Specifically, this legislation provides legal redress for employees who have been harmed psychologically, physically or economically by being deliberately subjected to abusive work environments; and it provides legal incentives for employers to prevent and respond to mistreatment of employees at work. This is the Workplace Bullying Institute Healthy Workplace Bill (HWB) that has been introduced in 16 other states. It was authored by Suffolk Law Professor David Yamada. The grassroots group NY Healthy Workplace Advocates has been the local catalyst for the many bills introduced in New York state since 2007.

“The social and economic well-being of the State is dependent upon healthy, safe, and productive employees,” said Senator Morahan.  “I want to thank all my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, who voted for this legislation today.  In particular, Senator George Onorato, Chairman of the Labor Committee, Republican Leader Dean Skelos, Majority Conference Leader John Sampson and Deputy Majority Leader Jeff Klein for helping secure passage of the legislation.”

“I became aware of the prevalence of abusive environments in the workplace when one of my constituents brought her situation at her place of employment to my attention.  It became apparent that legislation was needed to address the problem,” said Morahan.

“Workplace bullying, abuse and harassment bring with them a variety of very serious human and economic costs,” said Senator George Onorato, Chairman of the Labor Committee and co-prime sponsor of the legislation. “Abusive behavior can cause grievous harm to employees who are the victims of it, leading to all manner of health problems and, often, forcing them to leave their jobs to escape it.  In addition, it costs employers in terms of lost employee productivity, and other workplace problems.  By taking aim at abusive work environments, this legislation will protect employees from inappropriate behavior and help our businesses to become more productive and successful.” The bill passed Onorato’s committee on March 12, 2010.

“Mistreatment of employees in the workplace is a serious issue, but too often, workers have no recourse when they are subject to an abusive work environment,” said Senate Republican Leader Dean G. Skelos. “Senator Morahan’s legislation will help employees who have been harmed, physically, mentally or financially, and will encourage employers to do more to prevent and respond to this problem.”

“We are truly appreciative of Senator Morahan’s efforts which have culminated in the passage of vital legislation today in the New York State Senate,” said  New York Healthy Workplace Advocate State Coordinators Mike Schlicht and Tom Witt.

“On behalf of the workforce of our State, I call on my Legislative colleagues in the Assembly to pass this bill in their house,” said Senator Morahan.

“This is only the second state in the nation to have passed the HWB on a floor vote. Now it is up to the outgoing Chair of the Assembly Labor Committee, Susan John, who is not running for re-election, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to guide the bill to a successful Assembly vote,” said Gary Namie, WBI Director.  “Thanks to NYHWA, the bill has 48 Assembly co-sponsors. With a positive vote by June 21, the bill could be on the Governor’s desk and become the first law in the U.S. of its kind”

Anyone who supports the passage of the HWB into law, please follow instructions at the NY State page of the HWB website.

As a follower of the workplace bullying phenomenon, you are invited to join the new IAWBH organization. Tell your friends. Begun at the biannual conference held in Montreal in 2008 (described at this site), this group which was primarily limited to academic researchers in the early years is now reaching out to a broader constituency — clinicians, practitioners, non-academics.

The next conference is June 2-4, 2010 in Cardiff, Wales. WBI will be represented with Dr. Gary Namie and Prof. David Yamada delivering keynote addresses and presenting papers.

Sponsored by the American Psychological Association/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health /Society for Occupational Health PsychologySan Juan, Puerto Rico | The Conference Program | The Conference Website

WBI participation

Symposium: Case Studies in Workplace Bullying – Just Scratching the Surface of Costs and Consequences.  Saturday Nov. 7:  11:30-12:45.  Presenters: Gary/Ruth Namie, Kathy Rospenda, Joel Neuman, Suzy Fox, David Yamada

Roundtable: Workplace Bullying: From Research to Activism. Sunday Nov. 8: 9:45-11.   Presenters: Suzy Fox, Lamont Stallworth, David Yamada, Gary/Ruth Namie, Joel Neuman

Paper: Bullied Workers Shunned in U.S. Workplaces.  Sunday Nov. 8: 2:45-3:45. Presenters: Gary/Ruth Namie

You can read the research works by these WBI-affiliated scholars in the WBI Research section for friends.

Romanow writes eloquently

GDP (gross domestic product) makes no distinction between economic activities that are good for our wellbeing and those that are harmful. Spending on tobacco, natural and human-made disasters, crime and accidents, all make GDP go up. Conversely, the value of unpaid housework, child care, volunteer work and leisure time are not included in GDP because they take place outside of the formal marketplace.

Even the “father of the GDP,” Nobel laureate Simon Kuznets, recognized that “the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income as defined by the GDP.”

(the late) Senator Robert Kennedy noted that GDP “measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”

The Institute of Wellbeing has created the Canadian Index of Wellbeing (CIW). The CIW is rooted in Canadian values.

 It begins with the belief that our cornerstone value as Canadians is the principle of “shared destiny”: that our society is often best shaped through collective action; that there is a limit to how much can be achieved by individuals acting alone; that the sum of a good society and what it can achieve is greater than the remarkably diverse parts which constitute it …

our standard of living, our health, the quality of our environment, our education and skill levels, the way we use our time, the vitality of our communities, our participation in the democratic process, and the state of our arts, culture and recreation.

Good public policies can improve wellbeing, bad ones can harm it. Three examples. Reductions in Employment Insurance (unemployment benefits in the U.S. which several governors have proudly refused to extend despite additional federal funding) increase financial risks and hamper economic wellbeing for people — a negative. Denial of medical services (even in Canada) causes a rise in a family’s health care expenses leading to poorer health for low-income citizens — a negative from the Canadian CIW perspective (as U.S. lawmakers consider taxing workers’ health care benefits and fight over people’s right to care). Significant cuts in welfare benefits increase income inequality (the rich getting richer) — something that impairs Canadians’ wellbeing.

Wellbeing in the U.S. Starting to Get Noticed

The only diectly comparable US counterpart to the Canadian CIW is the Foundation for Child Development (FCD).

The Child Well-Being Index (CWI) is a national, research-based composite measure  updated annually that describes how young people in the United States have fared since 1975.  It combines national data from 28 indicators across seven domains into a single number that reflects overall child well-being.  The seven quality-of-life domains are family economic well-being, health, safety/behavioral concerns, educational attainment, community connectedness, social relationships, and emotional and spiritual well being.

The FCD 2009 Report warned that the recession adversely impacts child wellbeing.

The percentage of children in poverty will rise to 21 percent in 2010, up from about 17 percent in 2006 primarily because of drops in family income from two incomes to one or none. Estimates of the recession’s effects reduce median family incomes to $55,700 by 2010, down from $59,200 in 2007. Single women household incomes fall to $23,000 in 2010, down from $24,950 in 2007. Single households headed by men income is expected to drop to $33,300 in 2010, from $38,100 in 2007.

As a social scientist-turned-advocate, I’ve seen firsthand how science is ignored by public policy decision makers (legislators) and by courts (and lawyers). Mostly it’s science’s fault by being too obscure, incremental, coupled with the common problem that scientists vary greatly in their ability to translate basic science into information relevant to societal problems. A recent (July 9 released) Pew Research Center survey of scientists found that only 3% of scientists are contacted by the media to describe their work; only 8% of scientists believe that public media exposure is important.

However, the library of relevant articles is growing with respect to workplace bullying. (For a sample, consult the WBI Research section.) And the media have been quite kind to WBI.

Lawmakers nearly always respond predictably to the demands of business lobbyists (no regulation, no enforcement, no accountablity, no new worker protections that interfere with absolute control over employees’ lives). Left out of the process is how laws affect real people living real lives, regardless of what’s good for business. Science about the impact of inhumane business practices should inform compassionate policy developers.

That same Pew survey also asked Americans how much various groups contributed to the “well-being of society.” The group credited as the most contributory: members of the military (84%), teachers (77%), scientists (70%), while lawyers (23%) and business executives (21%) contributed the least. In addition, 53% of the public (and only 33% of scientists) agreed that the best way to ensure peace is through military strength. Militarism is a key cultural ingredient in America. Militarism, all about the business of death, certainly undermines attention to wellbeing.

Rugged individualism, another American trait, sabotages the collective nature of society. It coarsens the regard we Americans have for one another. “To hell with him, let him fend for himself” is often the operating creed.

Both militarism and individualism run counter to genuine human altruistic impulses. Elsewhere, we cited the neuroscience of compassion. In America, showing concern for a fellow human’s wellbeing is frequently mocked as being “wimpy” or a “bleeding heart.” It is a challenge to American exceptionalism (the belief that the nation is the best and most advanced in all endeavors) to compare ourselves to European or Canadian progress on a topic like wellbeing. We clearly lag behind.

However, there is a bold new movement called Therapeutic Jurisprudence (TJ). WBI colleague and law professor David Yamada introduced TJ in his July 2 blog. He reports that a recent conference of the International Academy of Law and Mental Health included panels on mental health law and family law.

Mental health and law professionals are beginning to see the utility of “connecting the dots” (the CIW description of the process) to make the causal connection between social policy and impact on individual lives (as the CIW and FCD already know). These connections come naturally to social scientists, but the barons of the marketplace, businesses, lawmakers, and obviously do not share the same perspective. The TJ movement is bridging that gap in knowledge.

Finally, theologians can soften American attitudes toward defining success. Rabbi Michael Lerner, in his book The Politics of Meaning (1997), wrote:

The goal of the economy should be to help produce and sustain humans who are capable of realizing their highest capacities for love; creativity; intelligence; mutual recognition; solidarity; productive work; freedom; caring and nurturing; intimacy; commitment; trust; vitality; and aesthetic, ethical, spiritual, and ecological sensitivity. The materialist conception that promoting these capacities is difficult when people face material deprivation is correct, but needs to be qualified. There are, and have been throughout human history, societies that more successfully actualize these capacities than some of our contemporary advanced industrial societies, even though these others produce less, materially speaking. In my view, these societies have had a stronger economy-one that we ought to deem more productive and generating a higher standard of living.

Here’s hoping that the public dialogue started in Canada and the rest of the world enthuses America. Taking into account citizens’ wellbeing is one sign of an enlightened society. America needs to catch up. We need only to look north for a model.

UPDATE: 7/15 Public Policy and Health Impact
Los Angeles has an estimated 40,000 homeless people. The city’s policy (called Safer City which spends $6 million to pay for extra 50 police to patrol the downtown 50-block skid row) is to criminalize the destitute (for example, giving harassing tickets for not obeying crossing signals). The city spends only $5.7 million for homeless services at a time when more people, including working people, are living in their cars stripped of their foreclosed homes. Contrasted with LA is New York City with half the homeless population in large part due to a “right to shelter” policy and an investment of $200 million for housing and services for the needy. Read the Reuters report. Policies affect human wellbeing.

Gary Namie

2010 Cardiff Conference

June 2-4, 2010

Cardiff, Wales, UK

The conference website