Zero Tolerance For The Truth.

Question Mark, drawn and photographed by me

A common sign in public offices, shop/store counters and on public transport reads something like: (the wording can vary) “Our staff have a zero tolerance policy to any kind of abuse and any customers being offensive, aggressive, threatening or intimidating to any of our staff will be asked to leave, or even face prosecution.”

Great at face value. No one wants some drunken oaf spouting racist, sexist slurs or threatening public service staff with violence or hostility.

Sadly the message and the policies behind it are sometimes aggressively weaponised against perfectly innocent customers raising perfectly valid verbal or written grievances. Literally any form of criticism, complaint or questioning of blind authoritarianism can be interpreted as the kind of abuse the worker on the receiving end encounters, even when the complaint is perfectly legitimate and presented firmly but never unpolitely.

A bar customer may question or complain why an incorrect food or drink was served, or the wrong change proffered. A bus passenger may be upset, and willing to say so to the effect that the driver has ignored the sound of the bell and driven on past where the passenger wished to alight. A hospital patient promised that they may be discharged at a certain time, may well complain if that time, and hours more on top of that pass without their discharge being initiated or them receiving any explanation or apology for the delay.

Instead of immediately apologising and doing all possible to make amends for the customer/patient/passenger, the service/trade provider immediately gets aggressive and hostile, refusing to hear the concerns, not even allowing the affected party to finish sentences. If the complainant doesn’t take a hint and immediately shut up and capitulate the service providers will interpret their stance as hostile rather than seriously heartfelt and justifiably deserving of closer attention. In effect the abuse isn’t coming from the client/customer/patient/passenger, but from the people they trusted to provide the goods and services expected and required to an appropriate standard. If the affected party doesn’t go away immediately, but presses their point further, no matter how politely, the service provider sadly often starts playing the ‘zero tolerance’ shield card, and treats the increasingly frustrated customer/passenger, etc as the aggressor when it is in fact the other way round. The complainant may suddenly face a gaggle of other staff, security officials and possibly even the police.

The customer is branded as abusive for daring to speak out at all, just because, for all their politeness, their unhappiness with the service and serving parties dares to question the authority figure, who often fragile in ego, expects respect simply for having attained the position and responsibility, but respect has to be earned, not given simply because someone has qualifications, training, letters after their name and/or a designated status, assuming they can say/do what they like to anyone not matching or surpassing their rank.

The zero tolerance stance frequently completely closes down all complaint. If it made you unhappy, they hope you just go quietly away and sulk. To raise complaints casts doubt about someone’s work standards. It is like they have just had their film mauled by critics or seen a damning report of their business, services, food or accommodation on a site like Tripadvisor. The difference is that the critic/complainant is not anonymous but right in front of you, looking you in the eye as they say, ‘You promised me this and didn’t do it / you got this wrong etc.

The complainant can end up facing backlash as their simple honest complaint is treated as abuse, attack and aggression, almost as if they chased the service provider with chainsaws and baseball bats rather than just pointing out that they feel let down in some way. The complainant may find the person they address refusing to listen to them, possibly even walking or running away, and attempting to complain about it later the complainant can find the company closes ranks and cites the zero tolerance policy to dismiss the customer as the aggressor and abuser, rather than the true offended party in the dispute. The actual complaint will be ignored, dismissed as trivial, or treated as simply a fabrication and lie created by the complainant whose real motive will be seen as simply parading their intolerance. Once the complaint receives this response the company protecting the true aggressor (the service provider) often shuts down proceedings to make it hard for the complainant to act further without undertaking expensive legal court proceeding. It is the equivalent of meeting a complaint by sticking your fingers in your ears and singing La-La-La-La-La on repeat until the voice of dissent is crushed into silence.

The Zero Tolerance policy needs to be a two way street and public warning notices need serious reform, to the effect of adding: “Customers/Clients/Patients/Passengers also have every right to be heard and not subjected to abuse, threats or intimidation. Staff treating customers with or without genuine grievances with respect will face immediate disciplinary investigation.”

Arthur Chappell