Co-Worker evaluations, letting off steam, & the laws of lashon hara
R. Yonatan Kolatch and R. Eliezer Kwass

Question:
The workplace provides many situations in which a worker would feel pressure to talk critically about a colleague, employer or subordinate. Employers often request that an employee evaluate the performance of a fellow employee. Additionally, sometimes people talk about colleagues in situations when not expressly required to do so by the employer. Even these discussions are sometimes beneficial in that they enable the coworkers to express their frustration and blow off steam. This release of tension can help avoid subsequent arguments, facilitate development of strategies to deal with the colleague, or provide emotional or moral support.

Clearly, these situations can have halachic implications in the area of loshon hara (improper speech).
1. What are the halachic parameters of evaluating the performance of fellow employees? Does it make a difference if the speaker is a sub manager or a coworker?
2. Under what situations may one discuss with others problems encountered while working with another?

Response:
The issues you mentioned, evaluating co-workers and employees and “blowing off steam” come up constantly in the workplace and bring into focus a number of the laws of loshon hara.

Saying negative things about others is, in general, prohibited by the laws of loshon hara, and is treated consistently by Jewish sources with an extremely high level of stringency. (The Chafetz Chaim lists 17 prohibitions and 14 positive mitzvot one might possibly transgress by speaking disparagingly of others.) Despite the severity of Loshon Hara, speaking negatively about others is sometimes permitted when it is “l’toelet”, for a productive purpose. In the following four situations one is not only permitted, but is obligated to speak negatively about others:

A. to help the person spoken about -- for instance, to speak about another’s faults to help that person improve.
B. to help or protect those negatively affected by the person being spoken about -- for example, to inform an unwary future business partner about someone’s dishonesty.
C. to prevent a community dispute.
D. to help others learn from the first person’s faults.

Based on this, both of the cases we are dealing with might be permitted. Evaluating co-workers or employees often help the worker himself improve and protect the company from his inefficiency. Moreover, when a worker is mistreated by a manager, speaking about his experience with others often helps solve the problem for the reasons you mentioned -- preventing it from happening again or preventing a blow-up later. Nonetheless, it is difficult to view mere “blowing off steam” as a permissible reason to speak loshon hara. However, if speaking about another’s misconduct will help the problematic person change or will protect those adversely affected by his actions, such speech is considered permissible. [Certainly speaking about another’s negative activity in a very structured therapeutic setting like psychotherapy is considered L’toelet.]

These cases do not provide a blanket absolution from the laws of Loshon Hara. The Chafetz Chaim lists seven necessary conditions one must fulfill to permit speech in the four situations enumerated above. Adhering to these conditions makes the difference between a productive halachic discussion geared to solve problems and a bunch of workers badmouthing another, confident that their conversation is vaguely helpful. The seven conditions are:

1. The speaker relies only on verified first-hand information, rather than hearsay or speculation.
2. The subject’s activity must be properly and deeply analyzed, giving him the benefit of the doubt.
3. The subject must be approached personally and influenced to change (according to the mitzvah of tochacha - rebuke), if at all possible.
4. It is forbidden to exaggerate what was actually done; it must be reported precisely.
5. The speaker’s intention is exclusively for productive purposes, not motivated by spite, revenge, or any other ulterior motives.
6. If there is any way of dealing with the problem other than speaking about the person, the alternative must be tried first.
7. The speech must not bring about excessive damage to the subject.

Some of these conditions can be particularly problematic in the situations we are dealing with. A coworker evaluated negatively might end up losing his job (see #7). People might fall into hyperbolic speech patterns -- “He always makes comments like that to me” (see #4). A worker feeling somewhat helpless might take a subtle type of revenge on his superiors by speaking about them (see #5). Approaching the perpetrator directly (see #3) is often ruled out; workers do not always develop the assertiveness needed to confront their boss about misconduct or are afraid of being looked at as a problem worker.

A workplace where the laws and values of proper speech are kept is naturally much healthier. This should go through the worker’s mind before he shares a negative experience with others -- how will this affect the way we all relate to each other? A manager weighing the pros and cons of introducing co-worker evaluations in his workplace must take this into account. The advantages of peer review -- the constructive feedback it provides and not allowing a boss to be the sole judge of a worker’s performance -- must be preserved without creating new problems. Anonymity must be preserved to avoid hard feelings, and an atmosphere of constructive objectivity and honesty must be created to avoid back-stabbing and the down-side of office competition. It should be kept in mind that a more pleasant, less tense work environment can be, in the long run, also more productive.

It is likely that in the situations you mentioned it is permissible to speak negatively about a co-worker, employee, or boss. However, the discussion is severely tempered by the seven conditions the Chafetz Chaim lists. Furthermore, the importance of taking into account the positive environment created by (and long range positive results of) keeping the laws and spirit of Loshon Hara must be emphasized.

Sources: Chafetz Chaim, Hilkhot Loshon Hara, Chapter 10, aided by R. Shimon Finkleman and R. Yitzchak Berkovitz’s Chafetz Chaim: Hashiur Hayomi (Blum, Jerusalem), pp. 82-100. Thanks to Mark Ellis. Prepared by R. Yonatan Kolatch and R. Eliezer Kwass

Reader response: from Dov -- "Blowing off Steam, and Intent"