Workplace Snitching: If You See Something, Should You Say Something?

One in five employees report they've been the victim of abusive retaliation for reporting bad behavior on
the job. Will it make you think twice before snitching?

When Corina Allen was dismissed from her job by Radio One, which owns two local stations in Texas, in
2007, she knew she had a discrimination claim on her hands. While Texas is an “at will” state, meaning
employees can be terminated without reason, something felt amiss. She filed complaint with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission and didn’t look back, accepting a position with CBS before
ultimately opening her own advertising and media placement agency. When she knocked on the door of
Radio One in 2009, hoping to launch a campaign for a client on KBXX-FM, Allen was welcomed by
former colleagues eager to do business with a familiar face. All seemed well, but soon the request was
passed higher and higher up the ladder until Allen was told in no uncertain terms by Vice President Doug
Abernathy that because of her previous complaint, the company would not do business with her or her
clients.

Sound fair? Sound legal?

Sounds like retaliation, which, when it comes to business is anything but. Lucky for Allen, her
conversation with Abernathy was recorded and in May 2011 a judge awarded her over $700,000* in
punitive damages. Retaliation against employees for whistle-blowing, it seems, is no joke in the eyes of
the law.

Unfortunately for employees though, retaliation or retribution for calling out bad deeds in the office is on
the rise. According to new research from the Ethics Resource Center, one in five employees who has
reported an ethical breach or misconduct of a colleague has faced some ugly payback, ranging from the
benign—exclusion form a work activity by management—to cases like Allen’s where loss of business
can occur, to much more extreme incidences of harassment and physical harm. All told, more than 8.8
million people experienced retaliation for blowing the whistle from 2009-2011.

“I’ve definitely found retaliation to be on the rise,” says Thomas Padgett, a civil rights attorney on
Corinna Allen’s case whose stories make Allen’s incidences of retribution seem like a cake walk: one
open case features a woman who reported sexual harassment and was shoved into a bathroom wall by
a male colleague who then threatened to toss her over a railing. As someone with his finger to the pulse
of reprehensible workplace behavior, Padgett says it all comes down to two things. First off, a general
lack of civility in the world today. “Bosses have become much more willing to treat people poorly
because of the fact that civil discourse in our society has become so prevalent,” he says. “That
translates into the way we treat each other at work.”

After taking aim at the state of the world’s code of conduct Padgett says another factor is at play in the
rise of workplace retaliation: “Fear.” Fear of losing their jobs can drive a person to do some crazy things,
he says. In incidences where you’ve violated a company code or—worse—a law, and someone is in a
position to threaten your job by reporting it, well, you might be tempted to do whatever’s in your power to
make them pay. “The quickest way to get out of a tough situation is to squash whatever, or whoever, is
threatening you,” he says.

Ouch. The rules on snitching have been nebulous since the playground. But in a year when a decent
number of high level University employees saw serious repercussions for not tattling on a colleague, it’s
become more apparent than ever that when your career’s on the line, doing the “right thing” generally
means calling out the bad guys. In fact, new provisions from the Securities and Exchange Commission
will go into effect this summer that will actually reward whistle-blowers for their tattle-talery.

Still it’s more than a little troubling to know that physical violence can be a repercussion to doing the
“right thing.” The vast majority of companies have what are known as “open door” policies and strict
“non-retaliation” guidelines to protect employees from bad behavior, but signs from both the ERC study
and from attorneys like Padgett indicate it’s actually commonplace.

Patricia Harned, Ph.D., the president of the Ethics Resource Center, says that while ethical misconduct
—which runs the gamut from discrimination to insider trading--is down, reporting of this kind of behavior
(that is, the number who said something as opposed to just seeing it) is at a record high of 65%. And
that, she says, is a good thing. “There’s really a chain reaction happening in the wake of the recession,”
Harned says. “A down economy drives management and leaders to instill a sense of ‘we’re all in this
together’ to their employees.” Employees hear this message as “integrity matters” and that strengthens
their commitment to the company. As a result, she says, they’re more mindful of the behavior of their
peers and more likely to report violations they perceive as a threat to the success of the group.

But as the economy begins to slowly recover, Harned says employees are seeing their managers turn
away from the “integrity matters” approach and back to business as usual. “The focus is returning to the
bottom line, to making as much money as possible,” she says, which is historically a time when ethical
standards start to slip. “As retaliation is directly linked to management behavior, it’s not surprising to see
that it is also on the rise.”

In fact, when we asked the ERC to dig down deeper into the numbers on retaliation, they revealed
exclusively to Forbes that not only to the majority of employees who make complaints or report violations
do so to their manager or direct supervisor, but that first-line supervisors and managers are, in fact, the
employees that say they experience the most retaliation for finger pointing. The results, which show 27%
of first-ling managers reporting retaliation for reporting ethical violations, Harned says indicate an even
bigger drop in reporting to come. “Once an employee feels threatened by retaliation, the likelihood he or
his employees will continue to report violations drops precipitously,” she says. “Be sure that if a quarter
of employees say they’ve experienced retaliation for do-gooding, the other 75% know about it.”

But it’s not all boo-hooing. The silver lining of this bad behavior is that employees increasingly have the
right to do something about it, particularly if they have the gumption to go outside of the company with
their complaint in the first place. “There’s a difference between people who complained about something
to their manager and were treated poorly afterwards,” says Lori Adelson, labor and employment attorney
with the law firm Arnstein & Lehr, where she represents employers in retaliation suits. Filing a complaint
with the EEOC, however, and alleging discrimination, or reporting a violation of Sarbanes-Oxley, have
provisions that protect whistle-blowers from retaliation.

From Adelson’s perch, representing the employers perspective, the legal system has made it too easy
for employees to file claims of discrimination or wrong-doing—to the point where she says the power is
being abused. “Employees have too much ammunition,” she says, and says the tough economy is
making the situation even worse. “As indicator, an unprecedented amount of claims against employers
are being filed in Florida. It’s one of the most depressed economies in the country and over two thirds of
claims nationwide are being filed there.”

But whether the repressed economy creates a workplace environment rife with abusive behavior and
retaliation or rather the perfect setting for abusing the system with baseless lawsuits is open for debate.
ERC data shows that more employees are calling out colleagues for bad behavior, only to see damage
to their careers, harassment or physical harm as a result. Does it make you think twice about saying
something? Understandably so. But Padgett would have you know one thing about your rights: “If the
truth is on your side, with the right evidence, these [cases] are among the easiest to win.”
 Difference between tattling, reporting a concern at work

Let's face it: Not everybody acts appropriately in the workplace.

From a co-worker updating her Facebook page on company time to a colleague fond of making
comments about the boss behind his back, sometimes we encounter less-than-ideal people.

Dealing with such problems can be tricky. Confronting an offender is scary, and going to a superior may
make you feel like a snitch. But doing nothing can make your blood boil (and may make a bad situation
worse).

How to handle the matter? Below, experts offer some thoughts.

Things to ask yourself

Alan Vengel, a consultant on workplace issues and author of "20 Minutes to a Top Performer," suggests
first identifying if the problem is disrupting productivity. "If not, forget it," Vengel says. "Don't get
immersed in personality issues or emotional issues that just bother you but don't really affect the
productivity of the team."

Likewise, Roberta Chinsky Matuson, president of Human Resource Solutions in Northampton,

Massachusetts, recommends assessing the severity of the infraction. "Ask yourself: What would happen
if I did nothing? If the answer is little, then perhaps this is a matter not worth addressing."

But on the flip side, consider the toll of being quiet if you judge that the matter is important. "Saying
nothing sends the unintended message that you're OK with whatever the other person is doing," says
Kerry Patterson, co-author of The New York Times best-seller "Crucial Conversations." "By clamming
up, you're giving your tacit or unspoken approval when, in fact, that's the last message you want to
send."

Finally, examine your intentions. Are you trying to help the company, or are you solely interested in
advancing your own agenda, such as getting back at someone or trying to look like the "good"
employee? "If you truly believe the issue will help advance the goals of the organization, then proceed. If
it's only about you, then reconsider your motives," Matuson advises.

Where to turn

Once you've determined that doing something to rectify the situation is necessary, the next obstacle is
deciding whom to tell: the "guilty" party or someone else.

"It's almost always best to talk directly to the other person," Patterson says.

"When you choose to talk to the person's boss, he is likely to be insulted that you didn't talk to him first.
Imagine if one of your closest colleagues at work talked to your boss about something you did. You're
not likely to agree with this tactic. 'Why didn't you say something to me?' would be your first question.
'Now the boss is on my case' would be your second remark."

Some suggestions to make this exchange go smoother include:

• Ask the other person when would be a good time to talk.

• Conduct the conversation in private.

• Keep emotions in check -- people tend to dislike being threatened, accused or scolded.

• Stick to the facts rather than making blanket statements. ("That report was supposed to be to me by
10:00 so I could add my data." versus "You always spend too much time on the phone and never get
things done.")

Give the offender a chance to address the situation

If the conversation doesn't yield desired results, the infraction is too severe to not be reported to
someone in authority or you simply cannot handle a direct confrontation, you may need to contact
others. Depending on the nature of the problem and whom it involves, options are usually your
immediate supervisor or someone from human resources.

Patterson suggests leading off such conversations with a contrasting statement, such as, "I'm reluctant
to say something because I would prefer to handle this directly with the person, but I believe that I need
to involve you because ..." (then give your reasons).

Regardless of whom you contact, try to keep the focus on the impact this behavior is having on the
organization. "The less personal matters become, the more likely you will be able to get this situation
resolved amicably," Matuson says.

Lastly, go in seeking solutions, not punishment. Vengel notes that "positive and future-oriented"
language can help others see that you are pursuing the matter for the good of the company and not
simply looking for retribution.

Patterson adds, "Explain the facts or details of the infraction, but avoid accusations of any kind. Think of
yourself as a detective reporting a crime. The only details that will make it to the inquiry are the actual
facts of the circumstances. Stick with those."