Working committee condemns harassment at CGD

The CGD Working Committee condemned “harassment behavior in the workplace”, with the state bank ensuring that it takes the matter seriously and that the allegations are being assessed by the audit department.

In a statement released this Friday, the Working Committee (CT) of the Caixa Geral de Depósitos (CGD) said that “he has been contacted exponentially by workers who demonstrate discomfort and concern about workplace harassment.” Job”.

He assured that such behavior “creates situations of personal destabilization affecting health, personal and professional life”, causing “sick leave, reduced productivity and a poor work environment, which affects the image of CGD, its banking activities. “and pointing out that the socio-professional environment is “extremely degraded and marked by an atmosphere of fear.”

CT points to situations of “blind obsession with goals, constantly imposed various layoffs and lack of material and human conditions in the workplace” as “factors leading to disregard for the dignity of the worker and leading to harassing behavior.”

“In the public CHD, from 2016 to the present day, “harassment” has been aggravated, threats of various kinds and the use of methods of incitement to reprisals occur daily, with positions supported by a higher hierarchical chain,” he said, assuring: “after eight years, we have reached a point where all limits were exceeded, reaching an unbearable and unacceptable level.”

In response to Lusa’s appeal, an official source from Caixa recalled that “it is one of the largest employers in Portugal with more than six thousand employees and takes the problem of harassment in the workplace seriously”, committing itself “in its code of conduct to the development of its function in respect for high ethical and deontological principles” and “guiding values ​​that promote a culture of relationships based on courtesy, tolerance and respect, as well as non-discrimination and equal opportunity and treatment, rejecting any practice that may constitute moral or sexual harassment. In fact, it has internal reporting mechanisms that guarantee the confidentiality of employees,” he said.

“Caixa continues to be one of the most sought-after companies among those who want to enter the labor market, not only because of the benefits it offers, unique to Portuguese banking, but also because of the merit-rewarded career offer” , – he said. , referring to the fact that “from 2017 to June of this year, 755 new employees were hired” and “9021 promotions” were carried out.

According to the same source, CGD’s goal “is to retain its staff as well as attract new professionals who contribute to the sustainable growth of its operations”, a goal that “can only be achieved with Caixa, which encourages and promotes Good work. environment, but also provides opportunities.”

The state bank concludes by saying that “all cases of alleged harassment are assessed by an audit department that operates in accordance with existing regulations”, ensuring that “the approximately 1,000 people who recruit, manage and coordinate others at Caixa (directors, coordinators, branch managers and office coordinators) are well aware of the importance of healthy relationships with employees and the illegality of harassment under the provisions of the law.”

CT, in turn, points his finger at the bank’s management. “All of these processes and actions flow from an example that is conveyed by the action and/or inaction of positions emanating from the highest levels of management,” he assured in the same note in which he reports “minor interest shown by management.” in eliminating this type of practice, where CT has condemned incidents of harassment, stating that it cannot intervene and advising employees to use the internal channels available for this purpose.”

The organization then gives concrete examples, beginning with “a former administration adviser who was harassed and constantly devalued in his duties, and in connection with this, two disciplinary proceedings were held to remove him from CGD, which he refused even with compensation,” and that “CT gave a negative opinion on dismissal, and in court the corresponding decision forced him to be included in the CGD staff.”

Another case, according to the CT, was “an employee with a manager category, from whom the CHD unilaterally removed the relevant functions, assigning administrative functions to him,” adding that “despite the court decision on his appointment as a manager, isolated the employee.” placing him in an agency without the same powers/responsibilities as a “regular” agency providing only customer service and dependent on another manager”, and thus not respecting “once again the relevant court decision”, assured.