Greens self-selected bullying survey supports Greens policy to turn your life into never ending high school

I’m not usually one for blaming the victim, but my observations have led me to believe that a lot of people blame “bullying” when the underlying problem is something else.

For example, people who lack the ability or ambition to get promoted will sometimes claim victimisation or bullying because it’s easier than the alternative – that they’re not getting promoted for sound reasons.

Other times, people misconstrue appropriate managerial feedback, a desire to maintain appropriate professional distance or just a difference in personalities as some form of bullying.

In cases of genuine bullying and victimisation (yes, I have seen a couple, and in one case been subjected to conduct that was borderline bullying) then, assuming the person is an otherwise capable employee, they can usually find alternative employment (especially in a town with a low unemployment rate like Canberra) which is what I did and recommend to others.

I only bully Greens voters, so I don’t really see a problem.

135 people…. Wow so 0.03375 percent of Canberran’s participated, that wouldn’t even cover the margin of error for a normal which is normally about 2% or so.

It’s good that they managed to find the email address of 135 people who have been bullied, I guess they got that from doing an FOI for persons who took sick leave this month or something?

Where was Amanda Bresnan and her touchy-feely survey back in the ’60s when I was an apprentice. I would have happily filled out her form – after the swelling went down.

Erg0 said :

What’s the opposite of “evidence-based”?

Greens Policy…

Oh FCS!

Please dont vote these people!

All this shows is that “in a survey of people who are aware of the ACT Greens, the Greens are unable to count”.
47% of 135 (ACT public servants) represents 63.45 people, or 0.00345% of the total ACT Public Service.
26% of 135 (Federal public servants) represents 35.1 people, or 0.00059% of the total Federal Public Service based in the ACT.
4.5% of 135 (the total not represented in the survey results) represents 6 people who are not employed yet still responded (and were counted) in the survey.

How this can support the statement “Unfortunately there’s lots of workplace bullying, lots of under reporting, and most people are dissatisfied with the rsponse they get when they do complain.” is beyond me. (note: The spelling mistake is Amanda’s, quoted directly from her Twitter/Facebook account.)

“The survey results not only show that plant abuse remains a real problem in ACT workplaces, but that plant abuse incidents commonly go unreported. People who do report plant abuse incidents are frequently dissatisfied with the response they receive,” said Greens Industrial Relations spokesperson, Amanda Bresnan.

“The feedback and comments from the survey shows that we need greater support for ant-plant abuse strategies and more proactive prevention strategies to help bring positive changes to workplace cultures.”

Ms Bresnan then went on to say that a recent Green online poll of green party members agreed with green ideals, that most green party members agreed the sun sets in the west, and that every single poll respondent who replied to the green party “would you like $100,000,000 for free?” poll replied in the affirmative, thus proving the veracity of the Green polling system. Ms Bresnan then declared herself to be made of fairy pixie dust, that she had ridden into town on a unicorn, and that she had poll statistics to prove it.

Erg0 said :

What’s the opposite of “evidence-based”?

The title of this post.

What’s the opposite of “evidence-based”?