A power differential is at the heart of all harassment. Juries hammer hardest the harassers who abuse their positions of title power--drill sergeants over young recruits, psychiatrists over vulnerable patients, bosses over workers, and teachers over students.

From Norway comes the first study of classroom harassment of students by teachers. Dan Olweus surveyed 2400 students in grades 6 through 9 about public bullying by teachers that was corroborated by at least three other students, unprovoked by the victim, and occurred at least twice per month during the 5 month term. Those are tough conditions to meet because most harassment is done behind closed doors.

The defining components of bullying in the unpublished study were:
(1) Bullying is repeated behavior
(2) The harasser's intent is negative and hurtful
(3) Imbalance of power--bully and victim

Two percent of the students had been publicly bullied according to the above definition. An estimated 10 percent harassed students when verbal harassment was included (displaying a "haughty or sarcastic" attitude). In more than half the incidents, only one student was singled out or scapegoated. Ninety percent of the targeted students were bullied by only one teacher, therefore, there was nothing the kids were doing to bring it on themselves.

Examples were: "she calls me names: idiot, baby, lousy kid, there's no hope for you", "the teacher says stupid things about me and gets the others to laugh at me." The teacher-bullies were nearly all younger than 50, not older burned-out teachers.

Irwin Hyman, a Temple University professor of school psychology, finds that about 2 percent of schoolkids have symptoms of post-traumatic stress as the result of emotional maltreatment in school. The numbers match Olweus' classroom harassment finding.

The implications of Olweus' research are sickening. We know from peer bullying studies that victimization by a bully leads to negative attitudes toward school, persistent self-blame, depression and feelings of worthlessness.

According to the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), individuals who showed antisocial tendencies starting in childhood, aggressive behavior, such as bullying, become adults with Antisocial Personality disorder. In adulthood, the grown-up bully's characteristics are deceit and manipulation, "conning" (the actual phrase) others to obtain favors.

Antisocials rationalize hurting people with little remorse by blaming victims for whom they have no empathy or concern--losers deserve to lose, life's unfair, they believe and say.

Is that so different from saying "hey, that's business" after stabbing a colleague in the back? Antisocials also tend to be callous, cynical and contemptuous of the feelings, rights and suffering of others. Are you matching the descriptions to faces of colleagues and bosses right now?

The competitive streak is revealed in the antisocial's belief that everyone is looking out for "number one." At any cost, being pushed around has to be avoided. Antisocials abhor being ever made a chump.

Straight from the dignified annals of the psychiatric classification catalog is the finding that those afflicted with Antisocial Personality Disorder show a reckless disregard for safety--theirs or others. Bullies grown up can get ugly.

When the power figure is the harasser, peer bullies may be aided and abetted by having a suitable target identified for them. The teachers from the Norway study modeled bullying, which sends the signal that it is acceptable.

Now consider the plight of workplace targets of bullying by adult bullies who never get in trouble. The environment "aids and abets" the bad guy or gal. This is the one of the conditions that the law requires to support claims of sexual harassment, that a "hostile environment" exists (see related sexual harassment courses).

It seems that general bullying, same-sex bullying and downright meanness all contribute to a "hostile" workplace climate that should be a violation of the law. As it stands now, it is not.