|
Workplace violence...keeping employees safe |
|
Marlette M Saul. Rural Telecommunications. Washington: May/Jun
2000.Vol. 19, Iss. 3; pg. 42, 4 pgs |
|
Classification Codes |
6100, 5140, 9190 |
|
Locations: |
United States, US |
|
Author(s): |
Marlette M Saul |
|
Document types: |
Feature |
|
Publication title: |
Rural Telecommunications. Washington: May/Jun
2000. Vol. 19, Iss.
3; pg. 42, 4 pgs |
|
Source type: |
Periodical |
|
ISSN/ISBN: |
07442548 |
|
Text Word Count |
1840 |
|
Abstract (Document Summary) |
|
Recently,
violence in the workplace has received considerable attention in the popular
press and among safety and health professionals. Much of the reason for this
attention is the reporting of data by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Heath and others regarding the magnitude of this problem in US
workplaces. One should look at what is known about fatal and nonfatal
violence in the workplace to determine what is needed for prevention. A
number of factors may increase a worker's risk for workplace assault, and
they include: 1. contact with the public, 2. exchange of money, and 3.
working alone or in small numbers. Many states have passed concealed weapons
laws, further adding to the workplace violence. A priority is to develop a
workplace violence prevention policy to establish a system for documenting
and ultimately eliminating violent incidents in the workplace. |
|
Full Text (1840 words) |
||||||||||
|
Copyright National Telephone Cooperative May/Jun 2000 we have
all seen the headlines: "Gunman kills 1, wounds 3 in Seattle shipyard
shooting"; "Gunman kills 7 in Honolulu office"; and
"Gunman in Atlanta rampage kills himself 12 dead, 12 injured." Recently
violence in the workplace has received considerable attention in the popular
press and among safety and health professionals. Much of the reason for this
attention is the reporting of data by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) and others regarding the magnitude of this problem
in U.S. workplaces. Unfortunately,
sensational acts of coworker violence (which form only a small part of the
problem) are often emphasized by the media to the exclusion of the almost
daily killings of taxicab drivers, convenience store clerks and other retail
workers, security guards, and police officers. These deaths often go
virtually unnoticed, yet their numbers are staggering: 12 percent of the
6,026 on-the-job deaths in 1998 were homicides. Nonfatal
assaults are also of concern to employers and workers alike. In 1997, 21,329
employees needed an average of five days off work to recover from nonfatal
assaults. Death or injury should not be an inevitable result of one's chosen
occupation, nor should these staggering figures be accepted as a cost of doing
business in our society If our responsibility is the safety of those in our
organization, isn't it essential that we prevent the hazard as opposed to
waiting to react to it? Let us
look at what is known about fatal and nonfatal violence in the workplace to
determine what is needed for prevention. Although no definitive strategy will
ever be appropriate for all workplaces, we must begin to change the way work
is done in certain settings to minimize or remove the risk of workplace
violence. We must also change the way we think about workplace violence by
shifting the emphasis from reactionary approaches to prevention, and by
embracing workplace violence as an occupational safety and health issue. Long-term
efforts to reduce the level of violence in U.S. society must address a
variety of social issues such as education, poverty, and environmental
justice. However,
short-term efforts must address the pervasive nature of violence in our
society and the need to protect workers. We cannot wait to address workplace
violence as a social issue alone but must take immediate action to address it
as a serious occupational safety issue. Risk
Factors A number
of factors may increase a worker's risk for workplace assault, and they
include the following: Contact
with the public Exchange
of money Delivery
of passengers, goods, or services Having a
mobile workplace such as a taxicab or police cruiser Working
with unstable or volatile persons in health care, social service, or criminal
justice settings Working
alone or in small numbers Working
late at night or during early morning hours Working in
high-crime areas Guarding
valuable property or possessions Working in
community-based settings The rural areas' workforce is not immune
either. In an August 6, 1999, Washington Past article, a businesswoman
interviewed after the shooting in "a bedroom community to Birmingham,
with most people working in the city and opting to live in this peaceful
community of farmland," stated, "We were all wanting to say that it
couldn't happen here, but it is terrible nowadays - no place is safe
anymore." The Need
for Workplace Precautions The
National Underwriter Company in November 1996, reported that many states have
passed concealed weapons laws, further adding to the workplace violence.
There are two areas of concern. First, the duty of care owed to your customer
on the premises, and, second, the duty of a safe working environment owed to
an employee. An
employer allowing customers on the business premises has to provide a reasonably
safe place. Customers invited to enter the premises for purposes connected
with the business are known as business invitees; the duty owed an invitee by
the owner is to exercise reasonable care to keep the premises reasonably
safe, and to warn of all concealed dangerous conditions. Should the
customer in a state with a concealed weapons law assume the sales clerk
waiting on him or her is armed? Or must the store post warnings? Even if the
local, informed citizen could be presumed to know of such laws, what about a
customer from out of state? No easy answers exist. If an
employee, carrying a concealed weapon, negligently or deliberately shoots a
customer who is legitimately on the business premises, and the employer is
subsequently sued for the injuries suffered by the customer, will a
commercial general liability (CGL) policy afford insurance coverage to the
employer? Whether the employer is liable is debatable, but two facts are
certain: One, the employer will most definitely be brought into any lawsuit
by the injured customer; and, two, the duty of the employer's insurer to
defend the insured employer will be triggered. What about
the employee shot at the workplace, or what of an employee carrying a
concealed weapon to work who shoots a fellow employee, resulting in a claim
against the employer? Can the employer look to an insurance policy for
coverage? Actually coverage in the above situations may be provided by
workers' compensation insurance. The workers' compensation policy offers the
benefits required of the insured by the state workers' compensation law and
employer's liability for bodily injury arising out of and in the course of
employment by the insured. Consider
as well an employer forbidding employees to carry weapons to work. What if an
employee is subsequently attacked and beaten at work? Can that employee then
file suit claiming his ability for self-defense was impaired by the
employer's action? Maybe, maybe not; this is where the situation becomes not
so black and white. Unfortunately
there is no end to the potential problems concealed weapon laws pose for
employers. It is not enough for insured employers to count on general
liability and workers' compensation policies for insurance coverage under
most circumstances. Good risk management calls for preemptive action. A Violence
Prevention Program The first
priority is to develop a workplace violence prevention policy to establish a
system for documenting and ultimately eliminating violent incidents in the
workplace. A written workplace violence policy should clearly indicate a zero
tolerance of violence at work, whether the violence originates inside or
outside the workplace. Just as
workplaces have developed mechanisms for reporting and dealing with sexual
harassment and other inappropriate activities, they must also develop a
workplace violence prevention program, including "threat
assessment" teams to which threats and violent incidents can be
reported. These
teams should include representatives from all departments, including the legal
and public relations departments. The charge to this team is to assess
threats of violence (e.g., to determine how specific a threat is, whether the
person threatening the worker has the means for carrying out the threat,
etc.) and to determine what steps are necessary to prevent the threat from
being carried out. The violence prevention policy should explicitly state the
consequences of making threats or committing acts of violence in the
workplace. A
comprehensive workplace violence prevention policy and program should also
include procedures and responsibilities in the event of a violent incident in
the workplace. This policy should explicitly state how the response team is
to be assembled and who is responsible for immediate care of the victim(s), re-establishing
work areas and processes, and organizing and carrying out stress debriefing
sessions with victims, their coworkers, and perhaps the families of victims
and coworkers. Employee assistance programs, human resources professionals,
and local mental health and emergency service personnel can offer assistance
in developing these strategies. Responding
to a Threat of Violence For a
situation that poses an immediate threat of workplace violence, all legal,
human resources, employee assistance, community mental health, and law
enforcement resources should be used to develop a response. The risk of
injury to all workers should be minimized. If a threat has been made that
refers to particular times and places, or if the potential offender is
knowledgeable about workplace procedures and time frames, patterns may need
to be shifted. For example, a person who has leveled a threat against a
worker may indicate, "I know where you park and what time you get off
work!" In such a
case, it may be advisable to change or even stagger departure times and
implement a buddy system or an escort by security guard for leaving the
building and entering parking areas. The threat should not be ignored in the
hope that it will resolve itself or out of fear of triggering an outburst
from the person who has lodged the threat. If someone poses a danger to
himself or others, appropriate authorities should be notified and action
should be taken. Dealing
with the Consequences Much
discussion has centered on the role of stress in workplace violence. The most
important thing to remember is that stress can be both a cause and an effect
of workplace violence. That is, high levels of stress may lead to violence in
the workplace, but a violent incident in the workplace will most certainly
lead to stress, perhaps even to post-traumatic stress disorder. The data
from the National Crime Victimization Survey presents compelling evidence
(more than a million workdays lost as a result of workplace assaults each
year) for the need to be aware of the impact of workplace violence. Employers
should therefore be sensitive to the effects of workplace violence and
provide an environment that promotes open communication; they should also
have in place an established procedure for reporting and responding to
violence. Although
no single intervention strategy is appropriate for all workplaces, immediate
action should be taken to reduce the toll of workplace homicide on our
nation's workforce. This message still holds true and applies not only to
workplace homicide, but to all workplace violence. From the
perspective of the witness/victim and their families, the ramification of
workplace violence is devastating. The loss of human life can never be
replaced. The emotional trauma of being involved and witnessing an act of
violence cannot be described in words. After violence has occurred, many
valuable employees will never return to work. Clearly,
violence is pervasive in U.S. workplaces, accounting for 6,026 on-thejob
deaths in 1998 and 21,329 nonfatal assaults in 1997. The National Institute
of Occupational Safety and Health continues to pursue research and prevention
efforts to reduce the risk of workplace violence for the nation's workers.
The murder of an average of 20 workers each week is unacceptable and should
not be considered the cost of doing business in our society.
|