Home page
> Indigenous affairs > Census report > Chapter 7: Relationships and behaviour in the workplace
> Publications
‹ Previous page

Census report

related indigenous items Useful references

Chapter 7: Relationships and behaviour in the workplace

This chapter examines a number of issues related to the experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees with relationships and behaviour in the workplace. It begins by looking at the familiarity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees with the APS Values (the Values) and Code of Conduct,³⁹ and whether employees have participated in training with an emphasis on the Values. It also looks at whether Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees believe that their colleagues, supervisors and senior managers act in accordance with the Values. The chapter examines whether Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees have faced challenges in balancing family and community obligations and being professional and achieving the requirements of their job in accordance with the Code of Conduct, and their levels of satisfaction with how such challenges were resolved. It concludes by looking at experiences that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees have had with discrimination and bullying and harassment.

APS Values and Code of Conduct

All employees in the APS are required by law to uphold the Values and comply with the APS Code of Conduct (the Code of Conduct). Agency heads are required to have systems in place to assist employees to understand and apply the Values.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employee survey found that 82% of respondents reported that they were familiar with the Values, 17% reported that they had heard of them but were not fully familiar with them, and 2% reported that they had not heard of them before reading the questionnaire. This is comparable with results for APS employees overall which found that 85% of employees were familiar with the Values.⁴⁰

Of respondents who reported that they were familiar with the Values, 47% rated their familiarity as high and 46% rated it as moderate. Six per cent of respondents rated their familiarity as low. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees were slightly less likely to rate their familiarity as high, and slightly more likely to rate it as moderate, compared to APS employees generally (56% of all APS employees rated their familiarity as high, 39% rated it as moderate and 5% rated it as low).

Arranging training in relation to the Values is one way for agencies to ensure that their employees are fully familiar with the Values. In the last 12 months, almost half of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees reported that they had participated in training that included an emphasis on the Values. This is a slightly higher result than that obtained for APS employees overall (41%).

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employee survey also asked respondents to rate their level of agreement that, generally speaking, their colleagues, supervisor and senior managers in their agency act in accordance with the Values in their everyday work.

Generally, respondents were positive about their colleagues and supervisors acting in accordance with the Values in their everyday work (79% and 81% respectively). However, in relation to colleagues, these results are lower than those for APS employees generally—87% of APS employees overall agreed that their colleagues acted in accordance with the Values and 85% agreed that their supervisors did.⁴¹

As for the general APS population, respondents were less positive about senior managers in their agencies, with only 69% reporting that, generally speaking, senior managers in their agency acted in accordance with the Values in their everyday work. This is similar to the result for APS employees overall (70%).

The survey also asked respondents about their familiarity with the Code of Conduct. Eighty-four per cent of respondents were familiar with the Code of Conduct, 14% had heard of it but were not fully familiar with its contents, and 1% had not heard of it before reading the questionnaire. This is comparable with results for APS employees overall (83% of all APS employees were familiar with the Code of Conduct).

Of those who reported familiarity with the Code of Conduct, 53% of respondents rated their familiarity as high and 42% rated it as moderate. A small proportion rated their familiarity as low (5%). These results are similar to results for APS employees overall (55% rated their familiarity as high, 39% rated it as moderate and 6% rated it as low).

Several factors were related to how familiar respondents were with the Values and Code of Conduct, and with levels of agreement that their colleagues, supervisor and senior managers act in accordance with the Values.

Younger respondents (aged under 25) were less likely to report being familiar with the APS Values (72%) than those aged 25 to 54 (83%), even though they were more likely to have participated in training in the last 12 months. Those with less than one year of service were also less likely to be familiar with the Values or Code of Conduct. Younger respondents tended to be much more positive about their managers acting in accordance with the Values (94% for their supervisor and 88% for senior managers in their agency), as were respondents with less than one year of service.
Those at the APS 1–2 levels tended to be less familiar with the Values (62%) and the Code of Conduct (65%) than respondents at higher levels. Slightly fewer respondents at the APS 1–2 levels had participated in training that emphasised the Values (39%).
Respondents in large agencies were more likely to be familiar with the Values (84%) and the Code of Conduct (87%) than those in small (66% and 71% respectively) and medium (72% and 73% respectively) agencies, and were more likely to have participated in training with an emphasis on the Values. Respondents in small agencies tended to be less positive (68%) about their supervisor acting in accordance with the Values in their everyday work than respondents in medium (77%) and large (82%) agencies.
Respondents located in the ACT reported greater familiarity with the Values (90%) than those located outside the ACT (80%). There was no difference in relation to familiarity with the Code of Conduct.
Respondents in identified positions and in roles working with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community were less likely to rate familiarity with the Values and Code of Conduct as high compared to other employees. Respondents in roles working with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community were also less likely to agree that their colleagues acted in accordance with the Values than respondents not in this role.

Some respondents made general comments about the Values and Code of Conduct.

APS Values and Code of Conduct should be communicated on a regular basis.

APS Values and Code of Conduct should be made compulsory for new recruits—non-ongoing and ongoing staff members. APS visit to remote communities to emphasise the importance of above.

I have found within this organisation, certain people do not act or conduct themselves within the APS Values and seem to be overlooked whereas another person will not.

Particular levels of management do not adhere to the APS Values…

I was demoted for breaching the Code of Conduct before I was ever trained.

My experience was that the APS Code of Conduct and Values have little relevance when the CEO and Deputy CEOs fail to follow them. They set a very poor example in complying with the APS Code of Conduct and Values.

The APS Values and Code of Conduct are fair and I don’t have any problems working within them.

Balancing family and/or community and professional obligations

One aspect of working in the APS that some Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees who work with the Indigenous community have identified as a potential area of difficulty is the balance between being professional and supporting family and community. This is especially so when employees live and work in their own community.

The survey found that almost half of respondents (45%) reported facing a challenge in the last 12 months in balancing family and/or community obligations and being professional and achieving the requirements of the job in accordance with the Code of Conduct. While this is a high result, of these, 65% (or 38% of all respondents) reported that the challenge they faced was resolved to their satisfaction. However, almost one in four (24% or 10% of all employees) reported that the challenge had not been resolved to their satisfaction.

Those most likely to report facing a challenge were:

respondents aged 35 to 44 (52%), although this group was less likely to report that the challenge was resolved to their satisfaction
those in remote areas (54%)
respondents in identified positions (52%) and those who undertake work specifically related to the Aborigi-nal and Torres Strait Islander community (51%)
respondents with 16 to 20 years of service (56%)
respondents with diploma and/or certificate educational qualifications (51%).

Respondents who had faced a challenge in the last 12 months in balancing family and/or community obligations and being professional and achieving the requirements of the job in accordance with the Code of Conduct, were more likely to report having cultural and/or community obligations (43% of employees who faced a challenge reported having cultural and/or community obligations, compared with only 25% for those who did not face such a challenge).

Some respondents highlighted the difficulties which they, as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, face in carrying out their work in relation to other Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders.

I would like to see specific training provided to Indigenous employees which provided culturally appropriate examples when examining and explaining the APS Values and Code of Conduct.

It becomes extremely difficult for an Indigenous APS employee when dealing with our clients because 9 times out of 10, we know the clients both PERSONALLY and PROFESSIONALLY. Which can sometimes lead to something bordering on conflict of interest.

It is difficult to adhere to the APS Values and Code of Conduct when working and living in an Indigenous community. Our work doesn’t stop on Friday afternoon when it’s time to go home. We are approached by community members at community events about funding issues which may not directly involve them but family members. It makes it difficult to separate your personal life from your professional life in these circumstances.

Community expectations can often conflict with expectations for impartial and objective decision making; the latter expectations are always met but there can be residual tension with family/community members.

I have always been able to draw boundaries with community members as to when I am a representative of [agency] and when I am a representative of the community organisations I am affiliated with. I ensure I am not put into a position where I may have a conflict of interest as an [agency] representative and if there is any doubt I always declare my conflict of interest and withdraw from the process.

Due to the privacy issue we cannot help a lot of customers and work has to be undertaken by people who do not understand what the customer is saying and therefore their meaning is not understood.

Discrimination and bullying and/or harassment

One element of the Code of Conduct is the requirement that APS employees, when acting in the course of APS employment, must treat everyone with respect and courtesy, and without harassment.⁴² This requirement is closely linked to valuing and encouraging diversity in the workplace, which needs to be based on respect for differences between employees. It operates in tandem with protections for employees under federal discrimination legislation, and relevant state or territory legislation.

As for APS employees overall, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employee survey found that respondents were more likely to report that they had experienced bullying and harassment (23%) than discrimination (18%). Nevertheless, both results are higher than those for all APS employees. The 2005 State of the Service employee survey found that 17% of APS employees overall reported that they had experienced bullying and harassment. There was an even greater difference for discrimination, with Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders three times more likely to report discrimination than the 6% of APS employees reporting discrimination in the 2004 State of the Service employee survey.⁴³

As might be expected, race and/or ethnicity was identified as the primary reason for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employee reporting that they had experienced discrimination (68%). There was a sizeable gap between the proportion of relevant employees selecting ‘race/ethnicity’ and the next most common grounds of ‘sex’ (18%) and ‘age’ (16%) (see Figure 7.1).

Figure 7.1: Proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees reporting discrimination on different grounds

Chart

Source: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS Employees Census Survey

Of the employees who reported experiencing bullying or harassment, the highest proportions reported that it was based on ‘general employment/work issues’ (44%) and ‘perceived personality differences’ (40%). The next most common grounds were ‘managerial style’ (30%) and ‘work performance’ (24%). ‘Employment status’ (22%) and ‘race/ethnicity’ (18%) were also cited as grounds for bullying and harassment. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees were more likely than APS employees overall to report bullying and harassment on the basis of managerial style and employment status or work performance (see Figure 7.2).

Only relatively small numbers of employees identified religion, sexual preference, disability, political opinion, age or sex as a ground for bullying or harassment. However, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees were more likely to identify race or ethnicity as a ground for bullying and harassment than APS employees generally.

Figure 7.2: Proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees and APS employees reporting bullying/harassment on different grounds

Chart

Source: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS Employees Census Survey and the 2004 State of the Service Employee Survey

Figure 7.3 shows that the likelihood of perceiving discrimination increased with classification for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, but that rates of bullying and harassment were fairly similar across classifications. This is a different result to the APS overall where perceptions of discrimination and bullying decreased with classification (6% for the APS 1–6 levels down to 0.4% for the SES for discrimination, and 18% for the APS 1–6 levels down to 8% for the SES).⁴⁴

Figure 7.3: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander respondents reporting that they have been subject to discrimination and bullying or harassment in the last 12 months, by classification group

Chart

Source: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS Employees Census Survey

For discrimination, there was also a difference related to whether the employee worked inside or outside the ACT, with respondents in the ACT (25%) more likely than those outside the ACT (16%) to indicate that they had been subjected to discrimination in the last 12 months.

Respondents were more likely to indicate that they had experienced bullying or harassment if they:

were women (25% compared to 19% for men)
were in large (24%) and medium (20%) agencies, compared to small (15%) agencies.

Unlike the situation with discrimination, the same proportion of respondents inside and outside the ACT reported being subject to bullying or harassment in the last 12 months.

The survey asked employees to identify who was responsible for their experience of discrimination or bullying and harassment. Respondents could choose more than one option, so responses total more than 100%. Respondents reporting discrimination were most likely to identify that the person responsible was either a co-worker or someone more senior, other than their supervisor (both 47%). Thirty-one per cent reported that their supervisor was the person responsible for the discrimination. Respondents reported clients as the group next most likely to be responsible for the discrimination they experienced (see Figure 7.4).

Respondents reporting bullying and harassment were also most likely to nominate that the person responsible was a supervisor, someone more senior or a colleague, but were less likely to nominate clients.

While the same top three groups were most likely to be identified as being responsible for discrimination or bullying and harassment by respondents to the 2004 State of the Service employee survey, APS employees overall were more likely than Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees to nominate someone senior who was not their supervisor as the person responsible for discrimination. APS employees were also less likely to identify discrimination as coming from clients.⁴⁵

Figure 7.4: Person(s) responsible for discrimination and bullying or harassment

Chart

Source: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS Employees Census Survey

The survey also asked respondents who believed that they had experienced bullying or harassment to indicate the nature of this behaviour. Employees could choose more than one response. The most common forms of bullying or harassment were:

humiliation through sarcasm, criticism or insults, sometimes in front of other employees or customers (53% of relevant employees)
persistent and unjustified criticism (49% of relevant employees)
intimidating or aggressive body language (47% of relevant employees)
deliberately withholding information from me so that I am less able to do the job (35% of relevant employees)
oral and/or written threats (32% of relevant employees)
shouting and screaming (22% of relevant employees).

These were also common responses for APS employees generally.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS Employees Census Survey asked employees who had experienced discrimination or bullying and harassment whether they had raised the issue through their agency’s support structures.

Fifty-two per cent of employees who believed they had experienced discrimination or bullying and harassment indicated that they had raised the issue through the support structures available in their agency. People in the 25 to 54 age group were more likely to raise the matter than those under 25 or over 54.

It was most common for respondents to raise issues of discrimination or bullying and harassment with a manager other than their supervisor (50% of relevant employees), followed by their supervisor (48% of relevant employees). Other options were the agency’s Human Resources (HR) area (26%) and the harassment, equity or diversity contact officer (25%). Employee assistance programs were only used by a minority of relevant employees (11%). Eleven per cent of relevant employees had raised their issue through other support structures, including unions, legal representatives, staff counsellors and colleagues.

Of the employees who experienced discrimination or bullying and harassment and raised it in their agency, only 28% were satisfied with the way the issue was dealt with, and 54% were dissatisfied. This result is not dissimilar to that recorded for APS employees in the 2004 State of the Service employee survey, in which 34% of respondents identified that they were satisfied with the way the issue was dealt with and 45% were dissatisfied.⁴⁶

Some employees provided comments that explained their dissatisfaction with the way issues they raised through their agency’s support structure were dealt with, which usually related to a perceived lack of action or support on the part of the agency.

… little action is taken when a complaint is lodged and management is not accountable for their improper behaviour.

I have been satisfied with the way the problems that I’ve had with supervisors and colleagues have been dealt with. But not long after, things have just slipped back to the ‘norm’.

During the course of my investigation I was very upset to find that there was no clear support from my immediate supervisor. Initially there appeared to be support until receiving copies of her written statements to the person handling the investigation in which she had written to him the exact opposite to what she was telling me.

There have been major issues with management conduct in our workplace for 2 years now and HR was called in for discussions relating to incidents that were occurring on a daily basis. The people who spoke up, later paid for it in other ways that was not so direct to the complaints made to HR. Nobody has had the confidence to speak out about harassment since this meeting with HR took place for fear of losing our jobs as they have more power in their positions than we do. Many people have left quietly rather than fight this problem.

Key findings

Overall, the results of the census survey suggest that there is a good knowledge of the Values and Code of Conduct among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, although levels of familiarity vary between groups. Some differences, among younger employees or employees with shorter periods of service, for example, may be explained by a lack of experience. However, it is of concern that respondents at lower classifications were less familiar with the Values as were those in identified positions and in roles working with the Indigenous community. The relatively lower levels of familiarity among the latter two groups is of particular concern, given that they were more likely to have faced a challenge in the last 12 months in balancing family and/or community obligations with being professional and achieving the requirements of the job in accordance with the Code of Conduct.

The survey results confirm anecdotal evidence that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees do sometimes face challenges in dealing with the pressures of family and community obligations, with almost half of respondents indicating that they have experienced such a challenge in the last 12 months. While most were able to resolve these challenges satisfactorily, the 24% of employees who had faced a challenge but had not resolved it to their satisfaction may require greater support.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, like all APS employees, were largely positive about their colleagues and supervisors acting in accordance with the Values in their everyday work. However, they were somewhat less positive about their colleagues doing so than were APS employees overall. Like APS employees generally, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees were least positive about the senior managers in their agencies acting in accordance with the Values in their everyday work, although the majority of respondents agreed that senior managers did act in accordance with the Values.

The level of perceived bullying and harassment, and particularly of discrimination, reported by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees is of concern. There seem to be particularly high levels of perception of discrimination in the ACT. While the figures relate to respondents’ perceptions rather than proven cases of discrimination and bullying and harassment, they indicate that there may be a need for greater support for Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders facing such issues. This support could include cultural awareness training in APS workplaces, and, for employees with direct service delivery responsibilities, greater support in dealing with difficult behaviour from clients (issues of workplace support are discussed further in Chapter 8). While levels of dissatisfaction with the handling of complaints of bullying and harassment and discrimination are similar to those for APS employees overall, the results suggest that there is also considerable room for improvement in the handling of such complaints which are made by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees.

³⁹ Public Service Act 1999, s.10 and s.13.

⁴⁰ APS employee results come from the 2005 State of the Service employee survey and were reported in the State of the Service Report 2004–05 and/or the State of the Service Employee Survey Results 2004–05.

⁴¹ APS employee results come from the 2005 State of the Service employee survey and were reported in the State of the Service Report 2004–05 and/or the State of the Service Employee Survey Results 2004–05.

⁴² Public Service Act 1999, s. 13(3).

⁴³ APS employee results on bullying and harassment are reported in the State of the Service Report 2004–05, p. 242 and results on discrimination are reported in the State of the Service Report 2003–04, p. 185. The 2005 State of the Service employee survey did not include a question in relation to experiences with discrimination.

⁴⁴ APS employee results on bullying and harassment are reported in the State of the Service Report 2004–05 and for discrimination in the State of the Service Report 2003–04.

⁴⁵ APS employee results on discrimination are reported in the State of the Service Report 2003–04, p. 185. The 2005 State of the Service employee survey did not include a question in relation to experiences with discrimination.

⁴⁶ The 2005 State of the Service employee survey did not include this question.