A senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales has doused some of the mounting concern over new workplace bullying laws.

There has been outcry from several sectors over the laws which came into place at the start of this year, stemming from recommendations in a 2012 House of Representatives inquiry.

Opponents say that managers and other higher-ups will now be blamed for every wrongdoing, or that the Fair Work Commission (FWC) will be inundated with vexatious but meaningless complaints.

UNSW’s Dr Carlo Caponecchia says a number of important factors should keep a lid on needless complaints, and that the arguments against the changes are “distractions, designed to derail the legitimacy of workplace bullying as a significant workplace health and safety problem”.

Dr Caponecchia points to the three criteria which must all be fulfilled for a bullying claim to be considered legitimate. New legislation states bullying has only occurred if negative treatment is repeated, unreasonable and creates a risk to health and safety.

“Many of the examples trotted out to undermine the need for bullying protections often fail to meet any or all of these criteria, and we should beware of these,” Dr Caponecchia says.

“Baristas being bullied for bad coffee is but one example that was acknowledged to be a bit of a stretch.”

As for the FWC being flooded with complaints the academic says that because no damages can be awarded for bullying claims, there will be little incentive to launch half-baked attempts at punishing employers.

Additionally, several large employment sectors are not covered by the legislation and thus cannot make claims. So far Defence and State Government workers have fallen into this category. Claims must also be about a current employer and cannot be levelled against a former workplace.

“The objective of the legislation is to make bullying stop – that is, prevent further risks to the individual making the claim,” Dr Caponecchia says.

“Not only does the claimant need to be employed in the workplace for which they are making the claim, but they presumably have to want to continue to work there. These issues significantly change the dynamics.”

Most importantly is to maintain these criteria and have a reasonable and considered approach to every case individually, the lecturer said.

“The response to the implementation of these new provisions will to some extent depend on the nature of early cases and orders that may be made.”