Workplace Bullying and Its Implications for Gender Transformation in the South African Higher Education Sector

• Published date: 23 September 2022
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.13169/intecritdivestud.4.2.0061
• Pages: 61-76
• Date: 23 September 2022
• Author: Brightness Mangolothi,Peliwe Pelisa Mnguni
• Subject Matter: Intersectionality,gender,race,transformation,workplace bullying

Workplace Bullying and Its Implications

for Gender Transformation in the South

African Higher Education Sector

An Intersectional Perspective

Brightness Mangolothi

Graduate School of Business Leadership, University of South Africa

Peliwe Pelisa Mnguni

Graduate School of Business Leadership, University of South Africa

ABSTRACT

While transformation in the higher education sector in South Africa has been the

subject of intensive research since 1994, few studies have explored the link between

workplace bullying and transformation. Whereas workplace bullying has drawn

researchers’ attention for decades, it is only recently that scholars have started to

interrogate the phenomenon through the intersectional lens. This paper employs

intersectionality to explore women academics’ experiences of workplace bullying

and to suggest links between workplace bullying and gender transformation in the

higher education sector in South Africa. Semi-structured interviews were conducted

with a cross-section of 25 women academics who had experienced workplace bul-

lying. As part of data triangulation, four union representatives and three human

resources practitioners were also interviewed. The study’s main ndings indicate

that gender, race and class mediate women academics’ experiences of workplace

bullying. In historically White universities, African, Coloured and Indian women

academics, particularly those from working-class backgrounds, are more likely to be

bullied, by seniors, peers, administrators and students. For White women academ-

ics, race ameliorates their workplace bullying experiences. The simultaneous effects

of race, gender and class derail transformation as members of previously disadvan-

taged groups either remain stuck in junior academic positions, or exit the sector.

KEYWORDS

Intersectionality, gender, race, transformation, workplace bullying

Introduction

Before 1994, the apartheid systems of government were designed to advance White interests

and entrench White privilege, at the expense of Black1 South Africans (Mokhoanatse, 2015).

DOI:10.13169/INTECRIT DIVESTUD.4.2.0061

62 BRIGHTNESS MANGOLOTHI AND PELIWE PELISA MNGUNI

International Journal of CRITICAL DIVERSITY STUDIES 4.2 December 2021

After 1994, the new democratic government was faced with the onerous task of transform-

ing South African society and institutions. The Constitution prohibits unfair discrimination

against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, marital status, ethnic or

social origin, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion and language. The Higher Education

Act, Act 101 of 1997, was passed to transform universities and to ensure equal access to

education for all South Africans.

The jury is still out on the efficacy of this legislation. According to Statistics South Africa

(2019), cited in the Commission for Employment Equity report (2019), 54.6% of the

Economically Active Population (EAP) in South Africa were men, and 45.4% were women.

Of this 45.4% of economically active women, 36.2% were African, 4.4% Coloured, 1.1%

Indian and 3.8% White. During the same period (2019), of the 19,901 permanent academic

staff in South African higher education institutions 47.7% were women. White women

made up 46.31% of women academics, followed by Africans (35.98%), Indians (9,35%), with

Coloureds lagging behind at 8.34% (DHET, 2021). This overrepresentation of Coloured,

Indian and White women in academia, and underrepresentation of African women, com-

pared to their representation in the EAP, suggests a stubborn racialised pattern in the higher

education sect or.

There is a positive relationship between holding a PhD, postgraduate supervision,

research outputs and career progression (DHET, 2019). According to (STATS-SA, 2019), of

the 46% of university academic staff holding PhDs, most were men (DHET, 2019). In 2017,

of the 9,033 permanent academic staff who had PhDs there were 30.1% African, 5.8%

Coloured, 7.74% Indian, 52.79% White and 0.03% Unknown. Zulu’s (2013) study on

research productivity found that women lacked the time to do research due to heavy teach-

ing workloads, administrative work, household responsibilities and supervision of

postgraduate students. Women academics also lacked access to supportive networks.

African women were less likely to hold a PhD. They, as a result, were overrepresented in

junior lecturer roles and underrepresented in the professoriate level, compared to other

races (DHET, 2019; Rugunanan, 2019).

Phaswana (2019) argues that, despite the gains brought about by transformation in

South African HE, Black women still grapple with racism, sexism and classism. Their antag-

onistic treatment in the academy is a continuation of their university experiences as students

(Nathane, 2019). While being an academic remains a challenge for Black women academics,

it is particularly challenging for young Black women academics who are not adequately sup-

ported, be it through adequate resourcing or mentorship (Rugunanan, 2019). While the

government provides financial incentives to encourage young, Black, women academics to

obtain their PhDs, and as will be shown later in this discussion, their professional develop-

ment efforts get frustrated at the faculty and departmental levels. Of course, as Moore (2017)

and Zulu (2013) point out, all women, including the ones with tenure, experience gendered

barriers. White women also experience gendered challenges, but their race and relative aca-

demic seniority do serve as a kind of shield.

The few Black women who join academia are met by a revolving door. Mekoa (2018)

argues that most Black academics leave because of job dissatisfaction, social and intellectual

frustrations, rampant racism, disillusionment with management and inadequate salary

packages. For Vandeyar (2010, p. 931), Blacks are not forced to leave because of racism only,