Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:30 pm
Time: 10:30 pm
Results for retaliation
4 results foundAuthor: Human Rights Watch Title: Embattled: Retaliation against Sexual Assault Survivors in the US Military Summary: Sexual assault in the US military and the failure to bring those responsible to justice has received considerable attention in recent years. Less well known is that victims too often have to choose between reporting their assaults and keeping their military careers. Department of Defense statistics indicate that 62 percent of service members who report sexual assault say they experienced retaliation. Embattled is primarily based on more than 250 interviews, including with sexual assault survivors, and numerous public records. It documents the many forms that retaliation against victims takes, including physical and psychological abuse; poor performance evaluations and disciplinary actions; and referrals by commanding officers for discharge from the military. In addition, sexual assault survivors may be prosecuted for “collateral charges”—minor offenses (like underage drinking or adultery)—based on information that came to light only because they chose to report their assaults. Mechanisms that should provide recourse for military sexual assault survivors who experience retaliation fall far short. While data suggest that thousands of survivors have experienced the type of professional retaliation that would be covered by the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, an analysis of public records did not identify any cases in which the law benefitted a survivor. Those who mistreat survivors rarely face consequences for their actions. Recent efforts to address retaliation have made important improvements, but real change will require the US Congress to bring military whistleblower protections in line with those afforded to civilians. Real justice for survivors requires the military to take concerted action to ensure that those who commit or condone retaliation are held accountable. Details: New York: HRW, 2015. 119p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 26, 2015 at: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/usmilitary0515_web.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/usmilitary0515_web.pdf Shelf Number: 135785 Keywords: Military Rape RetaliationSex Crimes Sex Offenders Sexual Assault Victims of Crime Whistleblowers |
Author: Altheimer, Irshad Title: Linking Research on Dispute Related Violence with Violence Reduction Strategies Summary: This paper is concerned with urban dispute-related violence. This paper has three objectives. First, to highlight the literature and research that should aid in the development violence-reduction strategies. Second, to address some of the challenges associated with drawing concrete policy implications from the extant research on dispute-related violence. Third, to identify the law enforcement strategies that can be utilized to reduce dispute-related violence. Details: Rochester, NY: Center for Public Safety Initiatives, Rochester Institute of Technology, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 11, 2016 at: https://www.rit.edu/cla/criminaljustice/sites/rit.edu.cla.criminaljustice/files/docs/WorkingPapers/2014/Linking%20Research%20on%20Dispute-Related%20Violence%20with%20Violence%20Reduction%20Strategies.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.rit.edu/cla/criminaljustice/sites/rit.edu.cla.criminaljustice/files/docs/WorkingPapers/2014/Linking%20Research%20on%20Dispute-Related%20Violence%20with%20Violence%20Reduction%20Strategies.pdf Shelf Number: 138621 Keywords: DisputesRetaliationUrban AreasViolent crime |
Author: Bania, Melanie L. Title: Don't Snitch: Responses to Neigbourhood Intimidation Summary: Community-wide intimidation refers to a general atmosphere of fear, silence, and non-cooperation with the police and criminal justice system within a particular neighbourhood or community affected by crime and violence. This is distinguished in the literature from individual-level intimidation: scare tactics and threats specifically targeted at one person or one small group of people following a specific incident. While the literature on individual-level intimidation is vast, much less is known about community-wide intimidation. Despite many anecdotal reports of community-wide intimidation, there is currently very limited reliable information on the prevalence and severity of community-wide intimidation in Canadian communities and elsewhere. In an attempt to explain the dynamics surrounding the causes of community-wide intimidation, existing studies point to a lack of informal social control in disenfranchised communities, strong messaging from the current 'snitch culture' surrounding gang activity, and gang stereotypes that portrait every possible gang-involved person as disproportionality violent. Regardless of potential causes, when deciding whether or not to report an incident to police, victims and bystanders generally consider whether the expected gains of reporting (the 'pros') will outweigh the costs of reporting, including the potential for retaliation (the 'cons'). When it comes to responses to community-wide intimidation, the literature refers to a variety of general suggestions, including: community outreach and education for residents; creating avenues for safe communication between community members and police; community policing; community-based prosecution strategies; civil injunctions targeting the activities of gang-involved persons; and inter-agency cooperation at the neighbourhood level. Only a few concrete examples of these approaches are provided in the literature, primarily from the United States and the United Kingdom. Most have not been well documented or evaluated for their impacts on communities. The most documented model is the Making WAVES program from the United Kingdom, which supports victims and witnesses in a variety of ways. An evaluation of the program showed promising results and emphasized the importance of interagency cooperation with community members. In Canada and Ottawa more specifically, efforts have focused on education and awareness campaigns for residents, and efforts to facilitate safe communication between residents and police. These initiatives have generally not been well documented, researched or evaluated for their effects and impacts on communities. Overall, there is a large gap in knowledge regarding community-wide intimidation of residents in vulnerable and marginalized neighbourhoods, and effective ways of addressing this concern. Further research is needed in order to understand the dynamics, prevalence, severity, and impacts of communitywide intimidation in neighbourhoods affected by crime and violence. Future attempts to address community-wide intimidation should be based on an indepth understanding of the complexity of the issue at the local neighbourhood level, and should be evaluated for their intended and unintended effects and impacts on the community. Finally, much of the literature on community-wide intimidation focuses solely on the challenges it creates for the functioning of the criminal justice system, particularly residents' willingness to report to and cooperate with the police. Very little attention is paid to the effects of intimidation and fear on the quality of life of residents in disenfranchised neighbourhoods. Yet for service providers, community workers, and residents themselves, quality of life issues are of primary importance. Various stakeholders touched by this issue, then, may have different definitions of what "success" looks like in attempts to address community-wide intimidation. Future research and initiatives related to addressing community-wide intimidation in neighbourhoods should therefore reflect carefully on the intended impact of the approach - what do we hope to see change? Should the focus be solely or mainly on reporting to police as a solution? Or are there other, more sustainable ways to meet resident needs and ultimately improve the quality of life of vulnerable and marginalized groups affected by community-wide intimidation? Details: Ottawa: Crime Prevention Ottawa, 2016. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 6, 2017 at: http://www.crimepreventionottawa.ca/Media/Content/files/Publications/Neighbourhoods/Don%20t%20snitch%20responses%20to%20Neighbourhoods%20Intimidation-EN-Final-Jan%202016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.crimepreventionottawa.ca/Media/Content/files/Publications/Neighbourhoods/Don%20t%20snitch%20responses%20to%20Neighbourhoods%20Intimidation-EN-Final-Jan%202016.pdf Shelf Number: 145944 Keywords: Communities and CrimeIntimidationNeighborhoods and CrimeRetaliationSnitching |
Author: Dussuyer, Inez Title: Preventing Victimisation of Whistle-blowers Summary: Aims of the Study The central focus of the study was on understanding the experiences of whistle-blowers after they had reported wrongdoing. In particular, the aims were to investigate the nature of victimisation, retaliation or other negative treatment against whistle-blowers and what the impact of such actions was on the whistle-blowers. A further aim was to identify what factors might prevent such actions and protect whistle-blowers when they speak out against misconduct. As part of this approach, information was also obtained about the type of misconduct involved, about the organisations where the whistleblowers were working; and about what processes they had in place for reporting misconduct and for protecting the whistle-blowers. Study Participants Qualitative semi-structured interviews (a majority of these were by telephone) were conducted with 36 whistle-blowers who were self-selected after being invited to participate through an independent hotline2 (n=12 out of 19 who had originally contacted the researchers) and through a volunteer support line Whistle-blowers Australia3 (n=24 out of 36 who had made initial contact) corresponding to a rate for interview of 65 percent (63 percent for the hotline and 66 percent for the support line). Of those interviewed 44 percent were female and 56 percent were male (there were more males from the support line, while more females came via the hotline). The age categories ranged from 30's to 70's at the time of interview. Participants resided principally in Victoria, NSW and Queensland with a few from the other states. A further set of interviews were conducted with persons who, in a professional capacity, had dealt with whistle-blowers, to enable alternative perspectives on the whistle blowing experience to be obtained. After being invited to participate principally through the hotline, which sent an email to client organisations, 19 qualitative semi structured interviews were conducted (of whom 6 were female and 13 male). Interviewees came from independent hotlines, integrity bodies with roles in whistle blowing processes including investigations, public sector disclosure coordinators as well as persons from the private sector with a role for handling whistle-blowers reports. Types of Misconduct Reported Responses from both the whistle-blowers and persons who deal with whistle-blowers indicated that while misconduct could involve dishonesty, fraud and deception, a greater proportion related to what can be broadly termed as 'workplace grievances', covering bullying, harassment and intimidation. For some whistle-blowers, in particular from the support line, the misconduct had occurred many years ago; for the hotline it had been in the last six years. In many instances the misconduct had gone on for some time before the whistle-blowers made the reports. Whistleblowing Reporting Processes Whistle-blowers would in the first instance, usually report the misconduct internally, often to their immediate manager or higher, or else to a designated disclosure coordinator (in the public sector) or, in the private sector the use of an independent hotline was available. In general, when whistle-blowers used the hotline there was anonymity for the whistle-blowers and the hotline acted as a go between the whistle-blower and the client organisation. Anonymity appeared to be less assured in public sector organisations, although investigative bodies went to considerable lengths to protect the identity of the whistle-blowers. There was frustration expressed by whistle-blowers when they tried to report misconduct about a number of issues - that they were not clear how they would be protected, who the right persons were to go to, and that they were not kept informed about what was happening to their reports of misconduct and what the outcomes were. Other complaints emerged along the way about the whistleblower reports not having been taken seriously or simply ignored. Some whistle-blowers reported not knowing what to do and who to go to when they wanted to report. Some also went to considerable lengths to have their concerns addressed by other avenues when there was an initial lack of responsiveness to their concern. These avenues included the unions, Ministers/MPs, the media, anticorruption bodies and employment commissions, as well as going to the courts and using lawyers. There appeared to be a variety of avenues available to whistle-blowers to go to report wrongdoing but it was not obvious for many, which was most appropriate and what the best steps were; that also depended on what sector they were working in and on the organisation itself. When dealing with whistle-blowers in their professional capacity, many interviewees from the agencies dealing with whistle-blowers said that it was important to clarify with whistle-blowers about their expectations and what could be achieved in a practical sense. Some said that the 'unrealistic' expectations of many whistle-blowers when they reported misconduct could have negative consequences on the interactions with the agencies they were dealing with, as well as increasing the frustration and indeed the anger of whistle-blowers. Consequences for Whistle-blowers after Reporting Misconduct - Retaliation and Reprisals Both groups - the whistle-blowers (once their identity had become known), and some of those who dealt with them, generally acknowledged the overall negative experience of 'speaking out', including lack of support, criticism and retaliation by management and being in a workplace culture characterised by denial/defensiveness, blaming, fear and bullying and harassment of the whistleblower. A number of the interviewees who dealt with whistle-blowers stated that they often did not know about or what had happened to whistle-blowers and, thus they had no or little knowledge about any negative treatment the whistle-blowers were subjected to. Whistle-blowers themselves were able to provide many examples of the victimisation they had suffered. Most common were bullying and harassment in the workplace associated with ostracism, isolation, being excluded from meetings and derogatory remarks on social media as well as being subject to disciplinary actions and counter allegations. Examples were given where whistle-blowers were also physically assaulted, their families threatened. As part of this array was the often mentioned issue of a lack of welfare support for the whistle-blowers. This was particularly emphasised by those who deal with whistle-blowers as being either absent or inadequate; there were some exceptions; an anonymous counselling/welfare service was available for employees (not only for whistle-blowers) in some organisations. About the protection offered by the whistle-blowers legislation there was no one who indicated it was effective in doing so, nor was it effective even as a deterrent. However many suggestions were provided as to how whistle-blowers and the whistle blowing processes could be improved and how negative experiences could be minimised both by whistle-blowers and in particular by those who dealt with them. Impact on Whistle-blowers For many whistle-blowers the outcomes of reporting misconduct were significant emotional and psychological impact, including stress, exhaustion, mental health and health related issues as well as the financial costs (using lawyers, going to court, losing their jobs) and a negative impact on their careers (not being promoted, moved sides ways, not having their contract renewed or in a number of cases dismissal). All of the whistle-blowers interviewed were no longer working for the organisation in where they had observed the misconduct; indeed many were no longer working (were unemployed or retired). Above all, whistle-blowers had a pervading sense of injustice and perceived a lack of fairness at the treatment that they had been subjected to after reporting misconduct, and that influenced their sense of trust and confidence in people and organisations. In many instances these experiences of being badly treated when they reported misconduct, led to a radical change in the lives of a number of whistle-blowers; with some changing career direction, some going back to further study (employment/workplace law in particular) and others writing about their experiences and publishing books. Again for other whistle-blowers they had gone on to help other (and potential) whistle-blowers by working for whistle-blower volunteer support lines and establishing websites to inform whistle-blowers about practical strategies and ways of handling the reporting process and the aftermath. When in the light of their experiences, whistle-blowers were asked whether they would do it over again, that is, to report the misconduct, about half said emphatically, yes of course while the other half said no, never. Improving Protection for Whistle-blowers Some thoughtful suggestions were proposed by whistle-blowers themselves and included: - Establish an annual citation or award for corporate governance where whistle-blowers are recognised and thanked. - Provide compensation to the whistle-blowers (as in the US). - Prosecute those who retaliate against whistle-blowers (has anyone been charged in Australia? asked one whistle-blower). - Changing the workplace culture was emphasised; the workplace brings together all sorts of people, with different values and ethical standards, increasing the risk of conflict and cultural clashes; ethical competency was identified as needing to be cultivated. - Investigations need to be done independently, not by Human Resources departments and that the whistle-blower should be given feedback and a copy of the report. - In some sectors such as some sports, there appears to be no grievance process and there is a lack of transparency and independence, especially if there are complains about conduct. - While colleagues and peer groups are supportive, they often do not have the information or knowledge to advise effectively or strategically; more appropriate sources are available. - Support should be provided to whistle-blowers, particularly those who may be vulnerable to reprisals and victimisation; for example having an independent counsellor or psychologist to guide the whistle-blower through the reporting process. None of the persons interviewed, whether they were whistle-blowers or those dealt with them, perceived legislation as effective in preventing victimisation. More often it was improvements in management and workplace culture that were identified as being more useful. Also the need for workplace policies that are actually implemented and complied with was stressed, as well as and more practical welfare support for the whistle-blower and more education in the workplace about whistleblowing procedures and processes. Details: Melbourne: Victoria University, 2016. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2018 at: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/IBACC/Submissions/Submission_20_-_Victoria_University_27.7.2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/IBACC/Submissions/Submission_20_-_Victoria_University_27.7.2016.pdf Shelf Number: 150343 Keywords: Employee Misconduct Retaliation Whistleblowers Workplace Misconduct |