[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":136},["ShallowReactive",2],{"nz-slugs-manifest":3,"nz-glossary-workplace-mobbing":62},{"article":4,"policy":30,"webinar":36,"alternative":45,"features":47,"use-cases":48,"solutions":55},[5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,22,24,25,26,27,28,29],"cybersecurity-culture","signs-of-a-toxic-workplace","anonymous-reporting-for-schools","iso-37002","anonymous-employee-feedback","shirli-kirschner-game-changers","employee-engagement-survey-questions","dealing-with-workplace-misconduct","whistleblowing-software","what-is-unlawful-victimisation-in-the-workplace","respect-in-the-workplace","bystander-effect-in-the-workplace","person-centred-and-trauma-informed-approach","combating-virtual-harassment-in-remote-work","understanding-and-preventing-workplace-bullying","anonymous-reporting-advantages-disadvantages","culture-audit-guide","serious-misconduct","what-is-whistleblowing","psychologically-safe-workplace","mentally-healthy-workplace","case-management-software","nz-protected-disclosures-act-2022","nz-hsw-act-psychosocial","nz-privacy-act-2020-anonymous-reporting",[31,32,33,34,35],"cookies","privacy","anti-modern-slavery","terms","whistleblowing",[37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44],"psychosocial-safety-construction-and-mining","new-world-of-work","2024-august-live-demonstration-of-the-elker-platform","psychosocial-risks-leadership-and-tools","safety-culture-and-transformation-hospitality","addressing-psychosocial-issues-at-work-webinar","finishing-safe-between-now-and-january-webinar","dealing-with-sensitive-information",[46],"eqs-integrity-line-alternative",[],[49,50,51,52,53,54],"aged-care-disability-services","schools","peak-bodies","businesses","government","universities",[56,57,58,59,60,61,26],"speak-up-platform","anonymous-suggestion-box","workplace-investigation-software","whistleblowing-platform","whistleblowing-hotline","psychosocial-hazard-management",[63],{"id":64,"status":65,"date_updated":66,"slug":67,"title":68,"locale":69,"category":72,"primary_keyword":73,"secondary_keywords":74,"definition_short":78,"definition_long":79,"context_body":80,"sources":81,"last_reviewed":82,"faqs":83,"related_pillars":118,"related_terms":133,"seo":134},3,"published","2026-04-20T00:47:56.161Z","workplace-mobbing","Workplace Mobbing: Definition and Meaning in Australian Workplaces",[70,71],"au","nz","psychosocial-safety","workplace mobbing",[75,76,77],"mobbing in the workplace","workplace mobbing definition","signs of workplace mobbing","Workplace mobbing under Australian and New Zealand law: how it differs from bullying, and employer obligations under WHS and anti-discrimination law.","\u003Cp>Workplace mobbing is a pattern of repeated, hostile behaviour directed at a single employee by multiple colleagues or by a group acting collectively. It is distinguished from individual bullying by the coordinated or collective nature of the conduct and typically involves exclusion, sabotage, rumour-spreading, and sustained undermining over weeks or months.\u003C/p>","\u003Cp>Australian law does not treat \"mobbing\" as a separate statutory category; it is handled under the broader framework for workplace bullying and psychosocial hazards. The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s789FD defines bullying at work as repeated unreasonable behaviour by an individual or \u003Cstrong>a group\u003C/strong> towards a worker that creates a risk to health and safety. The explicit reference to group conduct means mobbing falls squarely within the Fair Work Commission's anti-bullying jurisdiction when it occurs in a constitutionally covered business.\u003C/p>\n\u003Cp>A worker subject to mobbing can apply to the FWC for a stop-bullying order under Part 6-4B of the Fair Work Act, or pursue remedies under state-based WHS legislation. Safe Work Australia's model WHS Regulations (as adopted by most jurisdictions from 1 April 2023 and progressively since) classify bullying and mobbing as \u003Cstrong>psychosocial hazards\u003C/strong> that employers must identify, assess, and control so far as is reasonably practicable. NSW's Code of Practice: Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work (in force from October 2022) and Victoria's OHS (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025 (in force from 1 December 2025) both explicitly list group hostility and exclusion as psychosocial risk factors.\u003C/p>\n\u003Cp>Where mobbing has a protected-attribute dimension (gender, race, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion), it may also engage the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), or the Age Discrimination Act 2004 (Cth), as well as state anti-discrimination statutes.\u003C/p>\n\u003Cp>New Zealand does not have a single statutory bullying provision; mobbing is addressed through the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (employers' primary duty to manage psychosocial hazards), the Employment Relations Act 2000 (personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage), and the Human Rights Act 1993 where a protected ground is engaged. WorkSafe New Zealand's April 2025 Good Practice Guidelines on workplace mental health explicitly name \"group hostility\" and \"exclusion\" as recognised hazard patterns.\u003C/p>","\u003Col>\u003Cli>Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), Part 6-4B (Workers bullied at work). \u003Ca href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2009A00028/latest/text\">Federal Register of Legislation\u003C/a>. Retrieved 2026-04-19.\u003C/li>\u003Cli>Fair Work Commission, \"Bullying at work\". \u003Ca href=\"https://www.fwc.gov.au/issues-we-help/bullying-work\">FWC\u003C/a>. Retrieved 2026-04-19.\u003C/li>\u003Cli>Safe Work Australia, \"Workplace bullying\". \u003Ca href=\"https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/hazards/mental-health/bullying\">Safe Work Australia\u003C/a>. Retrieved 2026-04-19.\u003C/li>\u003Cli>NSW Code of Practice: Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work (2022). \u003Ca href=\"https://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/\">SafeWork NSW\u003C/a>. Retrieved 2026-04-19.\u003C/li>\u003Cli>WorkSafe New Zealand, Good Practice Guidelines: Mental Health at Work (April 2025). \u003Ca href=\"https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/topic-and-industry/work-related-health/mental-health/\">WorkSafe NZ\u003C/a>. Retrieved 2026-04-19.\u003C/li>\u003C/ol>","2026-04-19",[84,91,98,104,111],{"id":85,"sort":86,"faq_item_id":87},15,1,{"id":88,"question":89,"answer":90},602,"How is mobbing different from workplace bullying?","\u003Cp>Bullying typically involves one aggressor acting against one target. Mobbing involves multiple aggressors, either acting collectively or in coordinated succession. Research by Heinz Leymann, who coined the term in industrial psychology literature in the 1980s, identified 45 behaviours characteristic of mobbing, ranging from withholding information to public humiliation. Legally, both are captured under \"repeated unreasonable behaviour\" in the Fair Work Act definition, but the group dimension often makes mobbing harder to evidence and more damaging to the target.\u003C/p>",{"id":92,"sort":93,"faq_item_id":94},16,2,{"id":95,"question":96,"answer":97},603,"What distinguishes mobbing from isolated hostile incidents?","\u003Cp>Three features distinguish mobbing from one-off hostile conduct: duration (typically weeks to months of sustained behaviour), coordination (multiple participants acting in concert or in visible succession), and escalation (behaviours intensify or proliferate as time passes rather than remaining constant). An isolated incident of exclusion or public criticism does not meet the mobbing threshold; the same behaviour repeated across a team over a quarter does.\u003C/p>",{"id":99,"sort":64,"faq_item_id":100},17,{"id":101,"question":102,"answer":103},604,"Why does mobbing tend to last longer than isolated bullying incidents?","\u003Cp>Because group dynamics reinforce the conduct. Once multiple colleagues participate, each participant's behaviour normalises the others'. Bystanders may join in to avoid becoming targets themselves. Targets often delay formal reporting because they doubt their own perception (\"everyone treats me this way, so maybe it's me\"). The collective nature also makes managerial intervention harder, as addressing mobbing requires action against multiple people at once rather than a single offender.\u003C/p>",{"id":105,"sort":106,"faq_item_id":107},18,4,{"id":108,"question":109,"answer":110},605,"Is the term \"workplace mobbing\" used in Australian legislation?","\u003Cp>No. The Fair Work Act 2009 uses the term \"bullying at work\" and defines it by reference to \"repeated unreasonable behaviour by an individual or a group\" (s789FD). Courts, the Fair Work Commission, and psychosocial-hazard regulators in Australia treat mobbing as a subset of bullying rather than a distinct legal category. The term remains common in academic and HR literature, and internationally in jurisdictions such as Sweden (where Leymann's research was conducted) and France (where \"harcèlement moral\" statutes explicitly recognise mobbing).\u003C/p>",{"id":112,"sort":113,"faq_item_id":114},19,5,{"id":115,"question":116,"answer":117},606,"Is mobbing a psychosocial hazard under WHS law?","\u003Cp>Yes. Every Australian WHS jurisdiction now treats bullying and mobbing as psychosocial hazards that employers must manage under their primary duty of care. Failing to identify, assess, or control the risk is an enforceable WHS breach and can attract significant penalties.\u003C/p>",[119,123,127],{"id":106,"sort":86,"article_id":120},{"id":121,"slug":19,"title":122},36,"Understanding and Preventing Workplace Bullying",{"id":113,"sort":93,"article_id":124},{"id":125,"slug":6,"title":126},12,"Signs of a Toxic Workplace: 7 Red Flags to Look Out For",{"id":128,"sort":64,"article_id":129},6,{"id":130,"slug":131,"title":132},27,"psychosocial-hazards-at-work","Psychosocial hazards at work - changes to Australian WHS laws",[],{"meta_title":68,"meta_description":78,"meta_image":135},null,1776754766816]