment Act 1997, which will have been enacted for 22 years next year, is placed in the limelight to prevent another case like that of Grace Millane ocurring, who was 22 years young, if indeed it is true she meet the alleged offender who we understand she knew only a very short time online so may not have been protected as per the Provisions of The Domestic Violence Act but may well have been afforded protection of her lawful right to her Personal Safety to be free from harm as per the provisions of The Harassment Act.


The Harassment Act legislation was created for a purpose and that inlcudes protecting ALL victims of Harassment not provided for under the provisions of The Domestic Violence Act legislation


http://www.legislati.../DLM417078.html


http://www.lawsociet...riate-behaviour

Law Society plans changes to regulatory process for lawyers accused of inappropriate behaviour

17 December 2018

The New Zealand Law Society is planning a number of changes to the processes for reporting and taking action on sexual harassment and bullying in the legal profession.

These include:

New rules for lawyers which specifically require high personal and professional standards with specific reference to sexual harassment, bullying, discrimination and other unacceptable behaviour.
A specific prohibition on victimisation of people who report unacceptable behaviour in good faith.
The imposition of minimum obligations on legal workplaces or lawyers who are responsible for workplaces. This will include auditing and monitoring of compliance and a prevention on the use of non-disclosure agreements to contract out or conceal unacceptable behaviour.
A more flexible two-stage approach to confidentiality for complaints about sexual violence, bullying, sexual harassment, discrimination and related conduct.
Creation of a specialised process for dealing with complaints of unacceptable behaviour.
Changes to the procedures of the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal.
Investigation of mandatory training and education of lawyers to address culture problems in the legal profession.

The Law Society’s Board has accepted the recommendations made in a report on the regulatory processes for lawyers where unacceptable workplace behaviour occurs. The report has been prepared by a five-person independent working group established by the law Society in March and chaired by Dame Silvia Cartwright.

Presented to the New Zealand Law Society Board on 7 December, it identifies a range of problems with the current reporting regime and concludes that the regulatory mechanisms and processes are not effectively designed for dealing with complaints about sexual violence, harassment, discrimination and bullying.

New Zealand Law Society President, Kathryn Beck says the working group has prepared a comprehensive and well-researched report which fully meets its terms of reference.

“Dame Silvia and the other four members have provided valuable information and insights into the issues involved. They have consulted widely and they have developed several recommendations. We thank them for their careful and thoughtful report.

“We wanted to know what was wrong with the current system and have received compelling independent answers including that conduct and reporting standards are unclear and must be addressed so to remove any confusion over what is expected of all lawyers,” she says.

Ms Beck says some of the recommendations are complex and far-reaching, but they will assist in making the legal community a safe place for all.

“The Law Society will now develop a programme to determine how they can be put into effect. Some of the recommendations are currently outside the mandate of the Law Society and require legislative change. The Law Society will work in consultation with the government, the profession and other organisations to achieve the appropriate outcome.

“We have already advised the Minister, Andrew Little, of the report’s recommendations and will seek a meeting in the New Year to hear his views and to discuss how we can implement the required rules changes,” Ms Beck says.

“As indicated in the working group’s report, and as with all legislative change, it will be important to take care to ensure there are no unintended consequences. A consultative and collaborative approach is needed, and this is essential to ensure we achieve our objective of healthy, safe, respectful and inclusive legal workplaces.”

The full regulatory working group report is available here
https://www.lawsocie...cember-2018.pdf

A copy of the Terms of Reference of the Group can be found here.
https://www.lawsocie...f-Reference.pdf
0

#665 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3346
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 14 June 2019 - 04:37 PM

Make sure they are also reported to the Police as there is often a Criminal element to their behaviours

Office bullies are still in place
14 Jun, 2019 2:59pm

https://www.nzherald...jectid=12240575


By: Steve Hart
[email protected]

Bullying in the workplace is rising; despite the #MeToo movement and lots of talk about making workplaces safe and secure places to be.

According to a survey by recruitment firm Hays, 20 per cent of the country's employees are bullied at work — almost half of the people affected says it is because of their age, gender, sexual orientation or due to a disability.

Dig deep into the data and an even more disturbing picture emerges; 64 per cent of people with a disability claim they are bullied; 58 per cent of LGBTIQ+ are the target of bullies, and half of all woman and mature-age people are picked on at work. Fewer men (37 per cent) report bullying or harassment.

In Australia, a report by workplace think tank Reventure claimed that bullying in Aussie firms doubled between 2016 and 2017.

But according to the Hays survey, reporting the bad behaviour of co-workers to the boss or HR has an almost 50-50 chance of resolving the issue, and 15 per cent of those bullied or harassed at work leave the job without making a complaint. That leaves the bully in place and the company none-the-wiser (unless it is mentioned during an exit interview — something the survey did not touch on).

Of those who took part in the Hays survey and complained of workplace bullying, 41 per cent said nothing was done to help them.

"I was told I was lying about it and was fired," said one who complained. Another was moved from their role and placed in a different department.

Another was told to be "more resilient".

"I felt I was being blamed for having been bullied," they said. "My claims were swept under the carpet."

However, some people were pleased with the outcome after reporting it to HR, their supervisor or boss.

"The people involved were spoken to, explained to them their behaviour wasn't acceptable and a written letter of apology was given to me by the persons involved," said one survey respondent.

Another said: "Formal action was taken and the person in question had their employment terminated. However, this took a long time, and only happened after two more staff members came forward with similar complaints — up until that point it was believed to be a personality clash, despite witnesses to the behaviour."

Adam Shapley, managing director of Hays in New Zealand, says: "We chose to explore this issue through a diversity and inclusion lens since bullying and harassment cuts through many of the key diversity and inclusion considerations we have identified through talking to both employers and professionals.

"Measures range from the formal letter of the law, sanctions and workplace guides to day-to-day awareness of leaders and managers and the behaviours of all employees. However, given our findings, it seems that despite a growing awareness of the problem, more needs to be done to stop harassment and bullying at work — for all demographic groups."

Often employers will simply point staff in the direction of their Employee Assistance Programme (EAP). These EAP firms are typically paid by the employer to provide the service to staff.

While speaking with an EAP counsellor can't stop the bullying or harassment issue at its source, it can help some people. However, in the Hays survey these services get a mixed review.

One respondent said: "The EAP provider admitted that my employer required full access to any information disclosed by me."

Another said: "I have twice accessed EAPs in two different workplaces. The first one was brilliant as the EAP knew the organisation really well. The second one was less helpful. Some EAP practitioners are good, some aren't."

While someone else reported: "Accessing EAP allowed my family to heal from a very traumatic experience. Having my employer's support strengthened my role as a mother and employee."

The survey reports that of the 35 per cent of people who looked to EAP to help them deal with workplace bullying, just 43 per cent found it helpful. That means that if 100 people felt bullied, of the 35 who looked to EAP for support just 15 were helped.

Disappointingly, 13 per cent of respondents claimed to have never heard of an EAP service at work. Shapley says that means companies need to do more to promote the service to their staff.

"This involves more than mentioning it on an obscure page on the company intranet. For example, line managers could raise it in team meetings and it could be referred to in internal communications.

"Encourage staff to access the EAP if required and ensure confidentiality and anonymity for staff who use the service. Conduct regular anonymous surveys to ensure your EAP provider is delivering to your staff the support they require."

For managers looking for guidance on how to handle issues of bullying and harassment among staff then these comments from survey respondents should provide a clue.

Education, immediate investigation, open and honest conversations, an apology and training.

More coaching of staff around diversity.

Training for everyone about what constitutes bullying.

Training so people learn about respect to women, not to make comments about appearance, and mental health issues.

More acceptance of difference, especially towards mature age employees.

Helping people become more inclusive and understanding of foreign workers.

Perpetrators given strict guidelines about behaviour and that behaviour then managed similar to performance management.

But if workplace bullying is on the rise that does beg the question 'why?'.

Until that question is answered Shapley says employers need to be aware of anti-bullying laws and follow correct procedures when complaints made.

Bottom line ... report bullies in writing even if you are heading out the door to a new job.
0

#666 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3346
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 14 June 2019 - 04:43 PM

It's unfortunate that the Human Rights Review Tribunal has a gender imbalance.

Come on folks, Whilst it's great to see women represented, there should be a better cross representation of men & women in such places.



New support for the Human Rights Review Tribunal

Monday, 20 May 2019, 1:09 pm
Press Release: New Zealand Government

http://www.scoop.co....ew-tribunal.htm

Hon Aupito William Sio

Associate Minister of Justice


20 May 2019

MEDIA STATEMENT


The Associate Minister of Justice, Aupito William Sio, has today announced the appointment of five Deputy Chairpersons to the Human Rights Review Tribunal to ensure that people have greater access to justice and that their voices are heard.

“This Government has acknowledged the unacceptable backlog of cases before the Human Rights Review Tribunal that developed under the previous National Government and we have taken action by establishing the Deputy Chairperson positions to help reduce the growing backlog,” says Aupito William Sio.

“The appointment of five Deputy Chairpersons will mean the Tribunal will now have the flexibility to provide certainty and reduce waiting times for people who have claims that have not been heard for a long time.

"The law changes this Government made will enable Deputy Chairpersons to share decision-making and decision-writing duties of the Tribunal.

“All of the five appointments have extensive litigation and public law experience and collectively bring together a strong set of skills to the Tribunal.

“The combined skill sets of the Deputy Chairs, in addition to the improvements we’ve made to the operational work of the Tribunal, gives me great confidence that we can improve the experience of people using the Tribunal, and make sure that justice is not denied to them by a lack of judicial resources.


The Human Rights Review Tribunal hears claims relating to breaches of the Human Rights Act 1993, Privacy Act 1993 and the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994. Claims could relate to discrimination, sexual harassment, racial harassment, the privacy principles, and the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights.

The Tribunal is an independent judicial body which is administered by the Ministry of Justice, and is separate from the Human Rights Commission, Privacy Commissioner, and Health and Disability Commissioner.

The Tribunal’s Chairpersons are Rodger Haines QC and Martha Roche.

“Previously, the Chairpersons were required to preside at all Human Rights Review Tribunal sittings and had all the responsibility for writing decisions.

"I would like to thank Mr Haines in particular for his commitment to improving the Tribunal,” says Aupito William Sio.

Deputy Chairpersons Appointed

Katherine Anderson, Auckland

Ms Anderson has been a panel member on the Human Rights Review Tribunal since 2013. She is a senior and experienced litigation and public law lawyer with extensive private and public law experience. She was a policy advisor on legal issues for the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet from 2007 to 2010 providing policy and legal advice on a broad range of portfolios. Ms Anderson was a senior legal advisor to the Police team in relation to the Pike River Royal Commission between 2011 and 2012. After three years as Director Legal Risk at Auckland Council Ms Anderson is presently a partner in a large national law firm.

Martha Coleman, Wellington

Ms Coleman describes herself as a human rights specialist. She is an experienced public lawyer with over 20 years practice. She has been a Barrister sole since 2014 and for the previous 14 years was employed by the Crown Law Office as a Crown Counsel specialising in the area of human rights. She has extensive experience in providing advice and representation in relation to human rights issues, including those arising under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and the Human Rights Act 1993. She has represented the Crown in a number of key discrimination cases. Previous to that she was a solicitor at Chapman Tripp, a judges’ clerk in the Court of Appeal and lecturer at Victoria University teaching discrimination law, administrative law and women workers law and equality. Ms Coleman has been a Parole Board Convenor since 2017 having been a Parole Board Member from 2014. She has been a District Inspector for Mental Health since 2017. Ms Coleman holds an LLM from Yale University where she studied on a Fulbright Scholarship specialising in constitutional and anti-discrimination law.

Sarah Eyre, Wellington

Ms Eyre is a New Zealander of Tongan and Pakeha descent. She is adept at working within and moving between different cultures. She has extensive experience working with diverse and minority groups, including Māori, Pacific peoples and refugee claimants. She has 18 years legal experience. She is presently a Visiting Justice (since 2015), a Disputes Tribunal Referee (since 2011) and a member of the Real Estate Agents Authority Complaints Assessment Committee (since 2014). From 2003 to 2011 she worked for an Auckland law firm providing general legal advice including Treaty claims and Immigration issues. From 2000 to 2002 she was a Refugee Status Officer for Immigration New Zealand. Relevantly she is Chair of the Real Estate Authority’s decision-writing committee; deputy chair of a Complaints Assessment Committee for the Real Estate Authority and a mentor for new Referees of the Disputes Tribunal.

Jane Foster, Wellington

Ms Foster is a highly experienced public lawyer with significant expertise in human rights and administrative law including nearly 20 years of litigation practice, including in matters involving the Human Rights Act, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the Privacy Act. Since 2015 she is presently employed as general counsel at the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. Her principal responsibility is to provide expert legal advice and quality assurance for the Commissioner and his office in administering the Privacy Act 1993, as well as managing any litigation in which the office is involved. She has previously worked for the Crown Law Office where she started as assistant crown counsel in 1997, moving to associate Crown counsel role in 2004, then to a Crown counsel role in 2009. She worked for 15 years in the Crown Law Human Rights Team. Between 1995 and 1997 she was a litigation solicitor for Chapman Tripp.

Gillian Goodwin, Auckland

Ms Goodwin has been a panel member of the Human Rights Review Tribunal since 2013. For the past 29 years she has been a partner in major law firms, most recently Anthony Harper since 2013. Her area of expertise is corporate and commercial law with an emphasis on securities law and finance. Ms Goodwin is a member of the Institute of Directors, the Auckland District Law Society Commercial Law Committee and a past member of the New Zealand Law Society Commercial and Business Law Committee. From 2012 to 2016 she was a National Board Member of the Muscular Dystrophy Association which provides support for families affected by muscular dystrophy and other neuromuscular conditions.


ends
0

Share this topic:


  • 34 Pages +
  • « First
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users