PREDICTING THE UNPREDICTABLE

Jan 1, 2005 12:00 PM, By J. BRANCH WALTON

No workplace is immune to an incident of violence. Understanding the importance of proactive attitudes, employee education and company policies and procedures on the issue will develop a healthy awareness of workplace violence and its consequences.

Security personnel obviously play a major role in developing and implementing policies and procedures on this topic. But ultimately it is the responsibility of management to ensure the existence and proper application of such policies. The primary goal in intervention, prevention and post-incident management is always the safety of personnel.

Learning from tragedy

Workplace violence is never far from the public eye. Last June, a Granby, Colo., man shot himself after he wrecked more than a dozen buildings with his homemade armor-plated bulldozer. Each of the 14 structures he damaged or destroyed was linked to persons he felt had wronged him in his failed effort involving a zoning feud.

In December, a man shot former Pantera guitarist “Dimebag” Darrell Abbott and three other men to death at a Columbus, Ohio, nightclub.

Although these incidents were not exactly “classic workplace violence incidents,” there are instructive aspects. There were warning signs present, but most became alarming only in hindsight. Forms of mental or emotional stress were observed. Indications of paranoia existed. Both seemed to lack social support of any type. As the investigations continue in these cases, more recognizable signs are sure to be discovered.

Were these acts and other workplace shootings preventable? Were the shooters identifiable ahead of time? The evidence says yes.

Violent behavior is unpredictable. Guessing about what a person might do when stressed out is just that — a guess. Yet we cannot afford to ignore any information received involving threats. The simple choice when one becomes aware of a threatening situation is to either do nothing or take action. No one can prepare for exactly what to do in every potential scenario — each incident is unique. What might be a correct action in one scenario might be a bad choice in another scenario. Still, one must do something, while making the best choices under the circumstances.

Take a team approach

Quarterly meetings involving representatives from security, local law enforcement, and other departments such as human resources, legal and management can be helpful. The goal is to discuss various scenarios and decide what is the legal and the best course of action to take should the incident happen. The meeting should involve research, evaluation, discussion and role-playing.

Now, when a real incident occurs, there is a better chance the best course of action will be taken since similar incidents have already been discussed.

Are workplace homicides reaching epidemic proportions? No. Although it depends somewhat on whose statistics are examined, there are about 120 homicides per year in which disgruntled employees, ex-employees or partners are involved. They have actually decreased by about half since the early 1990s, although they are still happening.

A homicide is the most serious way to seek revenge, although the least frequent. Most disgruntled employees — former employees or customers — who seek revenge, do not resort to homicide. They destroy property, disrupt computer systems, spread rumors, vandalize, harass, steal or contaminate products. These acts can cause heavy financial or emotional losses and are capable of destroying a company or its reputation. They require no less attention than do potential homicides.

When an employee is the victim of a less-serious incident, it is still necessary to intervene. When an employee is targeted by the intimidating problem employee and seeks help from supervisors, they must respond even to seemingly minor incidents. There is no shortage of examples illustrating how a victim can become a perpetrator if management does not respond appropriately.

Another point worth noting; the subordinate is not always the problem. Many times the supervisor is responsible for incidents. This situation can be especially frustrating and difficult for those working for the problem supervisor. A thorough inquiry should be conducted into incidents before placing blame.

Beware of doing nothing

If one elects the “do nothing” choice after becoming aware of a potential problem, the odds are still good that no incident will be attempted. But if something were to happen, there is a likelihood of a major loss in the courtroom. It is not too difficult to imagine the legal wrath that will ensue should a serious incident occur at a workplace and the court realizes management was aware of the threat ahead of time, but chose to ignore it.

Here's an example: An employee of a well-known Fortune 500 company filed a sexual harassment complaint against a male coworker claiming he touched her breasts. The company took action. The investigation resulted in the firing of the offender. The company later rehired the employee. He did the same thing again. The woman filed another complaint. This time the company chose to do nothing. The complainant then took the matter to court and received an $80.2 million award. It is difficult to imagine what the company's explanation might have been for not responding to the incident the second time.

When lawsuits develop as a result of workplace violence incidents, it is usually based on negligence on the part of the employer. It's about what they didn't do more than what they did do. The four most common areas of lawsuits are based upon negligent hiring, negligent retention, negligent employee training and negligent supervision.

Develop a policy

The basic elements of an effective workplace violence policy are listed below. Existing policies and procedures should be reviewed and elements added or adjusted accordingly.

• Know who you hire. Develop standardized pre-employment inquiries.

• Develop a zero tolerance policy towards substance abuse.

• Develop a policy of no firearms, knives or other lethal weapons on property.

• Develop a zero-tolerance, non-harassment policy. Accept no threats, harassment or intimidation by anyone toward anyone else for any reason.

• Train supervisors on topics such as stress management, conflict intervention, problem recognition and solving, etc.

• Develop standardized exit interviews and a “thought-out” termination process.

• Develop a policy on the employer's right to inspect the employee's work area.

• Review the facility's access control policy (how people and things enter and depart the facility).

• Develop and maintain a close liaison with local law enforcement.

• Develop and train a crisis management team.

Have a plan

Intervention is the proper word for the do-something choice. The company probably has a policy on handling fires, robberies, bomb threats and natural disasters such as earthquakes, flooding, hurricanes or tornadoes. It should also have a policy for dealing with incidents of workplace violence.

Studies indicate that about 80 percent or more of businesses and organizations in this country do not have written procedures on how to deal with this issue.

‘It could happen here’

When a company does not have a policy, it is usually because they do not think violent incidents caused by disgruntled employees or former employees are a major concern. This attitude is illustrated profoundly by the frequent post-incident comments uttered by coworkers such as “We never thought it could happen here.”

Studies show that about one-half of these incidents have nothing to do with the workplace environment, but are caused by problems brought to the workplace from the home. Problems such as substance abuse, severe emotional problems or domestic relationship problems are frequently the cause: thus the comment, “No workplace is immune to these incidents.”

Supervisors should be educated on warning signs. Management must understand that no matter how secure they believe their facility is, an incident can happen. Getting employee support for prevention plans is not difficult when appropriate education on the topic is provided.

When domestic becomes corporate

Even seemingly secure facilities such as police stations, courthouses, churches and the U. S. Capitol have been scenes of fatal shootings. The most frequent instigator in the category of “surprise” incidents is a domestic relationship that has gone bad. Many otherwise “normal” people can go off the deep end when involved in a love relationship that has gone bad. Years ago, if an employer heard an employee had been threatened by a lover or former spouse, the typical response was “we can't get involved in the employee's personal problems.” This attitude must change. Employers must intervene in any situation that might endanger their employees or visitors.

A typical domestic scenario might be when a woman who has been abused by her partner finally decides to break off the relationship and move out. The abusing partner then makes the frequently heard comment in situations like this — “If I can't have her, no one can.” If that abusing partner decides to carry out his (or her) threat, it would normally take place at the residence, but since the partner has moved out, the most likely target will now be the place of employment. This is not a hypothetical situation. Such domestic conflicts have resulted in kidnappings, hostage situations and shootings all around the country.

In the case of an employee who is afraid because of threats received from a former partner, is it the policy of the employer not to get involved in the employee's personal life? Or does the employer activate an intervention plan? What specifically is that plan? Does the plan have the input of human resource personnel, the legal department and local law enforcement?

What about those red flags? Many people display signs common to those of past workplace shooters. Even though they may be problem employees in many ways, the vast majority of them will never commit any violent acts. However, when one does “go off the deep end” and attempts or commits an act of violence, it will be someone who has displayed the warming signs. The chances of an incident happening may not be high, but they certainly can happen.

Remember, in any situation requiring an emergency response, your primary concern is always the safety of your employees and customers.

FOR THE RECORD

About the Author

J. Branch Walton, is president of Profit Protection, LLC. Mr. Walton had a 21-year career with the United States Secret Service, retiring as the Special Agent-in-Charge of a field office. Post retirement activity included director of corporate security for Cummins Inc., Columbus, Ind., chief of the FLETC Management Institute, and criminal justice instructor at Indiana University. He is a well-known speaker and author on workplace violence and continues to instruct at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) at Glynco, Ga.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.

This month in Access Control

• Targeting The Customer
• Electronic Pedigrees
• One Hero Among Many
• Who? What? When? Where? Why?
• More from September's issue