Winning the Fight against Workplace Violence

April 2007 was a particularly deadly month for workplace violence. At NASA's Johnson Space Center, an engineer somehow managed to get a gun through security and kill a fellow employee, whom he considered responsible for his mediocre job evaluation, before killing himself. In Troy, Michigan, a former employee of an accounting firm who had been fired a week earlier returned to the office with a shotgun, killing one and seriously wounding two others.

What is more disturbing than these and other incidents of workplace violence that have occurred in staggering numbers? Employers who fail to address the issue with effective prevention procedures, programs, and policies.

A Survey of Workplace Violence conducted by the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that half of the biggest employers in the United States reported an incident of workplace violence within the 12-month period prior to completing the survey. Nearly five percent of all private business establishments reported an incident of workplace violence during the same time span.

Until recently, there have been little reliable data on employers' policies to prevent and address workplace violence; the majority of studies on the topic focused on the issue primarily from the employee‘s or victim's point of view. However, the recent survey provides a different, more relevant perspective for employers.

Workplace violence is defined as “violent acts directed towards a person at work or on duty (i.e., physical assaults, threats of assault, harassment, intimidation, or bullying),” and is classified into four types of situations:

Criminal—when the perpetrator has no legitimate relationship to the business or its employees and is usually committing a crime in conjunction with the violence;
Customer or Client—when the perpetrator has a legitimate relationship with the business and becomes violent while being served by the business (e.g., customers, clients, patients, etc.);
Co-Worker—when the perpetrator is an employee, past employee, or contractor who attacks or threatens another employee; and
Domestic Violence—when the perpetrator, who has no legitimate relationship to the business but who has a personal relationship with the intended victim, threatens or assaults the intended victim at the workplace (e.g., a family member, spouse, boyfriend, girlfriend, etc.).

The survey sampled private industry and both state and local government entities. Utilizing size classifications ranging from employers with fewer than 10 employees to those with 1,000 or more employees allowed for higher confidence levels in the survey results.

Learn how to recognize, prevent and manage sexual harassment in the workplace in accordance with California and federal law.

In addition to establishing the prevalence of workplace violence, the survey identifies some of its most harmful consequences. For example, roughly one-third of the establishments reporting an incident of workplace violence acknowledged that the incident had a negative impact on the workforce, as measured by increases in levels of fear and decreases in employee morale.

Incidents of workplace violence also affect a company's bottom line. Increased expenditures for workers' compensation, third-party insurance, absenteeism, injury leave, replacement workers, property damage, and training or prevention costs can all result from workplace violence.

Though it may be impossible to eliminate workplace violence entirely, American business culture's method of addressing the problem—or rather of not addressing it—is perhaps even more disturbing and may exacerbate it. Over 70 percent of U.S. workplaces do not have any formal policies or programs that address workplace violence. Only 20 percent of establishments in private industry have provided some employee training on preventing workplace violence, and only 4 percent of all establishments have offered training on domestic violence and its impact on the workplace.

Thus, the survey exposes the clear need for employers to fill this glaring gap in training with the goals of making their workplace safer and reducing their risk. Employers must invest the time and resources to train their employees on preventing and responding to incidents of workplace violence because the costs of not addressing the problem are greater and graver.

A workplace violence prevention program should train employees to:

identify techniques for creating a safe workplace;
recognize forms of violence, including intimidation, threatening remarks and behavior, and abuse;
recognize the warning signs of violence and know how to intervene appropriately;
characterize the three main sources of violence—internal, external, and domestic;
develop a contingency plan and procedure to follow after a violent incident occurs; and
distinguish between effective and ineffective management techniques relative to workplace violence.

Employers should also consider implementing policies and procedures for addressing workplace violence when it does occur; not doing so may increase significantly their liability to employees and customers who fall victim to violence in the workplace.

Although an individualized risk assessment is typically required to recognize and address potential vulnerabilities to workplace violence, there are some practices that have nearly universal application. For example, employers should never ignore warning signs: Workplace investigations conducted after violent incidents reveal that employees had observed one or more warning signs that violent behavior might occur yet had dismissed the behavior as unimportant or just "weird." Had these employees received proper training in recognizing the precursors to workplace violence, they might have been in the position to report the behavior using company procedures, thereby preventing such incidents from occurring in the first place.

Employers should also consider implementing a zero-tolerance policy for workplace violence. In addition to sending a clear message to their workforce, such a policy could limit employers' potential liability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, along with the majority of federal courts addressing the issue, has asserted that an employer may discipline or terminate an individual who, because of disability, makes a threat against other employees if the same discipline would be imposed on a non-disabled employee engaged in the same conduct. Consistent with this assertion, the lack of a zero-tolerance policy, or even exceptions to such a policy, could result in exposure under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The survey reveals that workplace violence has a definite negative impact on employees as well as on a business's bottom line. Given the sheer number of people in the American workforce, some conflicts, including violent ones, are bound to occur. However, while employers cannot be expected to eliminate all incidents of violence, they can take reasonable steps to prevent them and expedient measures to resolve them. Good business practice, the law, and concern for employee safety all recommend such a proactive policy.

Provided by: HRTutor.com and The Human Equation Email this article Winning the Fight against Workplace Violence By: Martin Salcedo, Esq.
April 2007 was a particularly deadly month for workplace violence. At NASA's Johnson Space Center, an engineer somehow managed to get a gun through security and kill a fellow employee, whom he considered responsible for his mediocre job evaluation, before killing himself. In Troy, Michigan, a former employee of an accounting firm who had been fired a week earlier returned to the office with a shotgun, killing one and seriously wounding two others. What is more disturbing than these and other incidents of workplace violence that have occurred in staggering numbers? Employers who fail to address the issue with effective prevention procedures, programs, and policies. A Survey of Workplace Violence conducted by the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that half of the biggest employers in the United States reported an incident of workplace violence within the 12-month period prior to completing the survey. Nearly five percent of all private business establishments reported an incident of workplace violence during the same time span. Until recently, there have been little reliable data on employers' policies to prevent and address workplace violence; the majority of studies on the topic focused on the issue primarily from the employee‘s or victim's point of view. However, the recent survey provides a different, more relevant perspective for employers. Workplace violence is defined as “violent acts directed towards a person at work or on duty (i.e., physical assaults, threats of assault, harassment, intimidation, or bullying),” and is classified into four types of situations: Criminal—when the perpetrator has no legitimate relationship to the business or its employees and is usually committing a crime in conjunction with the violence; Customer or Client—when the perpetrator has a legitimate relationship with the business and becomes violent while being served by the business (e.g., customers, clients, patients, etc.); Co-Worker—when the perpetrator is an employee, past employee, or contractor who attacks or threatens another employee; and Domestic Violence—when the perpetrator, who has no legitimate relationship to the business but who has a personal relationship with the intended victim, threatens or assaults the intended victim at the workplace (e.g., a family member, spouse, boyfriend, girlfriend, etc.). The survey sampled private industry and both state and local government entities. Utilizing size classifications ranging from employers with fewer than 10 employees to those with 1,000 or more employees allowed for higher confidence levels in the survey results. *Learn how to recognize, prevent and manage sexual harassment in the workplace in accordance with California and federal law.* In addition to establishing the prevalence of workplace violence, the survey identifies some of its most harmful consequences. For example, roughly one-third of the establishments reporting an incident of workplace violence acknowledged that the incident had a negative impact on the workforce, as measured by increases in levels of fear and decreases in employee morale. Incidents of workplace violence also affect a company's bottom line. Increased expenditures for workers' compensation, third-party insurance, absenteeism, injury leave, replacement workers, property damage, and training or prevention costs can all result from workplace violence. Though it may be impossible to eliminate workplace violence entirely, American business culture's method of addressing the problem—or rather of not addressing it—is perhaps even more disturbing and may exacerbate it. Over 70 percent of U.S. workplaces do not have any formal policies or programs that address workplace violence. Only 20 percent of establishments in private industry have provided some employee training on preventing workplace violence, and only 4 percent of all establishments have offered training on domestic violence and its impact on the workplace. Thus, the survey exposes the clear need for employers to fill this glaring gap in training with the goals of making their workplace safer and reducing their risk. Employers must invest the time and resources to train their employees on preventing and responding to incidents of workplace violence because the costs of not addressing the problem are greater and graver. A workplace violence prevention program should train employees to: identify techniques for creating a safe workplace; recognize forms of violence, including intimidation, threatening remarks and behavior, and abuse; recognize the warning signs of violence and know how to intervene appropriately; characterize the three main sources of violence—internal, external, and domestic; develop a contingency plan and procedure to follow after a violent incident occurs; and distinguish between effective and ineffective management techniques relative to workplace violence. Employers should also consider implementing policies and procedures for addressing workplace violence when it does occur; not doing so may increase significantly their liability to employees and customers who fall victim to violence in the workplace. Although an individualized risk assessment is typically required to recognize and address potential vulnerabilities to workplace violence, there are some practices that have nearly universal application. For example, employers should never ignore warning signs: Workplace investigations conducted after violent incidents reveal that employees had observed one or more warning signs that violent behavior might occur yet had dismissed the behavior as unimportant or just "weird." Had these employees received proper training in recognizing the precursors to workplace violence, they might have been in the position to report the behavior using company procedures, thereby preventing such incidents from occurring in the first place. Employers should also consider implementing a zero-tolerance policy for workplace violence. In addition to sending a clear message to their workforce, such a policy could limit employers' potential liability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, along with the majority of federal courts addressing the issue, has asserted that an employer may discipline or terminate an individual who, because of disability, makes a threat against other employees if the same discipline would be imposed on a non-disabled employee engaged in the same conduct. Consistent with this assertion, the lack of a zero-tolerance policy, or even exceptions to such a policy, could result in exposure under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The survey reveals that workplace violence has a definite negative impact on employees as well as on a business's bottom line. Given the sheer number of people in the American workforce, some conflicts, including violent ones, are bound to occur. However, while employers cannot be expected to eliminate all incidents of violence, they can take reasonable steps to prevent them and expedient measures to resolve them. Good business practice, the law, and concern for employee safety all recommend such a proactive policy.
© 2007 HRTutor.com & The Human Equation. All rights reserved. No reproduction, display or sale is permitted without the express written consent of the copyright owner. The Human Equation's newsletters and publications are intended as an information source for the clients and friends of the firm. Their content should not be construed as legal advice, and readers should not act upon the information in these publications without professional guidance. Please note that newsletters and publications that are archived by The Human Equation or HRTutor.com are not updated after initial publication and may not contain the most current information available.