Latest news with #workplacebehavior
Forbes
a day ago
- General
- Forbes
Why Gaslighting At Work Can Be Worse Than Passive Aggressive Behavior
Why Gaslighting At Work Can Be Worse Than Passive Aggressive Behavior If you have ever walked out of a meeting questioning your memory, your judgment, or even your value, you are not alone. You might be experiencing gaslighting or passive-aggressive behavior at work. Both are more common than most people realize and both can quietly chip away at your confidence. What is gaslighting? The term gaslighting comes from a 1944 movie where a husband tries to drive his wife crazy by convincing her she's imagining things. In the workplace, gaslighting isn't always so obvious, but the effects can be just as harmful. Passive-aggressive behavior may seem less severe at first, but over time it creates resentment and confusion. The two behaviors both damage communication and trust. Understanding how they work, how to spot them, and what to do when they appear is key to protecting your emotional well-being and your professional growth. These behaviors can erode curiosity, silence good ideas, and drive talented people out the door. And when that happens, performance and culture both suffer. What Do Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior Look Like At Work? What Do Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior Look Like At Work? Workplace gaslighting is a psychological tactic used to manipulate others into doubting their own perception of reality. Think about that for a moment. Someone deliberately tries to make you believe something that is an intentional distortion rather than disagreement. It happens when someone repeatedly invalidates another person's concerns, blames them for things they did not do, or pretends a conversation never happened. That might sound cruel, and sometimes it is not even intentional, but it can be damaging. On the surface, gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior can seem similar. Both leave you questioning what just happened. But they are fundamentally different. Passive-aggressive behavior is usually an indirect expression of frustration, like sarcasm, procrastination, or silent resistance. Gaslighting is an attempt to make you question your reality. One avoids conflict. The other manipulates perception. And while both are toxic, gaslighting can be much more destabilizing. Here are a few examples of passive-aggressive behavior at work: Here are a few examples of gaslighting at work: In many cases, the person being gaslit starts to internalize the blame. That is what makes it so effective and so dangerous. As Dr. Robin Stern, psychologist and author of The Gaslight Effect, explains, victims often doubt themselves and their instincts. When this happens at work, it creates confusion, self-doubt, and disengagement. Why Are Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior So Damaging To Workplace Culture? Why Are Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior So Damaging To Workplace Culture? Gaslighting creates fear, and fear kills curiosity. When people feel unsafe speaking up, they go silent, innovation stalls, and mistakes go unreported. Employees who once felt energized by their work start to pull back emotionally or leave altogether. Passive-aggressive behavior also contributes to a toxic work environment. While it may seem less intense, its persistent nature fosters resentment, confusion, and a breakdown in communication. A study from the Workplace Bullying Institute found that more than 30% of employees have experienced some form of bullying at work, and gaslighting was a common thread. This is especially problematic because gaslighting often hides behind power structures. A senior leader might be the one doing it, intentionally or not. And because they have influence, others might defend or excuse the behavior. What makes gaslighting more damaging is its effect on a person's identity and psychological stability. While passive-aggressive behavior often triggers frustration, gaslighting can trigger self-doubt, anxiety, and even trauma. It not only changes how someone feels about work, it can alter how they see themselves. These behaviors also create a ripple effect. Once one person is treated this way, others take note. They learn it is not safe to challenge, to question, or to think independently. Over time, that kind of environment becomes hostile to curiosity and psychological safety. People learn to adapt rather than engage, and that hurts business. How Can You Respond To Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work? How Can You Respond To Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work? If you suspect gaslighting or passive-aggressive behavior is happening to you or someone you manage, there are steps you can take to bring clarity back into your workplace interactions. Start by documenting conversations and decisions. That can ensure clarity. Keep written records of assignments, expectations, and performance discussions. Use email to confirm verbal conversations. Paraphrasing back what you have heard is a very effective technique to ensure understanding, and it is especially helpful if you suspect gaslighting. If someone tries to claim a conversation never happened, you will have something neutral to refer back to. Next, you do not have to accuse someone of gaslighting or being passive-aggressive, but you can call out inconsistencies in a factual, calm tone. For example, say, 'I want to be sure we are on the same page. I remember that conversation differently. Here is what I have in my notes.' Curiosity is powerful here. It allows you to challenge distortion without escalating into confrontation. It also helps to build allies. Isolation is one of the goals of gaslighting. Counter it by staying connected to people who can validate your experiences. That might include HR, a mentor, or even a peer who witnessed the behavior. These behaviors lose their grip when the person being targeted is not alone. If you are in a leadership role, be proactive. These behaviors often thrive in ambiguity. Create channels where employees can speak up without fear. Train managers on how to handle feedback and conflict without resorting to psychological tactics. Promote transparency and reward open communication. Why Curiosity Helps Protect You From Both Gaslighting And Passive Aggression Why Curiosity Helps Protect You From Both Gaslighting And Passive Aggression Curiosity creates space to explore rather than assume. When someone says something that contradicts your experience, a curious question like, 'Can you help me understand how you saw that?' shifts the conversation from confrontation to collaboration. It also gives you a moment to pause, reflect, and stay grounded in what you know to be true. In my research on workplace curiosity, I found that one of the biggest blockers is fear. Fear of being wrong. Fear of being dismissed. Fear of speaking up. Gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior exploit all of those fears. That is why building a culture of curiosity is a safeguard against manipulation. It reinforces psychological safety and helps people separate facts from spin. The Bottom Line On Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work The Bottom Line On Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work Gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior are real threats to employee well-being and organizational health. While both undermine communication and trust, gaslighting causes deeper harm because it leads people to question their own thinking and reality. That level of psychological manipulation has a more lasting impact, not just on individuals, but on culture and performance. Recognizing these behaviors, addressing them early, and creating systems that support psychological safety can restore trust and reignite curiosity. People do their best work when they are confident, heard, and clear about what is real. That starts with having the courage to name what is happening, and the curiosity to explore what comes next.
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
The proof that BBC turned a blind eye to Gregg Wallace
The BBC warned Gregg Wallace six years ago that he would be sacked if he continued behaving inappropriately, but failed to act when further concerns were raised about his conduct. A BBC executive wrote to Wallace in 2019, following complaints about his behaviour, and said they would cut ties with him if they learnt of any further allegations. However, when the BBC was subsequently told about Wallace's inappropriate behaviour, the corporation did not follow through on its threat. Wallace has now been sacked by the BBC ahead of the expected publication of a report into his behaviour, commissioned by Banijay, an independent production company, and conducted by law firm Lewis Silkin. The BBC is now facing fresh questions over why Wallace was allowed to keep working amid mounting complaints. Kate Phillips, the BBC's chief content officer, warned the MasterChef host in 2019 that the corporation would 'seriously consider its future working relationship' with him if he did not heed warnings about his behaviour. In a letter, she said that the BBC ' will not tolerate behaviour to occur on any productions that is inappropriate, unprofessional and/or has the effect on individuals to feel sexually harassed'. She added: 'It would be regrettable and disappointing to learn of any further incidents, and in such circumstances, the BBC would need to seriously consider its future working relationship with you.' Her letter followed complaints about behaviour on at least two of his shows: Impossible Celebrities and Celebrity MasterChef. In 2023, on Inside the Factory, another of Wallace's shows, the presenter allegedly made inappropriate remarks about the weight of people working at a Nestle plant. After filming took place in February that year, Nestle's head of media relations told its staff that it had 'spoken to the BBC to bring our unacceptable experience to their attention in the hope that it is not repeated in other workplaces around the UK'. Wallace left Inside the Factory afterwards. According to a source, the production company that makes Inside the Factory carried out an HR investigation but did not make a finding against him. However, the BBC did not end its working relationship with him as threatened, and he continued working on multiple other shows, including MasterChef, his biggest platform. MasterChef is made by Banijay, but is on the BBC's list of eight 'flagship programmes'. The same year, a former policeman who said he witnessed Wallace making inappropriate sexual comments at a charity event in 2023 told BBC News he complained to the corporation online, as well as attempting to call on the phone, but never heard back. There have been reports of at least two other incidents during this period, although there is no evidence that they were reported to the BBC. A producer working on MasterChef told The Telegraph that at the end of 2019, they saw a runner crying after apparently being asked to enter Wallace's dressing room when he was only wearing underwear. In 2022, a 19-year-old MasterChef staff member also tried to complain about Wallace's comments regarding her body, according to BBC News. Wallace was only taken off air in late 2024. The BBC sent a letter to Wallace this week, reminding him of the written warning by Ms Philips and enumerating other occasions when corporation executives had warned him over his behaviour. According to the BBC's letter, corporation executives spoke to him about their concerns in the late 2000s, and twice in 2013, including about an incident where he punched a member of the public. The Telegraph has also learnt of an additional incident on MasterChef more than a decade ago, where BBC bosses were made aware of his alleged inappropriate behaviour. 'Tried to cover up his behaviour' A young woman working on the show told The Telegraph that she was pulled aside by a BBC executive who used to visit the set of the cookery show regularly. She claimed that the individual asked her if she 'needed help' because of Wallace's 'inappropriate' behaviour. Although she declined the offer for fear of losing her job, the woman, who has asked to remain anonymous, said she now wonders if the executive was trying to 'cover' themselves by offering help. She believes the BBC staff member should have reprimanded Wallace in any case. She said: 'The BBC should have taken action earlier…It seems like they tried to cover up his behaviour as they tried to protect the 'talent'.' When The Telegraph approached the BBC executive in question, they said that they did not remember the conversation with the young woman, but did confirm that they had been aware of 'inappropriate' conduct by Wallace. Wallace's behaviour was brought to the attention of Ms Phillips in 2017, when she was controller of entertainment. Aasmah Mir, a radio presenter and Celebrity MasterChef contestant, wrote to her about two incidents on the show. In the first, Wallace allegedly told Ms Mir that a woman of her acquaintance was a 'sexy bitch'. She also alleged that the former greengrocer had been forced to apologise to contestants after telling a rape 'joke'. Ms Phillips assured Ms Mir that she would make it clear to Wallace and his agent that 'this type of behaviour is unacceptable and cannot continue'. However, Ms Phillips cautioned Wallace again in 2018, following an incident on Impossible Celebrities. His BBC career only came to an end this week when he was sacked following the legal inquiry into his behaviour. Banijay has not yet published the report or its conclusions, but Wallace said on social media this week that he had been cleared of serious wrongdoing. He admitted that his 'humour and language' could be inappropriate at times and apologised, but he also described himself as the victim of an 'incredible injustice'. He said: 'The most damaging claims… were found to be baseless after a full and forensic six-month investigation.' Wallace also suggested that some of his behaviour was down to autism and criticised bosses for failing to take that into account. He said: 'My neurodiversity, now formally diagnosed as autism, was suspected and discussed by colleagues across countless seasons of MasterChef. 'I will not go quietly. I will not be cancelled for convenience. I was tried by the media and hung out to dry well before the facts were established. The full story of this incredible injustice must be told and it is very much a matter of public interest.' A BBC spokesman said: 'Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace. We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.'
Irish Times
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Irish Times
Gregg Wallace dropped by BBC over doubts he could ‘change behaviour'
Gregg Wallace was dropped from the BBC after bosses concluded they had no confidence he could 'change what seems to be learned behaviour', the corporation has told him. A letter of dismissal to the former MasterChef presenter from the head of compliance for BBC television states she cannot be sure his presence on a show would allow for 'a sufficiently safe and respectful environment' for others, the Telegraph reported. The letter from Claire Powell, head of compliance for BBC Television, states that she took into consideration his recent diagnosis of autism , which Wallace himself suggested had made the MasterChef set a 'dangerous environment' for him. She concluded that he 'struggled to distinguish the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace', despite being given relevant training in 2019. READ MORE Wallace stood aside from presenting MasterChef in November after BBC News reported a series of allegations being made against him by 13 people, who worked with Wallace across a 17-year period. A report on his behaviour, overseen by law firm Lewis Silkin, was then commissioned by MasterChef's producers Banijay. The report's findings are expected imminently. On Tuesday the BBC said in a statement: 'Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace. We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.' Wallace has already admitted using inappropriate language and apologised, but claimed earlier this week to have been cleared of 'the most serious and sensational accusations made against me'. Powell's letter, obtained by the Telegraph, said the corporation had taken into account that Wallace was a presenter on a flagship BBC show and referred to the 'impact that your comments had on the BBC's reputation'. 'I have also taken into account whether your behaviour could be improved with training and/or coaching,' she stated. 'However, having reviewed the 2025 findings, I do not have the confidence that you can change what seems to be learned behaviour for you to make what you perceive to be jokes in the working environment, without understanding the boundaries of what is appropriate. 'I also have to consider the fact that various people in the BBC have spoken to you about your behaviour over the course of your career, and that you also already received training/coaching in 2019. 'I do not have confidence that your behaviour can change to ensure there is a sufficiently safe and respectful environment for others working with you in the types of programmes the BBC has engaged you to present. 'Such productions are not heavily scripted programmes and involve sound and consistent levels of judgment in relation to interactions with others which cannot constantly be monitored or supervised.' The Telegraph also reported Wallace was preparing to sue the BBC for discrimination. The 60-year-old has revealed a recent autism diagnosis. In a statement early this week, he accused the BBC of failing 'to investigate my disability or protect me from what I now realise was a dangerous environment for over 20 years'. - Guardian
Daily Mail
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Gregg Wallace BANNED from working at the BBC in scathing dismissal letter as sacked presenter is blasted for using autism diagnosis as an excuse for 'inappropriate behaviour'
Gregg Wallace has been banned from working at the BBC after executives ruled they did not 'have the confidence that you can change what seems to be learned behaviour'. In a letter of dismissal, the corporation made clear that Wallace, 60, would not work as a BBC presenter following an investigation into his behaviour on MasterChef. When coming to the judgement the BBC said they took into account Wallace's autism diagnosis but concluded that he 'struggled to distinguish the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace' despite training in 2019. The independent report by Lewis Silkins, which was commissioned by Masterchef producers Banijay in November after the initial allegations, has yet to be published but Wallace has insisted he has been cleared of the most serious allegations of groping. But it is understood that he has been found guilty of making repeated inappropriate comments which he considered 'banter'. Defending himself on Tuesday, Wallace recognised 'that some of my humour and language, at times, was inappropriate' for which he apologised 'without reservation'. The dismissal letter from the BBC, which was obtained by The Telegraph, said the corporation had taken into account that 'you were a presenter on a flagship BBC show' and noted 'the impact that your comments had on the BBC's reputation'. It went on: 'I have also taken into account whether your behaviour could be improved with training and/or coaching. 'However, having reviewed the 2025 findings, I do not have the confidence that you can change what seems to be learned behaviour for you to make what you perceive to be jokes in the working environment, without understanding the boundaries of what is appropriate.' 'I also have to consider the fact that various people in the BBC have spoken to you about your behaviour over the course of your career, and that you also already received training/coaching in 2019.' The letter added: 'I have further taken into account the 2025 Findings as they relate to your health and recent autism diagnosis (as you have publicly stated). 'I have noted that you do not consider certain environments to now be 'safe' for you. In addition to the duty of care towards you, the BBC equally to take into account the safety and duty of care owed towards contributors, members of the public and colleagues on production teams that you may engage with and the appropriate use of licence fee payers' money in establishing a safe working environment for all. 'The 2025 Findings reflect that you acknowledge some of your comments have offended or upset people, but it is clear that you struggle to distinguish the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, as well as lacking awareness of why your behaviour impacts others.' 'I do not have confidence that your behaviour can change to ensure there is a sufficiently safe and respectful environment for others working with you in the types of programmes the BBC has engaged you to present. 'Such productions are not heavily scripted programmes and involve sound and consistent levels of judgment in relation to interactions with others which cannot constantly be monitored or supervised.' Wallace has been blasted by disability charities for using his autism as an excuse for his alleged inappropriate behaviour. On Tuesday he claimed that television executives had failed to 'investigate my disability' or 'protect me from what I now realise was a dangerous environment'. Fifty people came forward this week with fresh allegations about Wallace, including inappropriate sexual comments, touching and groping, which he vehemently denies. Now Wallace has been told by one leading charity that his autism diagnosis was 'not a free pass for bad behaviour', while others warned that his comments risked stigmatising the autistic community. Seema Flower, founder of disabilities consultancy Blind Ambition, told BBC News there was 'no excuse' for being inappropriate to people in society. 'Where does it leave us if we use autism as excuse to behave in whatever way we like?' she asked. Emily Banks, founder of neurodiversity training body Enna, also condemned Wallace. She said: 'To be clear: being autistic is never an excuse for misconduct. It doesn't absolve anyone of responsibility, and it certainly doesn't mean you can't tell the difference between right and wrong.' While Dan Harris, who runs the charity Neurodiversity in Business and is himself autistic, said people like him 'may miss social cues autism is not a free pass for bad behaviour.' 'Comments like this stigmatise us and add an unfortunate negative focus on our community.' On Wednesday, friends of Wallace had said his autism is partly responsible for his inappropriate behaviour because the condition has allegedly caused an 'inability to wear underwear because of his autistic hypersensitivity to labels and tight clothing'. His autism is said to result in him having an 'oddity of filters and boundaries', The Times reported. A BBC spokesperson told MailOnline: 'Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace.' 'We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.' In response to the latest allegations, a spokesperson for Wallace said: 'Gregg continues to co-operate fully with the ongoing Banijay UK review and as previously stated, denies engaging in behaviour of a sexually harassing nature.'
The Sun
04-07-2025
- The Sun
Met cop sacked after farting in female officer's FACE & laughing when she refused to ‘pull my finger'
A MET cop has been sacked after farting in a female officer's face and laughing when she refused to "pull his finger". PC Wayne Sansom is one of two officers who have been axed following gross misconduct. 2 2 He asked a WPC to pull his finger at Wembley Police Station in northwest London on November 2021. Fellow officer PC Ben Jeffries is said to have made "inappropriate and discourteous comments" to the same female officer. Russell Ford, for the Met Police, previously told a hearing: "When she declined he passed wind in her face from around 10-15 cm away." PC Sansom "agrees to the 'pull my finger' remark" but denied he actually broke wind. Mr Ford added: "He fully accepts his attempt at humour was misplaced and inappropriate in a modern policing workplace. "PC Sansom approached her and asked her to pull his finger, she knew what was intended and told him to move along. "At this, PC Sansom turned his back, stood on his toes and passed wind in her face." Mr Ford said the incident was "corroborated" by another female officer at the time. He described how after he asked the PC to pull his finger, PC Sansom, in close proximity, turned away from her and "passed wind very loudly - then laughed out loud and walked away." Mr Ford then referred to an occasion in mid-December 2021 when the female officer described assisting on a call-out involving "Romanian people who did not speak English" with PC Sansom. He added: "Back in the writing room, PC Sansom complained about the Romanians, referring to them as 'f***ing d***heads'." The female officer replied: "That's OK Wayne everyone knows you don't like Romanian people." PC Sansom replied: "That's not true… I would put my d**k in you." He was also accused of asking the female officer "questions about her sexuality" and "calling her a lesbian". PC Sansom claims that he only asked the officer "once" about her sexuality after hearing rumours circulate about his colleague's personal life. The hearing was told that Sansom was concerned that this could lead to her being "unfairly treated or talked about". Meanwhile, Sutton Police Station heard how PC Jeffries made "discourteous remarks" to the same female officer about her sexuality. PC Jeffries also took a picture of his testicles using the female officer's mobile phone at an Extinction Rebellion protest on 25 August 2021. A nine-day hearing found that both officers had breached the standards of professional behaviour in relation to discreditable conduct, authority, respect and courtesy, and equality and diversity. It was heard that on multiple occasions, dating back to 2020, the officers made racist, misogynistic, sexual and homophobic remarks to several colleagues while on duty. Detective Chief Superintendent Luke Williams, who leads policing for the North West Command, said: 'The actions and comments made by both PC Jeffries and PC Samson were disgusting, wholly inappropriate and fell far below the standards expected of Met police officers. It is right they have been dismissed. 'I would encourage our staff to continue to report any wrongdoing so that we can take action.'
