Chapter 26 - § 26.4 • ADVISING EMPLOYERS

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 26.4 • ADVISING EMPLOYERS

Despite the prevalence of workplace violence (and the attendant costs to employers), at least 70 percent of employers lack policies designed specifically to deal with actual or potential violence originating within or outside of the workplace. BLS 2005, supra. Instead, organizations typically rely on conventional disciplinary procedures, such as verbal and written warnings, suspensions, and termination. Two of the major obstacles that hinder the development of effective workplace violence prevention programs are myths that workplace violence will not touch the specific organization and that prevention is expensive. Management in organizations often subscribe to dangerous myths such as, "It will not happen here," and "people just snap," meaning that workplace violence is random. As discussed in the statistics section, acts of workplace violence occur in most organizations, to varying degrees, and no organization remains unaffected. Research has demonstrated that individuals who commit acts of workplace violence have shown warning signs preceding threats or acts of violence. Organizations can train their employees to recognize these warnings signs through fairly economical means, such as online training courses or stand-up training by threat assessment professionals and people skilled in teaching verbal de-escalation techniques and personal safety. Despite the perceptions that workplace violence cannot be dealt with effectively, counsel for employers must advise their clients in developing and implementing policies that identify and attempt to minimize risk factors.

§ 26.4.1—Assessing The Degree Of Risk — Common Risk Factors

Mental health professionals lack a definitive formula for identifying the employees who will go on to perpetuate violence in the workplace. One reason for this is that there are too many variables that fluctuate daily for every individual, therefore making it difficult for professionals to quantify a level of risk for violence for any specified amount of time. However, while no test can accurately predict violence, there are a number of factors associated with violent behavior that have been identified and can be used to assess degrees of risk, rather than to predict a specific act of violence. Managers and security employees within organizations should not be expected to assess the degree of risk that an individual poses to the organization and its employees by themselves. Risk assessment can be greatly aided by consultation with professionals who have been trained specifically to identify risk factors through prior clinical experience. That said, if managers or security employees feel an individual may pose a risk, they ignore those feelings at their peril, and should begin the risk assessment process immediately. In the context of violence prevention, it is dangerous to ignore "gut feelings." Such feelings or fears are often the product of our ingrained survival instincts, and we may encounter such feelings long before we can consciously articulate why we have them. For an excellent discussion of this topic that reads like a thriller, see Gavin De Becker, The Gift of Fear, Ch. 9, "Occupational Hazards," pp. 148-180 (Dell, 1998).

"The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior." U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, The Federal Selection Interview: Unrealized Potential (U.S. Merit Systems Protection Bd., 2003). Research has shown that a significant risk factor for future violence is a past history of violence. Not only does this mean that an individual has previously engaged in violence, but many perpetrators of violence have also been victims of violence themselves, often during childhood. Mantell and Albrecht, Ticking Bombs: Diffusing Violence in the Workplace (Richard D. Erwin Inc., 1994) (Ticking Bombs). Early role models for these individuals may have provided a paradigm for solving disputes through physical force. Cynthia Hobie, MPH, RN, CPNA, "Violence Prevention," 9 J. Ped. Health Care 234-236 (1995). Specific examples of risk factors correlated with workplace violence include a chaotic upbringing characterized by conflict, domestic violence, frequent moves, unemployment, and substance abuse in the family of origin. These factors can contribute to the development of maladaptive coping patterns, leading to poor academic performance, frequent job changes, and interpersonal difficulties with work peers and supervisors. For employers, some of this information may not be readily accessible. However, knowing and documenting an employee's past behaviors and interactions with coworkers in the workplace may demonstrate a pattern of aggressive behavior. Conversely, a decline or change in work performance, personal appearance, hygiene, and interactions with coworkers may also be strong indicators to an employer that the employee may be at risk for engaging in violence directed toward the organization or someone within it.

An employee at risk for perpetrating violence typically has few friends and lacks a supportive family, and a sudden loss of status in the workplace is a common precipitant for violence. The individual's self-esteem often depends heavily on the contribution he or she makes at work. Eugene F. Ferraro, Investigations in the Workplace (Boca Raton: Auerbach Publications, 2006) (Investigations in the Workplace). Therefore, a potential job loss is a significant threat to the employee's identity, purpose, and sense of belonging. Following a layoff or termination, such an employee may believe he or she has little to lose by engaging in retaliatory violence, as the job was the important reason to refrain from aggressive acts. Raymond M. Bergner, "Impulsive Action and Impulsive Persons: A Descriptive and Pragmatic Formulation," 5 Advances in Descriptive Psychology 261-284 (1990). Employees who engage in acts of workplace violence often feel as though they have no other form of recourse to remediate a situation in which they feel as though they have been wronged. For example, most employees recognize several outlets for reporting their concerns, such as talking with supervisors or human resources, reporting complaints via an employee hotline, or even litigation. An employee who poses a threat of workplace violence does not view the conventional reporting methods as effective and, therefore, views violence as his or her only viable solution.

The individual at risk for perpetrating violence also tends to feel persecuted. The employee may portray a sense of entitlement and grandiosity, and, not uncommonly, the individual is argumentative and preoccupied with being right. He or she may have difficulty accepting constructive criticism and frequently will externalize blame for problems arising in the workplace. An aggressor may believe everyone is against him or her and that his or her needs supersede the needs of the organization and its employees. Investigations in the Workplace, supra. The employee may have the greatest difficulty with authority figures and is likely to intimidate others. The potentially violent employee has little tolerance for frustration, and resilience may be further diminished by personal crises such as divorce, bankruptcy, or the threat of job loss.

The employee at risk for perpetrating violence may demonstrate a fascination with weapons, the military, or extremist groups. Larry H. Pastor, M.D., "Initial Assessment and Intervention Strategies to Reduce Workplace Violence," 52 American Family Medicine 1169-74 (1995). This risk factor was supported by the Violence Risk Assessment Guideline created by the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals, which identified risk factors for violence in the workplace as being a fascination with destructive power, to include use of weapons and references to groups, heroes, affiliations, and community attachments. Violence Risk Assessment Guideline: Standard Considerations for Assessing the Risk of Future Violent Behavior (Ass'n of Threat Assessment Professionals, 2005). He or she may be preoccupied with violence, as evidenced by compulsive viewing of movies or reading books with violent themes. Additionally, an individual who has prior training with weapons — for example, from the military — poses a greater potential for violence due to his or her prior experience. Further, the employee may openly discuss the weapons he owns, engaging in use of the weapons, and a plan for executing violence.

An individual prone to...