The impact of bullying on health care administration staff : reduced commitment beyond the influences of negative affectivity

Background: Investigations of workplace bullying in health care settings have tended to focus on nurses or other clinical staff. However, the organizational and power structures enabling bullying in health care are present for all employees, including administrative staff.

Purposes: The purpose of this study was to specifically focus on health care administration staff and examine the prevalence and consequences of workplace bullying in this occupational group.

Methodology/Approach: A cross-sectional study was conducted based on questionnaire data from health care administration staff who work across facilities within a medium to large health care organization in Australia. The questionnaire included measures of bullying, negative affectivity (NA), job satisfaction, organizational commitment, well-being, and psychological distress. The three hypotheses of the study were that (a) workplace bullying will be linked to negative employee outcomes, (b) individual differences on demographic factors will have an impact on these outcomes, and (c) individual differences in NA will be a significant covariate in the analyses. The hypotheses were tested using t tests and analyses of covariances.

Findings: A total of 150 health care administration staff completed the questionnaire (76% response rate). Significant main effects were found for workplace bullying, with lower organizational commitment and well-being with the effect on commitment remaining over and above NA. Main effects were found for age on job satisfaction and for employment type on psychological distress. A significant interaction between bullying and employment type for psychological distress was also observed. Negative affectivity was a significant covariate for all analyses of covariance.

Practice Implications: The applications of these results include the need to consider the occupations receiving attention in health care to include administration employees, that bullying is present across health care occupations, and that some employees, particularly part-time staff, may need to be managed slightly differently to the full-time workforce.

Workplace bullying a risk for permanent employees

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that the risk of experiencing workplace bullying was greater for those employed on casual contracts compared to permanent or ongoing employees. Methods: A cross-sectional population-based telephone survey was conducted in South Australia in 2009. Employment arrangements were classified by self-report into four categories: permanent, casual, fixed-term and self-employed. Self-report of workplace bullying was modelled using multiple logistic regression in relation to employment arrangement, controlling for sex, age, working hours, years in job, occupational skill level, marital status and a proxy for socioeconomic status. Results: Workplace bullying was reported by 174 respondents (15.2%). Risk of workplace bullying was higher for being in a professional occupation, having a university education and being separated, divorced or widowed, but did not vary significantly by sex, age or job tenure. In adjusted multivariate logistic regression models, casual workers were significantly less likely than workers on permanent or fixed-term contracts to report bullying. Those separated, divorced or widowed had higher odds of reporting bullying than married, de facto or never-married workers. Conclusions: Contrary to expectation, workplace bullying was more often reported by permanent than casual employees. It may represent an exposure pathway not previously linked with the more idealised permanent employment arrangement. Implications: A finer understanding of psycho-social hazards across all employment arrangements is needed, with equal attention to the hazards associated with permanent as well as casual employment.