junior doctors ...

She has a very "girly" way of presenting herself and seemed overly keen to be liked. Compare her to the other female doctors and nurses and she stood out as coming across like a child. I expect she will learn, and age will help, but part of the job is presenting yourself in a way that inspires confidence and trust and doesn't just make people think "aaaw bless!".

I'm just going by what the OP describes, but the key thing I'm taking in here is that she is "clearly gutted but tries to laugh it off."

As I said, as far as the law is concerned, the only thing that matters is that she is upset and because she is upset, it is a matter of bullying. I think if more people realised this, workplaces would be a much better place.

I feel strongly about this because I have seen so many examples of workplace bullying I can't count. Some were dealt with well and some badly but all had significant impacts on the people at the receiving end and often people who weren't directly victims but witnessed the incidents.

eldritch please tell us that you're not "Call me Suzi"

Yes, the supervisor should say something to her about the pink obsession.
He was however, supportive and took an opportunity to express his confidence in her after she had an upsetting incident with a male patient who questioned her judgement.
Having not seen it karmakameleon, I don't understand how you be so sure that it was bullying

Of course we don't see a formal disciplinary but usually ime on TV we are told it has happened. Most of these things aren't dealt with formally btw. They are dealt with informally by the manager but in this case he seems to be part of the problem rather than the solution.

Karma - agree, but if it was dealt with (and we don't know) then we'd have a rather different view. Formal disciplinaries are very unlikely to be televised.

If the "pack steps in" the pack should be stopped, and the pack certainly shouldn't include the supervisor as has been described. That is what anti bullying and harassment codes are about. I think they are more important than dress codes, wouldn't you agree?

Re the editing, you cannot edit to make bullying magically appear. It either happened or it didn't. You can edit so you don't show how it was dealt with, I agree. But just because the bullying was dealt with appropriately, doesn't mean it never happened.

I think dress codes are important as then it is clear that breaches should be dealt with within normal procedures. If you don't, then it may still be perceived as inappropriate but instead of normal supervisory/training functions applying, the pack steps in and the result is what was described.

The problem with editing is that we do not know what wasn't shown. If it was 100% of the baying pack, but only 1% of how that pack was dealt with at the time, then we get little idea of the true dynamic.

For those people who don't think it seemed like bullying, I was initially a bit to find out that for an industrial tribunal the complaintant doens't have to prove any objective test of being harmed. They just have to demonstrate that they were harmed.

So if she's upset, it's bullying. Doesn't matter if someone else would have been upset in the same circumstances.

But why gentle ribbing when you can just say it to someone?

I've had to have difficult conversions with people at work and it's not nice. But much better for then to have a frank conversation than for their boss to take the piss out of them. Surely? Or do people really prefer having the piss taken out of them endlessly?

Also I think it's important to remember it's her decision at the end of the day. You can give advice but she may not take it and that would have to be the end of the conversation. When does the piss taking stop? I assume, when she either leaves or makes a formal complaint?

Well theonlythe thing is, pink is pretty much seen as a 'girly princess' colour now. Little girls wear pink, professional adult women generally don't wear pink to work.

I'm not saying she deseved to be bullied, by the way. It's wrong that our appearance is generally the primary thing we are judged upon. But the fact of the matter is that if you put an emphasis on 'girlishness' by using a pink stethescope and wearing pink shoes, then you will be treated like a girl, rather than a professional woman.

Also (and I'm probably not articulating this very well) the stethescope is the thing that most obviously would signify she is a doctor to a patient; by using a pink one she is drawing attention to her femininity and 'softness' in a way that I think is odd, if you don't want to be treated any differently to the other doctors.

So yes, pink is just a colour but it's almost solely seen a a girly colour now and I don't think it looks very professional.

I didn't seem like bullying to me - but maybe that's the kind of banter I'm used to.

If you were at work and dressed in a way that meant people didn't take you seriously - but you did adhere to the official dress code (i.e. Hello Kitty handbag, ribbons in your hair - whilst wearing a suit) then a bit of gentle ribbing might make you reconsider?? No??

Sorry, one more thing. Most workplaces have formal codes on bullying and harrassment, yet very few people know where they stand on this as evidenced by the situation here. The supervisor etc presumably have no idea that they are acting against the code and Suzi presumably has no idea that she can make a formal complaint and expect to have it acted on.

Why do you think it's more important to have and agree on dress codes rather than codes around negative behaviour?

I'm not sure how it could be edited to "maximise" incidents. Either bullying occurred and was captured on film or it didn't.

(I can see how you can edit to "minimise" an incident by leaving half of it out. Does anyone think this might have happened?)

meditrina, I've never seen a formal dress code that specified which colours you are allowed to wear, so I guess that in most places that have one, she wouldn't actually be wearing prohited items.

I also understand that the way you dress can change people's perceptions of you and as a manager I wouldn't hesitate to point that out if I thought that someone who worked for me was suffering for wearing inappropriate clothes. However, I'd do it privately, one on one and with some sensitivity rather than public bullying. I'm not sure why people think the latter is acceptable and aren't considering that the former should be applied.

Why is using a pink stethescope infantilising Voddy? It is just a colour. It isn't just for kids you know.

I didn't see the programme, but agree with OP that it would have been carefully edited to maximise any incidents.

Of course it doesn't have to be one or the other, just in this case it seems that it's either Suzi (who is dressed in pink) or one of her collegues (who apparently don't know how to act around other people). I'd take Suzi.

Also to make a polite suggestion about how you introduce yourself is quite different from the bullying that the OP describes.

The only reason it irritated me was that it was clearly stolen from 'Scrubs'.

I didn't see it but surely if you want to be taken seriously you shouldn't infantilise yourself by using a pink stethescope

Ealingkate: I'm not going to flame you, I agree with you. If there were formal dress codes, then everyone would know where they stood. Instead there are subjective views on appropriateness, which vary both between individuals and in terms of impact on groups.

Dressing in a way which enhances your effectiveness in role is in itself a skill. Obviously your attire does not change your knowledge and ability, but if part of your role is to inspire confidence then the impression given by your appearance is a factor.

Her supervisor seemed like a nice guy.
She had an incident where a patient was questioning her judgement on the diagnosis and treatment and she felt that it might have had something to do with her appearance, as she had also been mistaken for a nurse. She was also asking one of the other junior doctors about suggestions for being taken more seriously and they suggested introducing herself as Dr Batchelor rather than, "Hi. I'm Suzi".
I don't think that she has to be one (totally lacking in empathy) or the other(wearing pink trainers), my best mate is a doctor and she dresses in a feminine way but not a girly way.

Sorry Kate, I didn't see it so I have to ask, was the supervisor a bit thick, socially incompetent or totally lacking in empathy?

It just seems that you'd have to be to get to a certain age and not understand that there is a way to give negative feedback sensitively rather than by undermining someone and bullying them.

If the supervisor really doesn't understand this, then I wouldn't want to be one of his patients being told that my illness might be serious or even fatal. It doesn't seem that he'd be able to handle telling someone something like that in a kind and caring way.

Given the choice, in that situation, I'd probably go with the one in the pink trainers with the pink stethoscope rather than the one who is traditionally dressed but totally inconsiderate of people's feelings.

I saw it too and on reflection I wondered whether they (her peers/supervisors) were trying to put across the message that she needs to take on a more doctorly(adult) persona to gain the trust and confidence of her patients. (Albeit in a crap way)

She was a 2nd year and maybe they thought that she should have got the message that if you want to be taken seriously by the patients then perhaps you have to be Dr Batchelor when you're advising people on life or death illnesses, not Suzi with a pink hair bobble and pink glittery trainers.