Workplace bullying: not all workplace disputes constitute harassment

The ruling reaffirms that the disagreements, tensions or conflicts inherent in the workplace are not sufficient to constitute harassment. More stringent criteria are required: (i) the systematic nature of the conduct, and (ii) its malicious intent, aimed at undermining the worker’s dignity or integrity. Without repetition or a sustained pattern, there is no harassment, even if the events cause distress.

With regard to the burden of proof, the ruling states that proving certain facts does not automatically imply the existence of harassment. A clear causal link is required between the alleged conduct and the alleged harm.

Finally, the Chamber distinguishes between the legitimate exercise of disciplinary authority (reprimands, guidelines, internal regulations) and harassing behaviour. Management powers are valid provided they are not used for persecutory or discriminatory purposes.

Implications for businesses

This approach supports the reasonable exercise of managerial and disciplinary powers, whilst technically defining workplace harassment and preventing it from being trivialised.

See the ruling at: https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0034-1372577