The fall-out from the conflict in the Middle East is being felt in UK workplaces. With each news report there’s a new sting, another reason for a clash of opinions and a strain on relationships.
Research into Antisemitism and Islamophobia at Work*, points to a spike in discrimination. Around half of Jewish employees and 36% of Muslims (of the 500 workers talked to), said they had experienced more discrimination since the beginning of the war in 2023. 39% of the Jewish workers and 24% of Muslims felt they had been subject to discrimination (80% and 69% said they had been the target of ‘microaggressions’). Most of all, people pointed to problems with “being stereotyped” and “verbal harassment”. The source of issues was often believed to be social media.
In this unusually charged climate, where there’s such negative electricity, disputes come from suspicion and misunderstandings. Well-intentioned people — colleagues and team members — can make comments that are nothing to do with religion or race or cultural identity, that are transformed by the context into what sounds and feels like inappropriate criticism and bias. Words become weapons. And in this polarised situation, individuals who identify with one or other side of the conflict see any contradiction as an attack on themselves.
So, there’s confusion and assumptions, and an anger that spills into workplaces, into messaging and conversations. Nothing feels simple anymore — especially when people might be looking for reasons to be angry, a justification for their own position; when they don’t want to listen to other perspectives. And there’s the wider problem that employees feel they’re not only misunderstood by colleagues but also by their employer more generally.
The standard response of organisations might be to make sure staff know how to report their issues, when to talk to their line manager or directly to HR, or think about setting up an anonymous reporting channel. The challenge is dealing with such a diverse range of concerns and irritations in response to other people’s attitudes. What’s discrimination in this context? Where does HR draw the line between reasonable points of view and inappropriate expressions of hatred? Who gets to decide who’s ‘right’?
In the thick of the noise of claims and counter-claims, the most practical approach for HR is to be the facilitator of listening and understanding, at the early stages, in informal ways — making sure that worries among Jewish and Muslim employees aren’t either ignored (as being too sensitive and difficult to resolve) or escalated too quickly into formal disciplinary procedures (where there’s the risk of fuelling disputes and opposition). Opening up conversations that foster mutual trust, even where there are fundamental differences of opinion, where differences are accepted.
As a foundation of an informal resolution culture, there should be compulsory training in mediation and conflict resolution skills for HR professionals, perhaps as part of CIPD qualifications and HR degree study. HR should be acting as mentors and coaches to managers in dealing with disputes, and prioritising informal resolution processes such as mediation and Neutral Assessment. For the wider workforce there should be more emphasis on the core interpersonal skills when it comes to recruitment, development and reward, with support around developing Conversational Integrity. That basically means attention to the skills that generate an environment of better day-to-day conversations, that smooth the way for dealing with those difficult moments of challenge and uncertainty: like situational awareness (being conscious about the time, place and wider circumstances in which a conversation takes place and how that might impact it); curiosity (the capacity to stay tuned into what is being said, and interested in why it is being said, rather than dismissing or disagreeing); reflective listening (listening with a focus on ensuring that the other person is heard, rather than listening to reload or refuel an argument. This ensures full disclosure and the development of mutual understanding); empathy (the ability to be present with what’s really going on for another person or ourselves in the moment. It allows the receiver to re-perceive their own world in a new way and move on); and self-awareness (the capacity to self-reflect and listen inwardly as well as outwardly; recognising how one’s own inner state or previous interactions may be adjusting the flow of conversation creates an opportunity to adapt and adjust). If everyone across a workplaces was equipped with these kinds of skills, what difference would it make to the experience?
Treating disputes as an embarrassment, as something to reduce to the level of formal admin, isn’t working. The best employers will have the people and the skills capable of being more grown-up about conflict: they know it’s always going to happen, that much of the time it’s healthy, and they’re going to encourage the kinds of conversations, listening and empathy that make an informal resolution possible. More and more it will be understanding the root causes of poor behaviours and performance that matters — especially when those causes are so tightly wrapped up in questions of employee wellbeing and stress.
*Research from by Pearn Kandola
