[Workplace Bullying Legal Elements 1 of 5]Does Workplace Bullying Only Happen at the Office? Wrong! Analyzing the First Statutory Element: "Laborer Performing Duties in the Workplace"

"The complaint stems from an incident occurring in a LINE group chat after work hours, not in the office. It shouldn't count as workplace bullying, right?"

This is one of the most common—and dangerous—misconceptions when handling workplace grievances.

Following the implementation of the new Workplace Bullying Prevention regulations on July 1, 2026, the first threshold for determining whether workplace bullying is established is whether the incident occurred while "the laborer was performing duties in the workplace." However, the term "workplace" (labor workplace) does not merely equal a company's office, factory, or storefront; nor is "performing duties" restricted strictly to the hours after clocking in or while physically operating machinery.

The true core criterion is whether a substantial and reasonable connection exists between the disputed incident, the working environment designated by the employer, and the employee's performance of duties. In other words, being physically present at the office does not automatically satisfy this condition, nor does being outside the office automatically exclude an incident.

For labor law compliance training, board member continuing education credits, external committee members for workplace harassment/bullying, and litigation mediation representation, please contact Yesin Law Firm (Tel: +886-2-25156822; Website: https://www.yesinlaw.com).

1. The workplace is not a physical address, but any environment designated by the employer for performing duties.

Many intuitively believe that workplace bullying can only occur within company offices. This understanding fails to reflect modern, diverse work models.

When employees are assigned to visit a client's office, supplier facility, exhibition, construction site, or travel on business trips, they remain in a "workplace" even after leaving the company's registered address. Corporate training sessions, business meetings, client dinners, and team-building activities may also be categorized as workplaces depending on their business purpose, participation format, and degree of employer control.

With work-from-home and cross-border collaboration increasingly widespread today, remote work environments cannot be ignored either. When managers issue directives or evaluate performance via Email, Teams, Slack, or messaging group chats, these digital communication channels become physical extensions where managerial authority operates.

Therefore, if a supervisor repeatedly verbally abuses an employee late at night via LINE, the incident is not automatically disassociated from the workplace simply because the employee was at home after off-duty hours. If the messages relate to work instructions, scheduling, performance, evaluations, or the exercise of supervisory power, a substantial connection to the workplace can still be established.

2. Performing duties is not defined solely by hours, but by whether the incident stems from work.

Determining whether an employee is performing duties cannot rely strictly on timecard records.

Completing reports, operating equipment, or servicing customers clearly constitutes performing duties. However, receiving supervisory instructions, attending performance reviews, handling shift schedules and leave requests, participating in handovers, training sessions, performance evaluations, or collaborating with colleagues on task communication are all integral parts of fulfilling a labor contract.

For example: a manager publicly humiliating an employee's performance during an online meeting hosted after working hours; a supervisor insulting an employee in front of clients during a business trip; or a manager threatening demotion over performance issues during a company dinner. Even if these scenarios occur outside regular business hours or beyond the office walls, they satisfy the requirement of performing duties due to their close tie to work responsibilities and power dynamics.

Conversely, if two colleagues engage in a dispute over personal loans, relationships, or family issues during a purely private, voluntary weekend gathering—completely unrelated to their duties or supervisory authority—it generally would not constitute workplace bullying.

Therefore, when investigating workplace bullying grievances, one must ask not only "where did it happen," but also "why did it happen" and "did it arise from work relations?"

3. Failing to meet the first element does not mean employers can ignore the issue.

This is the second most common mistake companies make when handling workplace bullying procedures.

Even if an improper behavior fails to meet the statutory threshold of "laborer performing duties in the workplace," it does not render the conduct lawful, nor does it extinguish the employer's duty of protection.

For instance, a private dispute between colleagues could spill over into work group chats, shift scheduling, performance evaluations, or team collaboration. Cyberbullying after an employee resigns might involve information obtained during employment, defamation, or retaliation. Even if such cases do not technically constitute workplace bullying, they may fall under the broader scope of unlawful workplace infringement.

Consequently, HR departments cannot refuse to handle a grievance with a blanket "it happened after hours." Instead, companies should establish a dual-nexus verification checklist:

• Spatial Connection: Was the location of the incident assigned, arranged, or recognized by the employer as an environment for providing labor?

  
  

• Job Connection: Did the incident stem from task assignments, performance evaluations, shift scheduling, team collaboration, or supervisory power?

  
  

An investigation report should not merely state, "The incident happened at the company, time/place satisfied." To comply with procedural justice and withstand scrutiny by labor inspectors and courts, it must specifically record the nature of the activity, reasons for participation, timestamp, communication contents, power dynamics, and direct linkages to the complaint.

Advice from Attorney Chen Ye-xin

The primary element in determining workplace bullying is not physical location, but whether the incident meets the standard of "a laborer performing duties in the workplace."

An off-site location can still qualify as a labor workplace, and an employee may still be performing duties after clocking out. Conversely, a purely personal dispute occurring inside company premises may not necessarily constitute workplace bullying. Companies must comprehensively evaluate whether the activity was arranged by the employer, whether the dispute stemmed from work, whether the perpetrator utilized managerial authority, and whether the incident related to job performance.

A truly mature workplace bullying grievance procedure does not rush to dismiss cases on legal technicalities. Instead, it properly triages issues, provides timely protection, and maintains verifiable records capable of withstanding scrutiny from labor inspectors and labor courts.

When the next complaint involves a late-night messaging thread, a business trip, or a company dinner, will your organization still dismiss it simply because it "didn't happen in the office"?