When is a work environment toxic? This question has to be renegotiated by the publications about Til Schweiger. Experts say when limits have been exceeded – and what those affected can do.
Cologne – The allegations against Til Schweiger weigh heavily. The actor and director (“Manta Manta”, “Keinohrhasen”, “Honig im Kopf”) is said to have freaked out during filming, bullied employees and, in one case, also become violent. In addition, he was often drunk. That’s how it isMirror Shown at the end of April. Schweiger contradicted the allegations about his lawyer.
There is talk of a “climate of fear”. A paraphrase for which some employees probably do not need any further explanation. Toxic individuals who abuse their power, become abusive, stretch hours, and push their employees to the brink of physical and mental distress. Canteen kitchens, construction sites, the armed forces – there are some sectors that are said to be tough. But when is a limit crossed? What can those affected do? Why is it so difficult for many people to stand up for a better working atmosphere, to report abuse and to stand up against violence?
Abuse of power at work: Til Schweiger is not an isolated case
For Jan Jurczyk from the Verdi trade union, the fact that these allegations became public and triggered a discussion is first and foremost a sign that people are much more sensitive to such issues today. In itself, none of this is new, says Jurczyk. “The Schweiger case is an example of the phenomenon of abuse of power, which manifests itself in very different ways: bullying, bossing, toxic types – these are all terms for problematic conditions in companies that have always existed but were given different names.” Examples? “This ranges from high-end restaurants, where things are sometimes flying around, to unlawful surveillance of subordinates in the locker rooms of a retail company, to police departments, where there have always been and continue to be complaints of bullying. This also shows that they don’t necessarily have to be profit-oriented companies,” says Jurczyk.
Whether profit-oriented, oriented towards the common good, Dax group or family business: How to deal with cases of border crossing? In the “Causa Schweiger” Minister of State for Culture Claudia Roth spoke in favor of a code of conduct (“Code of Conduct”). That would only be the beginning, says Verdi spokesman Jurczyk. “An external point of contact is important to curb abuse of power. Beyond the film industry, the Works Constitution Act offers effective leverage. With the election of a works council, a contact point is created within a company to address problems in a protected environment. This does not completely rule out abuse of power and assaults, but it can help to contain them.”
Employment lawyer on the Schweiger case: Boundaries are actually clearly defined
Michael Fuhlrott knows what that can look like in practice. He is a lawyer specializing in employment law. His assessment may come as a surprise: “Certainly there are different types of personality, even among superiors. But even if an employee does not have to be yelled at: an employee has no right to a nice or particularly friendly boss.”
The decisive question is to what extent the boss himself is controlled. “The extreme example here is the mid-level manager in a corporation who, in turn, has to justify his behavior to superiors, compared to the shareholder director of a smaller company, who has no superiors over him and ‘governs’ the company as he alone thinks it’s right,” says Fuhlrott.
Nevertheless, the expert explains that there are clearly defined legal limits as to when a manager’s behavior goes too far. Discrimination based on age, gender or religion, for example, is a clear taboo. Insults (“idiot”, “idiot”, “idiot”) are also beyond the permissible. “Theoretically, there is the possibility of reporting this to the superior or of obtaining an injunction from a civil court,” says Fuhlrott. A tricky undertaking, because: “It goes without saying that such an approach should be carefully considered and not chosen hastily, as it can naturally lead to strains in the employment relationship.”
Extended working hours: Where there is no plaintiff, there is no judge
A clear crossing of boundaries, in the truest sense of the word, are also work instructions that violate the law. Classic example: The maximum working time of ten hours in one day is to be exceeded. Fuhlrott: “An instruction to work 12 hours a day or to ‘stay until the thing is finished’ is illegal. The employee does not have to follow them.” In the case of Schweiger, that does not appear to have happened. Affected people described it Mirrorthat the statutory rest periods, according to the collective agreement at least eleven hours between two working days, were repeatedly undercut.
That shows where the real problem lies. It’s about enforcement. If nobody reports anything, nothing happens. Loud Mirror There is no charge against Schweiger, the allegations were raised anonymously. A procedure that is difficult from a legal perspective. “It is always unauthorized for employees to turn on the press in order to clarify any grievances at their employer or to put pressure on the employer,” explains Fuhlrott. “Such behavior can result in termination without notice.” A requirement that, according to the mirrors more than 50 filmmakers did not keep.
The production company Constantin Film now wants to have possible incidents on the set clarified by an external law firm.
#friendly #boss