A Paradigm Shift in Thinking and Philosophy of Workplace Violence Prevention is Needed…

Archive for the ‘Disgruntled Employee’ Category

A Paradigm Shift in Thinking and Philosophy of Workplace Violence Prevention is Needed…

Posted on: July 8th, 2024

Preventing the next Workplace tragedy requires a paradigm shift or a change in thinking how Workplace Violence Prevention is viewed by senior management, HR & Security. It is not caused because of mental health, it is caused by contributing factors left unabated, perceptions and lack luster leadership can provoke by its reluctance to intervene swiftly.

Organizations can benefit by organizing a prevention initiative around a process – leadership involvement, integrated, collaborated policy, plans and procedures, coordinated resources and effort and communicated & well executed prevention strategies organization wide. Process and strategy are essential (LIC3E)

Some think Active Shooter training is prevention. I do not! I see the active shooter incident as a failed prevention commitment. Preventing another tragedy requires an understanding of prevention as it relates to the organization and its culture.

Once an employee is allowed to transition to thoughts of rationalization and justification of retaliation the rationale projects the actions. In short, the Active Shooter is a failed prevention program or the lack of one.

California Workplace Violence Prevention law 553 is a huge step in the right direction. It aligns hand in glove with the Workplace Violence Prevention philosophy & Factors I have shared over the past 22 years.

My Consulting Strategy is LIC3E (Leadership, Integration, Collaboration, Coordination, Communication and Execution) and the Factors are ARC (Accountability, Responsibility and Consequences), ACE (Assumption, Convenience & Expedience) and PREP (Proactive, Responsive, Engagement & Practical thinking tied to violence prevention and violence response policy, plans and procedures.

Training alone is not the answer but it can make a huge difference when it is experience-centered and knowledge-based. Quality training in alignment with supporting plans, protocols and procedures is. It effectively institutionalizes the effort through management commitment and investment and employee involvement. https://bit.ly/3MKKN4a

#CEO #Compliance #Legal #HR#workplace #SHRM #HumanResources #RiskManagement #workplaceviolenceprevention #activeshooter #Security #Safety #EHS #PHADA #ATAP #SmallBusinesses

About the Author:

Felix P. Nater is a Certified Security Consultant (CSC) as awarded by the International Association of Professional Security Consultants (IASPSC). He is a nationally recognized workplace violence prevention specialist and has co-authored his first book: Combating Workplace Violence: Creating and Maintaining Safe Work Environments. Felix enjoys helping organizations identify contributing factors that lead to violence before it escalates. He knows that achieving a comprehensive workplace violence prevention program takes supportive strategies, process, policy, plans and procedures and effective training that goes beyond the standard list of statistics, other people’s quotes, other organization’s practices in designing worksite and workforce specific training. Communication through quality training is essential in developing leaders who understand the philosophy and employees who are part of the solution. Felix knows that workplace violence prevention is an ongoing process involving multiple intervention strategies. https://naterassociates.com/testimonials/

10 Workplace Violence Prevention TIPs to Manage, Prevent, and Improve the Workplace Safety and Security Culture

Posted on: May 20th, 2024

Creating a Workplace Culture of Safety and Security grows from within by leaders who set the example. It is not mandated. It is exemplified. It reflects people seeing the organization as “walking the walk and talking the talk.” People care about people. This is when organizational leaders through supervisors and others, lead by example by showing, correcting, and educating before there’s the surprise attack. Now is a better time than ever to review your capability to combat the threat of workplace violence every day. Workplace Violence Prevention is an ongoing process involving multiple intervention strategies. The active shooter is a failed workplace violence prevention program.

Provide some level of assessment and evaluation of employee-reported incidents of violence to determine the need to conduct an official investigation. Ineffective responses to employee concerns and complaints erode trust, and confidence and disrupt workplace performance efficiencies. Such practices can lead to employees taking the “law” into their own hands. By that I mean if nothing is done about it, they will do what is necessary to protect themselves.

Establish a “Reporting Policy” and provide avenues and opportunities for employees to report safety and security concerns, observations, and victimization. Having a clearly defined, credible reporting, tracking, and monitoring system provides reassurances that their reports and complaints are taken seriously. In other words, not fallen on deaf ears. Organizations can reduce incidents and avoid civil liability allegations in cases of serious injuries or fatalities by engaging in proactive measures that promote accountability and responsibility.

Holding supervisors and managers responsible and accountable for responding, managing, and processing initial employee complaints can have an influence. There should not be any discretion at this level to promote an organizational commitment to workforce safety, security, and risk management.

Employers must lead from the front. They must ever be mindful that victims are reluctant to step forward if there is credibility in reporting concerns. Essential witnesses withhold their observations out of fear of retaliation. Such instances can become problematic. As problem employees they are identified as troublemakers and problem children, a term commonly used in schools. Students are commonly referred to as “problem children” becoming victims of student bullies and other forms of harassment. At work, however, adult workers are denied vacation choices, requested days off are also denied. Sudden changes in assignments including change of assigned area. Bullying of this nature is always a tool of the “rogue” supervisor-manager who feels the negative attention.

Prejudging and undermining employee reports place them at risk by failing to address the information promptly and thoroughly, contributing to perceptions of disparate treatment. Unfair prejudgment of employee disputes and situations results in long-term discord between coworkers and management.

Be sensitive to employee working conditions and the impact of established policies, plans, or procedures on employee perceptions of unfairness especially when the employee feels victimized. Learn to recognize and be alert to early warning signs of potential problems because of personnel changes, reorganizations, impending business decisions, mergers, and acquisitions.

Make employee encounters with management a dignified process, especially during the disciplinary and termination experiences. Giving employees the benefit of the doubt by treating them with dignity and respect diminishes stress. Know the impact of heavy-handedness. Giving detailed explanations and allowing room for feedback reduces anxiety and tension.

Consider the value of forming a workplace violence prevention team or the more formalized threat assessment team to serve as the company incident management teams in monitoring and tracking reports that de-escalate future problems. Create a team that is representative of key members of the organizational leadership team with authority to act.

Don’t be afraid to dig for root causes, conducting a root cause analysis or critical vulnerability assessment can yield interesting discoveries before arriving at culpability. The Zero Tolerance Policy should not be used as a “Termination” Weapon. Being ever mindful that acts of workplace violence tend to be emotional and reactionary to events to grievances and perceptions of unfairness. Keep clarity on reality. Stay focused on potential “Triggers” and avoid assumptions.

Bring the HR & Security department together as a human resource – security collaborative team in a way of sharing information that hastily mitigates risk and makes exigent decisions. There is no excuse for the disgruntled employee to transition into volatile thoughts of homicidal retaliation. This concept can be a value-added benefit during the initial assessment and evaluation phase of employee reports and complaints. If the police are called, be prepared to manage the support they provide. Avoid turning over the human resource-security matter to local police who might not offer the best advice in every situation. While coordination is recommended, having an Emergency Action Plan for these situations ensures an efficient hand-on in hostile emergency matters until the police are on location.

About Felix Nater, CSC President & Chief Security Consultant at Nater Associates Ltd. is a Certified Security Consultant, and trained Workplace Violence Prevention Consultant, Advisor and Coach to manufacturing, processing, production, and utility employers who helps them identify issues that lead to workplace violence. He helps organizations assess and evaluate their workplace violence prevention -security posture, implement and manage workplace security strategy with an emphasis on workplace violence prevention. He has been involved in this work for over 30 years as a Workplace Violence Prevention Specialist, starting out as a U.S. Postal Inspector having diversified expertise in criminal, security, administrative, training and program management experiences. He is the main author of the book with David Van Fleet & Ella Van Fleet entitled: Combating Workplace Violence: Creating & Maintaining Safe Work Environments. bit.ly/3odv3NA

Office: 7040784-0260

Workplace Violence is More Than Gun Violence

Posted on: February 8th, 2024

Whether you are a supervisor, production manager, operations manager, HR manager, facility manager, safety manager, security manager or CEO your understanding of what constitutes workplace violence is crucial. The lack of understanding can contribute to a misplaced focus.

Are you thinking that workplace violence is about the employee who threatens or conducts gun violence? What about the employee who is the victim of harassment, verbal abuse, bullying, dictatorial supervision or some other aggressive behavior that intimidates an employee? What about the employee who is the victim of shoving, pushing, kicking and jostling? Equally important are you of the opinion that workplace violence cannot be prevented?

The understandable focus on gun violence by management seems to overshadow employee concerns and expectations associated with every day psychological value. The 2023 Work in America Survey sheds light on the critical role workplaces play in psychological health and well-being. https://www.apa.org/pubs/reports/work-in-america/2023-workplace-health-well-being

OSHA Federal reports an average of 2 million reported incidents a year involving fights, threats, harassment, name calling, verbal abuse and sabotage. Should the data be an indicator of concern? What about your workplace violence prevention training and reporting? Are they credible? Perception is often reality. Would you feel comfortable representing your role during an OSHA Inspection or as a witness in a civil liability lawsuit? You may be surprised to discover that a company or employee that does the right thing without the right policy in place can become liable in lawsuits filed by other employees or even the perpetrator.

“It doesn’t matter whether you are a small, medium or large business or organization you should have a WORKPLACE VIOLENCE PREVENTION POLICY AND PLAN supported by quality training”. The training must address what employees must do, why and how. Every Organization Needs to Address Workplace Violence so that employees can describe it and report it.

The plan at a minimum must explain the prohibited behaviors, reporting, accountabilities, responsibilities, consequences, protocols, and procedures. Small and midsize businesses must not dismiss the importance of having their plans thinking they are immune from workplace violence or not subject to an Unannounced OSHA Inspection. The risks are higher when it comes to recovery and business continuity from a workplace shooting incident, but other forms of workplace violence are toxic to productivity and teamwork.

HR Managers, facility and safety professionals at every workplace should develop a policy on violence prevention that includes:

Employee training and creating an emergency action plan.
Conducting simulation training exercises.
Engaging in interactive discussions.
Adopting and enforcing a zero-tolerance policy toward workplace violence
Deploying safety technologies in reducing workplace violence.

https://www.nsc.org/work-safety/safety-topics/workplace-violence

WORKPLACE VIOLENCE PREVENTION should be comprehensive organizational initiative but not complicated based on the type of organization. Here are 10 practical workplace violence prevention tips that will energize your workplace prevention efforts.

Review and update the Workplace Violence Prevention and Harassment Polices annually.
Train supervisors in their role to evaluate, assess and document employee reports.
Review the incidents in a timely manner to identify patterns, repeat offenders and gaps in the policy.
Train employees in workplace violence prevention.
Inform employees that hasty reporting activates the organization’s workplace violence prevention protocols and procedures more efficiently.
Review visitor management and access control policy and procedures for vulnerabilities.
Review the domestic violence/intimate partner policy to ensure employees are familiar with the policy, services & resources available.
Train supervisors & managers on the leader’s role in maintaining safe workplaces.
Test your emergency evacuation plan and hostile intruder/active shooter threat procedures.
Conduct on site work-site specific assessments of employee work settings and operations.

Remember, Compliance is a good thing, but it is not prevention. Crisis Management is not prevention. Threat Assessment supports prevention. Think of Workplace Violence Prevention as your workplace security insurance blanket.

The workplace violence prevention mission can be a shared responsibility. Create a robust, agile, and proactive (RAP) process in managing aggression and at-risk situations. Integration and collaboration of limited resources can maximize effort.

About: Felix Nater, CSC Security Management Consultant helping organizations avoid mistakes that lead to workplace violence by implementing and managing workplace security strategy with a focus on workplace violence prevention. Felix is a recent published co-author of Combating Workplace Violence: Creating and Maintaining Safe Work Environments http://bit.ly/3odv3NA His website is https://naterassociates.com

Workplace Violence Prevention and Violence Response Planning Considerations

Posted on: March 21st, 2023

Is your workplace violence response plan to an active assailant something of concern to you? You no longer read or hear frequent news reports about the “Going Postal” threat anymore. The Postal Service recognized it needed to take preventive measures.

Why?

Could it be that initiative-taking measures were taken and continued today to manage the threat? What is your organization’s mindset relative to the active assailant threat? Is the active assailant taken for granted as someone not employed at your workplace or school and incapable of such violence? Is your school relying on technology and the presence of school resource officers to be your school’s first line of prevention measures? Today as more incidents of disgruntled persons hit the news waves are you questioning or doubting your readiness? If you are, that is a commendable reaction. The next question is – what will you do about it?

Has Covid-19 confused the thinking in how to classify the workplace security threat because of remote work or work from home scenarios? Perhaps you can keep the continuity in perspective by adding workforce protection and modifying policy, plans and procedures? We don’t need to get too complicated but, we have to be realistic and practical.

It seems that every time you turn the news on there’s a report of a workplace shooting, mall shooting, parking lot shooting or school or college shooting all that seem to strike a sense of fear. But workplaces need not fear when there’s an investment in worker safety and security based on a management commitment that shares both a legal and moral sense of duty and responsibility. A prepared workplace can withstand the public outcry and legal scrutiny better than one that relies on Myths or Concerns out of fear of arousing employee concerns.

Workplaces and Employees don’t have to wait for the day when they hear gun shots or screams of a knife or machete wielding person running amok in their workplaces to begin taking robust, agile and proactive™ prevention and violence response measures.

Prepare NOW for the WHEN and not for the IF IT HAPPENS worst case scenario through proactive, responsive, engaging practical (PREP violence prevention and violence response policy, plans and procedures. When we hear about incidents of workplace violence, it often seems like something that never could happen in our workplaces, until it does. Will we be prepared? Just because it has not happened at your workplace does not mean you should expose your workforce to unnecessary risk or your workplace unnecessary liability.

When speaking of the workplace, we refer to every work environment your workforce might be performing their assigned duties. So that means, considering the risks your workforce might be exposed to as a field inspector, sales personnel, repair and utility personnel, medical services providers, social workers, truck drivers, taxi services and security personnel. Workplace violence prevention means addressing the potential risks the workforce might be exposed to wherever they might be.

When you go to the doctor for your annual physical examination you trust that your doctor knows what he’s doing and asks you the right questions. You do not challenge or question her diagnosis and recommendations though you should. So when was the last time you had a workplace physical (security) examination; a security assessment to assess and evaluate your workplace violence prevention, violence response measures and security posture? As a trusted advisor, your concerns are my priorities. As one healthcare facility manager Client once said, “Felix, thank you for pointing us in the right direction. Your recommendations following your assessment have taken us in a direction we needed to go”.

If you say you have never had a security assessment, you might have an existing vulnerability or security gap that a disgruntled person might exploit. You might be investing in a thoughtful strategy that could be redirected to achieve greater benefit. Do not let fear direct your ways. Just know that as an organization there are protective measures you can plan for that include plans and procedures in immediate protective measures and safe harbor rooms. If you have not had the physical security examination you probably don’t know that you can’t alert your employees, communicate with your employees or know anything about the police response and police encounter.

Preparation is key. That’s why I have coined a key word called: PREP (Prepared, Responsive, Engaged and Practical) as the foundation of a credible workplace violence prevention and violence response plan.

Here are 5 Things I recommend you should do TODAY. If you want to increase your workplace security posture against a threat of routine incidents of workplace violence or homicidal violence, do the following immediately:

Dispel the myths. Do not say it will never happen here. Do not say we do not have a problem with workplace violence. Remember, it is the problem that you do not know about that can escalate right under your eyes.
Conduct a Workplace Violence Prevention Critical Vulnerability Assessment ™ of your Workplace Violence Prevention posture. (Includes review of the policy, plans, procedures, and protocols)
Conduct a Violence Response Assessment/Audit. (Includes review of the physical security layout to identify gaps in the security posture, alert, notification and communication system, potential safe harbor rooms and evacuation routes.)
Roll out Violence Response and Safe Harbor Room Procedures and Guidelines. (Includes immediate protective measures, identification of safe harbor room, organizational responsibilities, safe harbor room configuration, alert, notification and communications instructions, role of security forces, police response and police encounter.)
Train the entire workforce on the Violence Response and Safe Harbor Room Procedures and Guidelines. This type of training should be facilitator led. If logistic concerns challenges facilitator led training, every effort must be made to have a subject matter expertise can answer employee questions and address their concerns.

But please do not worry because if you have gotten down this far in the post you definitely care and are concerned. You have been proactive and were seeking to know what more you could do. Well, because you have been proactive your Workplace Violence Prevention Critical Vulnerability Assessment ™ should have identified vulnerability gaps and identified ways to improve your overall workplace violence prevention and security awareness posture, even your business continuity and continuation of operations plans.

About the Author: Felix P. Nater, CSC the President/Owner Nater Associates, Ltd. a security management consulting practice coaching and consulting organizations on workplace security strategy with a focus on workplace violence prevention is a Certified Security Consultant (CSC) as awarded by the International Association of Professional Security Consultants (IAPSC). Nater Associates, Ltd. celebrated 20 years as a security management consultant. He prides himself on understanding and interpreting the issues around the threat of workplace violence, workplace violence prevention and violence response in the delivery of his services. His motto continues to be “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

Can Human Resources Play an Enhanced Role in Managing the Threat of Workplace Violence Through Supervisor Intervention?

Posted on: June 22nd, 2022

Human Behavior is a critical component of preventing workplace violence. So how can employers improve their capability to reduce the threat of violence before it escalates to the homicidal acts we have seen recently. ASK ALAN: How To STOP Workplace Violence? – (alan-adler.com)

May and June were a period of horrific workplace and public shootings. On May 14, 2022, there was the TOPS Market Mass Shooting in Buffalo, New York. Then at the start of the Memorial Day weekend there was the Robb Elementary School Shooting at Uvalde, Texas raising questions about the school’s lock down response plans and the police department’s violence response. On June 1st, there was a shooting at an Oklahoma Hospital involving a distraught patient complaining of back pain following the surgery a week earlier who killed the surgeon, and three others. Can poor communications a contributing factor?

Organizations may be waiting too long before intervening in preventing the escalation of potential problems because of confusion in not understanding the meaning of workplace violence and workplace violence prevention.

Workplace violence is not just the homicidal act of violence by the disgruntled current or former employee or the intimate partner violence spillover into the workplace. But it is the everyday variety of harassment, verbal abuse, intimidation, threats, pushing, shoving, kicking, and fighting, which OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) defines as nonfatal acts of workplace violence.

Does Human Resources (HR) have a role in training supervisors as a workplace violence prevention strategy?

If you view workplace violence prevention as an ongoing process involving multiple intervention strategies, then you agree employers must maximize their internal capabilities early on. It does not require a complex process, but it does require senior management commitment and investment that allows for training in the recognition of warning signs, risk factors and swift intervention.

So, can Human Resources play a role in making supervisors a workplace violence prevention strategy?

I think so! Supervisors can be an effective part of the workplace violence prevention strategy if HR can play a role in providing them training in how to manage the potentially hostile workplace on aspects of workplace violence, workplace violence prevention, technical expertise and consultation that helps them determine what course of administrative action is most appropriate in specific situations.

My position is that there is NEVER an excuse for a supervisor not knowing their workforce, or for failing to recognize their responsibility in providing a work environment that is RESPECTFUL, SAFE AND CONSISTENT in its handling of both good and poor performers as well as in managing and maintaining appropriate employee behaviors. Could this be asking too much when one considers whether the workforce trust supervisors and even considers them part of the problem?

It is my belief that HR can play an initiative-taking, constructive role in building trust and confidence in the workforce? They can improve the perception that HR overlooks the minor incidents that contribute to the daily victimization of employees reluctant to report in avoiding having a bullseye painted on their chest. Employees believe that HR waits for the escalation as proof of the premediated behavior and overlooks the psychological damage the day-to-day exposure has. Training supervisors in the role they can take to address such behaviors a strategy worth pursuing before it is too late.

Can supervisors be effective in creating positive communications between management and workforce by developing an empathetic leadership style that promotes trust and confidence in the hearts and minds of employees? Employees want to be a part of the solution but view supervisors as part of the problem.

While the questions are many does it make sense for HR to play a role in training supervisors to understand their resources in assessing, evaluating, and addressing the threat of workplace violence, including use of Alternatives to Discipline and use of Alternative Dispute Resolution process, and receiving advice, and counsel regarding personnel and labor law regulations? What do we have to lose now? Despair is not a solution.

The overriding goal of supervisor involvement is to make civility and decency in the workplace as critical as the paycheck. Shouldn’t the objective at this stage be the need to upgrade and humanize the way in which employers deal with all employees every day rather than just to focus narrowly on how to respond to the one who has made threats; is confrontational, disruptive or a disciplinary problem? So why cannot HR enhance supervisor prevention capability through their visibility by training supervisors to be the solution.

Long-term planning to improve employee morale pays in human terms. Studies have shown that companies with effective grievance redress, harassment procedures also reported lower rates of workplace violence and workplace conflict.

While the intention of the Zero Tolerance Policy is well known, how effective is it really when discipline is the perceived outcome. How does an employer motivate an employee to report observations of a co-worker who might be his friend or Godparent to their child if the outcome is discipline and/or separation?

Despite the perception problems, employers must pursue alternative prevention strategies if they are to stem the alarming rise of the homicidal act of workplace violence in recognizing the employer’s duty and responsibility to provide for a safe and secure workplace. A workforce that is convinced that working from home is not as risky as working from the office, plant, warehouse or being shot in the parking lot.

Are there any undocumented obstacles and hurdles? HR needs to be viewed as the Champion of workforce safety and security if they are to dismantle negative perceptions when it comes to workplace violence prevention and zero tolerance.

As an ongoing workplace violence prevention strategy HR can play a role by assisting, assessing, and investigating allegations of workplace violence in the initial stages to address root causes and contributing factors? Do you have an answer?

Workforce patience is already stretched enough. It might be time for Human Resources to step up as leaders in a unique way if not in this way. If supervisors are called upon to discipline those who cross the line of civility, why can’t they be called upon to serve as day-to-day mediators and observers. Workplace Violence Is Unfortunately On The Rise Felix Nater Discusses Best Practices Regarding Recent Office Shooting – EIN Presswire (einnews.com)

Supervisors can be trained to recognize dramatic changes in employees such as mood swings, changes in appearance, time and attendance problems, co-worker interactions, and work performance.

Felix P. Nater, CSC is a retired Postal Inspector and security management consultant who partners with organizations to help implement and manage workplace security with an emphasis on workplace violence prevention and active shooter and the workplace mindset. He has spent the last 20 years working with organizations interested in improving, changing or enhancing their internal capabilities. www.naterassociates.com

How to Improve the Strategic Value of Workplace Violence Prevention

Posted on: January 2nd, 2022

Happy 2022! May it be your best year ever.

In the late winter of 2020, Hanna Hasl-Kelchner asked me to join her on her podcast, Business Confidential Now. A lot has happened over 2021 that has raised the level of concern, so we decided to reissue the interview in this format to get attention and implementation of some practical solutions. We had a great conversation then if you’d like to listen to the entire episode. We’ve decided to include short snippets of each subtopic for your listening convenience as I expand upon each subtopic to make the case for proactive engagement, awareness, preparedness, and proactivity as well as training in violence response (active shooter and police response). Listen to the full episode here. https://bit.ly/3f6QhUN

There were three topics of particular interest that Hanna focused on that really emphasized the interview and aligned closely with the main theme and what we talked about during the show. Here they are:

You could be the subject of workplace violence and not know it. OSHA has definitions of workplace violence to help employers formulate policies and captures the incidents under 4 specific Categories of Workplace Violence. Let’s address what workplace violence covers. There are a lot of employees out there who do not know they are victims of workplace violence and who might assume because they do not know and not to report it.

Most workplaces to include school places do not truly understand the integration of workplace violence prevention as an organizational function. Workplaces operate believing that it can’t happen to them. They really should not think like that simply because workplaces and their workforce are a microcosm of our society. No business whether a small, medium, or large employer is immune from the reality of workplace violence.

Whatever the size or status of your workplace, each workplace should have a workplace violence prevention policy supported by a workplace violence prevention program. It doesn’t have to be complicated or complex, but it should cover specific aspects of the threats and risks your workplace might be exposed to or experiences. The threats and risks run the gamut from physical violence to emotional and traumatic violence otherwise known as psychological violence.

Because under the OSHA Duty to Warn Clause, employers are required to provide for a safe workplace violence free of any hazard that might lead to violence, they are expected to introduce workplace violence prevention policies and risk mitigation measures that include training and security measures.

The threat of workplace violence is a real and present danger that does not always have to include physical violence. The most frequent incidents are nonfatal such as verbal abuse such as verbal abuse which include name calling, insults, racial and ethnic slurs, taunting, harassment, bullying, sexual harassment, intimidation, threats, and nuisance behavior.

The idea is to address these so-called minor or nonfatal incidents as quickly as possible to avoid escalation. Stop the banter and drop the excuses. OSHA annually documents approximately 2,000 reported incidents of what is commonly referred to as nonfatal and nonfatal incidents like an active shooter or homicide during a physical assault. The objective is to establish a proactive workplace violence prevention mindset designed to inform the workforce through a policy that clarified what constitutes workplace violence, addresses mutual responsibilities, and speaks to the consequences for breaching the policy. Ultimately the objective is to avoid is the disgruntled employee whom you walk out the front door from returning through the unsecured back door. https://youtu.be/eA79GElBktg

9 Potential workplace violence warning signs you need to know. While there are a host of red flags and warning signs that may apply to any type of workplace, my recommendation is to keep this subject as simple and practical as possible to encourage to overcome the fear of reporting his or her observation. Reporting of the coworker of misconduct is a difficult decision for the employee who relates to the problem and may be empathetic. It doesn’t mean they tolerate what they see, hear, or assume but that they do not want to be wrongly accused or might be concerned about their personal safety.

The purpose of workplace violence prevention training is to create a compelling training experience that encourages reporting based on red flags or warning signs and impact to workplace safety and security. The goal is early reporting and swift intervention whether it applies to an employee observation or suspicious non-employee report. Helping the workforce to appreciate the value of reporting is essential in gaining their cooperation.

Reporting can be anonymous or for attribution – just report it. One doesn’t have to be perfect or accurate only that it gets reported. Go with gut feelings supported by your training, suspicions, observations, and the recognized behaviors. Don’t put off the observation by rationalizing and justifying what was heard or seen. Waiting is not an option in addressing suspicious behavior. We want to prevent escalation, prevent an assault, prevent problems by calling management’s attention appropriately and swiftly. https://youtu.be/zzajBm9w6qE

Why workplace violence prevention doesn’t need to be expensive. Small and midsize organizations lament over the thought because it will cost too much money and time for something that has never happened before. There is an old Lee Myles Transmission commercial – “pay me now or pay me later”. Mandated court spending is a lot more than voluntary investment in prevention. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”.

Human Resources and Security Directors have a corporate responsibility that in many instances hampers their ability to stay on top of workplace violence prevention. Larger organizations can have a workforce spread about in multiple locations over many states and countries. Expense is a legitimate pushback on whether to hire or train their workforce onsite but not an area where the courts have been sympathetic to. Being resourceful means doing more within your budgets. Conducting employee surveys can yield incredible results. Don’t worry that will create more work. The worst witness in a civil liability lawsuit is the employee who knew but was never asked. responsibility.

I say if you have knowledgeable resources, and your confidence level is high, relying on your internal expertise to develop basic content and present appropriate training content with credibility will go a long way. That person could be a supervisor, the HR Professional. security manager or the safety manager. The truth is that overcoming the arguments of limited resources and time, creativity and imagination can make the workplace violence prevention initiative a cost-effective workforce safety and security investment. Doing it yourself does not have to be sophisticated – just do it and you’d be surprised at the results. Keep it simple.

Resourcefulness is the tip of creativity and innovation. Organizations that do not employee security managers can be creative in training supervisors. As leaders within organizations supervisors by virtue of their reach and accessibility by the workforce can make the difference. Used as trainers, supervisors can highlight areas of specific concern among their teams daily or as situations dictate. As leaders, supervisors can be the first line of defense in responding to employee reports and complaints, assessing incidents and conduct workplace specific assessments. They are in a strategic position to act swiftly and proactively to observations and employee reports.

Speaking of cost effective, the greatest tool that gets the most for the investment is the new employee orientation. It can be a time where the security and human resources can maximize this tool to engage the new employee in articulating the workplace violence prevention policy, explaining prohibited behavior, discussing situations, and emphasizing the value of responsibilities in reporting. This is an opportunity where company and the new employee establish a positive connection. Assumptions are dismantled through clarity. Remember, workplace violence is a microcosm of our society. Referring the new employee to the Employee Handbook will not clarify their assumptions of what is and isn’t.

As organizations grow in capacity or operate as larger organizations resourcefulness empowers innovation and creativity in the use of personnel. With a lot of employees, a lot of teams, and a lot of people and departments they can allocate, commit, and invest internal use of their workforce to conduct assessments, evaluate risks, respond to incidents more proactively and assertively.

Larger organizations and maybe midsize ones might have the flexibility to roll out dedicated workplace violence prevention personnel to ensure that things are moving along the right direction in support of the policy. They may even consider workplace violence prevention as a project, assigning a ‘project manager” assigned who makes sure needed follow up gets done effectively in alignment with the policy, guidelines, procedures, and timeliness.

“Terminations” are a necessary business function, but a difficult management decision that organizations must make. How they are conducted determines the outcome. Having a separation or termination protocol in place gives aid and comfort to all involved that equity and justice are the objective of ensuring the employee is treated with dignity and respect as part of a professional process.

Workplace Violence Prevention is really a leadership function that facilitate activities in setting direction, aligning the effort, and coordinating teams and people to ensure they’re moving in that direction, motivating, and inspiring people at their core. Avoiding escalation and reducing negative emotions by containing problems and minimizing conflict is a leadership responsibility juries in civil cases like to see are in place. Leadership is the function that empowers any organization to maximize the moral and ethical responsibility to provide for a safe and secure workplace. Prevention is really an engaged workforce in organizations that integrates the effort, coordinates the process of prevention into a daily seamless effort through quality training assumed within the company culture. https://youtu.be/tNaQRAW0f0w

Listen to the full episode here. https://bit.ly/3f6QhUN

Guest Blogger Dawn Marie Westmoreland and Felix P. Nater Discuss the “WHY”, “WHAT” and “How” of Workplace Violence Prevention

Posted on: August 11th, 2021

This edition of News & Tips to Combat Workplace Violence – the Blog highlights Dawn Marie Westmoreland as the Guest Blogger discussing the “WHY”, “WHAT” and “HOW” of workplace violence and workplace violence prevention with Felix P. Nater, CSC, Nater Associates, Ltd. Dawn celebrates her one-year anniversary of her syndicated radio show, “The Empowered Whistleblower”. Dawn has featured yours truly on the “The Empowered Whistleblower” Show on previous occasions.

The interview focused on tragic workplace homicides specifically the April 15, 2021, shooting incident at the FedEx plant, Indianapolis, Indiana. This senseless incident resulted in the deaths of 8 coworkers and 5 injured totaling 13 victims who were innocently doing their respective jobs. Though this shooting incident was reported by the media and local police as an active shooter, this shooting was actually classified as a mass shooting.

What’s sad is that by April 2021, April was a deadly month of workplace homicides. There were about 26 victims of workplace shootings. Unfortunately, that’s not all. As of July 31, 411 mass shootings fitting the Mass Shooting Tracker project criterion, leaving 437 people dead and 1,688 injured, for a total of 2,125 total victims, some including the shooter(s). So I ask the question, WHY is there a penchant for violence?

(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2021)

WHY? Most businesses do not report workplace violence that does not result in deaths or serious injuries. That’s due to lack of communication, fear of taking action, and of course, lack of awareness. But the numbers are hard to ignore regardless.

Dawn thought the message was appropriate and applicable in reminding our audience that as employees we all deserve to work in safe and respectful work environments and that proactive measures can be taken to reduce the threat and minimize the risks.

Dawn Marie Westmoreland, who has 30 years’ experience working in HR, is not new to workplace conflict and personnel security threats. So, this edition is ripe in presenting an important opportunity to bring up that while it was Fedex then, it could be any workplace or educational institution that could be victimized in similar fashion tomorrow.

No workplace or educational institution is immune from the threat of workplace violence. How prepared are you really? Is the workplace active shooter an organizational prevention response or an unfortunate reaction to an unforeseen event?

WHAT? OSHA reports that there are about 2 million reported incidents of workplace violence annually. By workplace violence we mean nonviolent acts (verbal abuse, name calling, harassment, bullying, intimidation, and threats) and violent acts (throwing objects with intent to injure, fist fights, sexual assault, lethal force such as armed robbery and active shooter, bomb threats, and terrorist acts).

Dawn’s objective during the radio show, which was also videotaped, was to bring out the value of workplace violence prevention in taking proactive measures that help an organization understand prevention as a philosophy, forging a mindset that understand the approach to take to resolve issues, reduce conflict, deescalate incidents, minimize risk and roll out hasty intervention measures.

We can reduce active shooting incidents and mass shooting fatalities and keep employees safe by taking workplace violence head on. HOW?

By assessing their worksites, employers can identify methods for reducing the likelihood of incidents occurring. OSHA believes that a well-written and implemented workplace violence prevention program, combined with engineering controls, administrative controls, and training can reduce the incidence of workplace violence in both the private sector and federal workplaces.

OSHA encourages employers to develop additional methods as necessary to protect employees in high-risk industries.” Source: https://lnkd.in/d9mWD38

Click the link to see and listen to Dawn Marie Westmoreland interview Felix P. Nater, CSC, Security Management Consultant. https://lnkd.in/dh4wr2q

Are Your Perceptions of Workplace Violence Accurate? – Guest Blog by Michael Dorn, December 2, 2020

Posted on: December 2nd, 2020

Introduction: In this Guest Blog by Michael Dorn, we introduce the role of workplace violence from the standpoint of the workforce threat. YES, the workforce threat. While media attention focuses on the student “active shooter” the workforce threat make up a significant percentage of the school homicidal violence. Our common interest centers on the importance of preventing the threat posed by the disgruntled employee. I recommend a comprehensive approach and design to workplace violence prevention that considers the type of workforce, work environment, past incidents, known risk indicators and contributing factors.

Training and proper program management philosophy and strategies are important. Decisions to conduct training should be a collaborative effort engaging the training consultant’s expertise in coordination with realistic content and delivery formats.

Principals and District Management can take reasonable proactive measures in addressing potential at risk teachers and staff by hastily addressing all reports and observations without assuming or applying shortsighted logic. Sometime educational institutions overlook valuable internal data in reviewing current reports against existing internal and external data.

For example, statistical information pertaining to the 277 FBI-designated active shooter incidents that occurred in the United States from 2000 to 2018 offer valuable insight and analysis from where the emphasis or focus can be directed in validating the potential for violence. https://www.fbi.gov/about/partnership/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents-graphics.

Michael Dorn’s contributions below forms the inescapable reality that educational institutions are also workplace environments for teachers, principals, administrative staff and school board members who are no different from any other employee and their environmental, societal and family risk factors.

What’s often taken for granted is the notion that the only perpetrators of school violence are the ‘mentally ill’ students.

But what about the disgruntled principal or teacher and the factors negatively impacting their mental well-being. Just like the student who has access to the school, who scrutinizes the at-risk factors and behaviors of the principal? Whether at a warehouse, manufacturing plant, office building or educational institution the workforce threat is a real and present danger. Therefore, Workplace Violence Prevention should be an ongoing process involving multiple intervention strategies that includes the entire workforce and students. It should be devoid of myths, assumptions or special treatment that limits critical assessment and application of threat assessment principles.

On May 6, 1940, the principal of South Pasadena Middle School opened fire at his school district’s office building and killed three victims. He then drove to his school and murdered two teachers. This tragedy is one of eleven fatal school attacks carried out by school employees in the United States to date. In addition to fatal shootings carried out by teachers and school administrators, our nation’s second most deadly attack at a K12 school was carried out by a disgruntled and deeply troubled school board member in 1927.

After most of the 2,000 pounds of explosives detonated blowing up the Bath School, the attacker drove his vehicle to the school and carried out a suicide bombing killing 43 students and employees.

These attacks make up a significant percentage of the active assailant and targeted school attacks at U.S. K12 schools. And while these attacks occurred many years ago, more recent attacks in the Lee County, Florida Public School System and at the Episcopal School of Jacksonville demonstrate that violent acts committed by school employees is still a concern.

Unfortunately, many K12 school systems and non-public schools have dedicated significant amounts of time, energy and budget on barricading training and devices while neglecting prevention measures for acts of violence that are far more common than an active assailant forcing entry to a locked classroom.

In reality, there has been only one fatal attack at a U.S. K12 school to date where an attacker forced entry to a locked classroom, entered the room and killed victims. This shooting occurred at a reservation high school in Red Lake, Minnesota. Having worked that case as an expert witness, I can state with relative certainty that neither barricading nor door blocking devices would have saved any lives in that attack. While this attack method could certainly be used in future attacks, it has simply not been a common attack method. In contrast, lethal attacks by school employees do represent a pattern that deserves more attention than it has received.

This is one of many examples of how easy it can be for any type of organization to fail to align prevention and preparedness measures with actual violence risk levels. This example also demonstrates how important preemployment screening measures, training programs, assessment capabilities and other approaches to prevent acts of workplace violence can be.

Has your organization carefully evaluated how well your violence prevention and preparedness measures align with actual risks?

Thankfully, there are skilled experts with advanced knowledge in this important area that can help organizations develop approaches tailored to fit their unique needs. I am appreciative that one of these experts has been kind enough to allow me to contribute this guest blog on this important topic.

Felix P. Nater, CSC of Nater Associates, Ltd. is a workplace violence prevention consultant who helps organizations through executive leadership how to develop and manage proper ways to handle threats of workplace violence through an educated, involved, coordinated and vigilant organizational response.

If You Have to Terminate…. Stay Safe!

Posted on: July 10th, 2020

As I am about to publish my next Guest Blog by Mike Perkins, President of Frontline HR Solutions a 25 year Legal and HR Professional Consulting Practice, I would like to introduce a recent workplace homicide – suicide at a Walmart Distribution Center, Red Bluff, California by Louis Lesley Land a former worker who had been fired in 2019 after failing to show up for work.

On Saturday, June 27, 2020, Louis Lesley had apparently crashed his car into the center shooting his semiautomatic rifle. Inside, he shot & killed one co-worker, injured 4 others, before being shot and killed by Red Bluff Police in Parking Lot.

This particular story is a timely one as it relates to terminations and the potential risks, giving interest to this informative Guest Blog by Mike Perkins on the topic of “terminations”. We both agree that while the process is the official termination of employment, we believe that the word has a negative connotation and the process needs to be considered a potential business-security threat.

I commend the Walmart Leadership and Security Teams for taking the appropriate workplace security and workplace violence prevention violence response risk mitigation measures, to prepare the workplace and protect the workforce against the potential threat posed by an armed intruder.

Here’s Mike Perkin’s information packed Guest Blog.

In this time of furloughs, layoffs, high unemployment, financial tension and uncertainty about the continued viability of many organizations, emotions are fragile and, sometimes, quite volatile. Many companies are having to make difficult decisions about reducing their workforce for the unpredictable times that lie ahead. Some companies are deferring employment decisions as long as possible while others are fighting for survival and having to make immediate cuts. Essential workers who are still actively employed are worried about exposure to illness at work, while commuting on public transit, and during breaks.

Others who have been considered non-essential workers are often sitting at home wondering if they will still have a job, when they can return, and which creditors should be paid over others. As the tension increases, substance abuse, domestic abuse and suicide rates are rising.

Terminating employees is always fraught with risk. All these additional factors combine to exponentially increase the stakes. When it becomes necessary to discharge an employee, employers should do everything possible to reduce the tension and the risk for everyone involved. Even before the Coronavirus-related growth of phone and video conferencing, I have been encouraging employers to consider utilizing alternatives to personal meetings and the use of “Administrative Leave” as practical strategies for risk mitigation.

Last year’s tragic workplace shooting at the Henry Pratt Company in Joliet, Illinois, is a grave reminder of the danger that surrounds the discipline and termination process. In that situation, an employee who knew he was likely going to be terminated that day, brought a gun to work and shot his plant manager, HR manager, an HR intern (on his first day at work), his union chairman and union steward, a co-worker, and several police first-responders. The shooting began in an isolated meeting room where the employee was told he was being terminated and continued after he fled from the room and moved throughout the facility.

Sometimes you have no choice but to end the employment relationship. Sometimes the decision is purely economic and relatively straightforward. Other times, the decision is more complicated.

Most challenging is when, despite your best efforts to salvage the relationship, one of your employees is just not working out. She may not be showing up for work on time despite repeated warnings. Sometimes he may not show up at all and doesn’t call to let you know. He or she may have taken advantage of the company by falsifying hours while working remotely. Co-workers and customers are left hanging. Maybe she continuously ignores safety rules and is endangering herself and others. Or, maybe he has been engaging in serious misconduct that is detrimental to your organization. You’re convinced—this employee has to go.

As an employment attorney and HR professional, I have always advised clients “There is no such thing as a routine termination” and “There is no such thing as an emergency termination.” Does that sound confusing and, possibly, inconsistent? Let me explain.

“There are no routine terminations.” Terminating a person’s employment can be nerve-wracking and, sometimes, dangerous. The first few times a manager or an HR professional communicates a termination decision can be especially unsettling and they may spend hours fretting over the decision and planning their approach. But, after a while, managers who have handled several terminations sometimes have the tendency to treat them routinely and may spend very little time reviewing the background and contemplating the best approach to take with an employee.

They become “cut and dried” decisions and the termination message is often handled with clinical detachment. The process becomes routine.

Conversely, losing a job is never routine for an employee. Everything is thrown into turmoil—housing, transportation, utilities, healthcare, financial stability, and relationships at work and at home. Often, a person’s most significant feeling of self-worth comes from his or her position at work. Sometimes, their work is their entire world. Even when a struggling employee has been coached, disciplined and given warnings, the employee may not accept that he or she has failed at the job. For many, being terminated is earth-shattering. Some rebound, recover and move on. Some do not.

Some turn to alcohol or drugs. Some lash out on social media. Some turn to violence. Truly, there are no routine terminations. Every termination should be treated as a significant event with extensive review of the background circumstances and documentation, an analysis of the legal and security risks, and consideration and planning for the safety and well-being of those delivering the message and those on the receiving end.

“There are no emergency terminations.” The risk of an employment lawsuit arising from a termination is higher than all other types of employment-related actions combined. Over the last twenty-five years, I have counseled with clients and managers concerning hundreds of terminations.

Despite “Let’s do it now” pressures from irate managers, I cannot think of one situation where it was absolutely necessary to discharge the employee immediately.

But wait. If the employee is engaged in significant misconduct or posing safety risks, shouldn’t he or she be removed quickly? Yes, but it does not mean the employee needs to be terminated quickly. Hasty, spur-of- the-moment terminations often lead to questionable decisions, sloppy execution and elevated emotions. Even economic terminations should be carefully planned.

Administrative Leave. For the last several years, I have advocated the use of “Administrative Leave pending review” in lieu of a rushed termination. Placing an employee on Administrative Leave accomplishes several things:

Removes the employee from the workplace and from official interaction with co-employees and customers;
Allows a “cooling off” period for emotions (employee, managers, co-workers);
Allows time for gathering facts, documentation and witness information;
Reduces the “intimidation factor” for witnesses when the subject employee is absent from the workplace;
Lets the employee know the company is carefully reviewing his/her employment status or incidents affecting that status;
Allows time to obtain the employee’s response to the alleged conduct;
Allows time for HR and/or legal review; and
Allows time to review safety concerns and put appropriate security measures into effect.

There is also a psychological influence. Removing the employee from the workplace tends to create a calming effect for all involved. It gives everyone a chance to breathe. I have found that employees generally respond calmly to being placed on Administrative Leave; especially when the leave is communicated as an opportunity for the company to carefully review employment status and any information pertaining to specific incidents that may have occurred.

Employees like to be told that they will have an opportunity to tell their side of the story. They expect, and should receive, a thorough and fair review of the circumstances before a termination decision is made.

To Pay or Not to Pay? Administrative Leave may be paid or unpaid. Some factors in that decision may include: applicable state and local law, past practice, company policies, company economics, terms of a collective bargaining agreement or employment contract, perceived volatility of the employee, nature of the offense, whether the employee is exempt or non-exempt, length of employment, legal risk, security considerations and the likelihood that the employee will actually be terminated.

In most cases, I recommend that the employee be paid while on administrative leave.

It helps take the immediate financial pressure off the employee and conveys a sense of fairness– that the company has not reached a final decision without doing its due diligence. Sometimes, anticipating the inevitable, employees use this time for job hunting. If the employee has another job lined up, the stakes are reduced for all involved.

Advising an employee that he or she is being placed on Administrative Leave can be done in person while the employee is at work or by telephone before or after work. If the employee works remotely, it can be done by phone or video conference during work hours. As usual, a witness should be present or conferenced in and announced as being present on the call or video conference.

The employee should be advised that he or she is being placed on “Administrative Leave Pending Investigation” or “Administrative Leave Pending Review of Circumstances” pertaining to employment.

The employee should be instructed not to return to the workplace until notified otherwise and avoid communicating with other employees about the issues being reviewed. The employee should be advised whether the leave is “with pay” or “without pay” and that someone will contact the employee very soon to hear his or her side of the story. The employee should be advised and steps should be taken to temporarily suspend access to company computers, systems, email, memory storage and facilities.

Be sure to follow through with the commitment to contact and interview the employee and witnesses identified by the employee before making a final employment decision.

Communicating the Decision. At the conclusion of the investigation and review, the employee should be notified of the final decision and given instructions for returning to work or for ending employment. If the decision is made to return the employee to work, the employee should be advised of this by telephone or email and then invited back to discuss (with a witness present) expectations for the future, and conditions for continuing employment. This discussion can also be held by phone or video conference.

If in person, appropriate security measures should be followed for the employee’s return to the facility and for the return-to-work-meeting.

During this meeting, it is important to warn the employee to avoid any type of actual or perceived retaliation against other employees who may have been involved in the issue and investigation.

If the final decision is to terminate the employee, I advocate communicating the decision by telephone or video conference. The Joliet shooting is reason enough to consider this option. The employee is aware of the strong potential for termination and, absent special circumstances, it is not necessary to increase the security risk by inviting the employee back to the facility to be told he or she is being fired.

When there is a union contract that requires personal meetings, union officials may be willing to waive the personal appearance and allow all interviews, hearings and discussions to be conducted by phone or video conference. If your collective bargaining agreement does not allow for this, consider proposing telephone or video conferencing as an option when you negotiate your renewal contract.

If the decision is made to ask the employee to return to the facility for a termination meeting, situationally-appropriate security steps should be taken.

As with the initial Administrative Leave communication, I have found that employees are generally more accepting of a termination decision when it follows Administrative Leave review. My clients and I have not experienced any negative repercussions from communicating the final decision by phone. A witness should be present and introduced so the employee will know there are others listening to the call or participating in a video conference. I recommend being very careful with the words used to communicate the message.

Avoid using words like “terminating” or “fired.” They are volatile on their face and have the potential to inflame emotions.

Instead, consider using words like “we are ending your employment,” “we will be proceeding with separation of employment” or “the circumstances leave us no choice but to discontinue your employment.” Of course, all the normal termination, final pay and benefits continuation information should also be communicated during this conference.

If your company follows a neutral reference policy, it is usually advisable to remind the employee of that policy. Terminated employees are often concerned with “what are they going to tell people about me?”

Where appropriate, be sure to include a clear instruction that the employee is not authorized to return to any of the company’s facilities. Arrangements should be made for exchange of employee property and company property via courier or other means. When available, remind the employee of the organization’s employee assistance program resources and any appropriate outplacement assistance.

If the employee has engaged in serious misconduct such as harassment, theft, or acts/threats of violence, it is recommended that you consult with legal counsel for advice about outplacement assistance and your response to reference requests.

There is a fine line between your confidentiality responsibilities to the former employee and your duty to others to avoid promulgating a known risk.

The somber story of the Joliet tragedy should prompt HR and operational leaders to thoroughly evaluate their approach to employee discipline and discharge. While the use of Administrative Leave is an effective strategy for reducing the risk surrounding employee discipline, it does not eliminate all risk.

Employers should always exercise due diligence and implement adequate security measures to protect themselves and their employees throughout the disciplinary and post-disciplinary process.

#Covid-19 Return to Work Risk Mitigation Challenges and Opportunities

Posted on: May 13th, 2020

Management must not begin to view the “Covid-19 Return to Work” as a “new normal” yet, but, rather a “transition interim” towards a stabilized period where Employers and the Workforce can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

In as much as Employers have a duty and responsibility to provide for a safe and secure workplace (OSHA Duty to Warn Clause) how it is achieved is not a mandate but a moral, ethical and legal obligation. Providing for a safe and secure workplace can be effectively implemented through organizational engagement and cultural support.

Whether your business or an organization is a small, midsize or large size one, Employers having a workplace violence prevention mindset will advance the thinking and aid the approach to managing #Covid-19 Return to Work Risk Mitigation Challenges and Opportunities during this “emergence phase”.

Because you may have a different understanding, emphasis and approach to workplace violence prevention you may not understand risk factors as important and may not find contributing factors as relevant as I may. However, both are important in prevention and mitigation. Managing risk during this “emergence phase” will be full of challenges and opportunities.

You are apt to find more frequent outbursts, verbal altercations and acts of defiance in preventing the feared surprise attacker (active shooter). Be prepared for the angry workforce as they return from periods of isolation and separations to encounter a workplace full of rules that seem more alienating and contributing to conflict.

Depending on what side of the issues you are on Covid-19 Return to Work Risk Mitigation may or may not present challenges or opportunities. Consider it a “neutral zone” full of opportunity to assess and evaluate what the “new normal” might look like. A time where rules are not clear and new approaches are required.

Will you anticipate the challenge in taking proactive measures in looking for a proper solution or will you have a reactive, dam the torpedoes, full steam ahead attitude and miss potential risk mitigation opportunities?

Is there room for changing old paradigms of thinking and operating while still providing for a safe and secure workplace and contending with other business-security expectations?

How the Covid-19 Return to Work Risk Mitigation challenges are handled and how opportunities are strategized will depend entirely on empathy, thoughtfulness and effective leadership. Building new approaches might dictate new ways of encountering business-security decisions, managing risks and preventing escalation of nonfatal acts of violence to more aggressive physical acts of violence.

Supervisors may be called upon to lead and give employees the benefit of the doubt. During this “emergence phase” “new normal” will task the Employer’s management and leadership responsibilities:

They will need to be responsible and accountable for their actions in not allowing situations to escalate.
Engaged supervision involved in anticipating problems, recognizing and responding to warning signs and understanding the impact of business issues on the workforce’s perception of the issues.
An organizational mindset may require understanding the significance of owning outcomes in minimizing risks by acknowledging unintentional consequences.

What if scenarios become more prevalent and relevant in forecasting impact on business decisions and actions. If you are in Human Resources you might see convenient opportunities in addressing adverse personnel decisions and personnel reduction actions not possible before Covid-19 but imaginable now. A shift in thinking may create new opportunities to improve approaches to discipline and refine the way you “terminate” or separate employees. You may find expedient solutions more practical today by the government mandated workplace closings that may include assumptions on downsizings, reorganization or not rehiring employees. Done correctly, employers might find workable solutions not available before the government mandated closings.

Employee perception of disparate treatment will drive the thinking and the behavior that fuels the emotional contagion, rationale and justification to exact their vengeance.

Supervisors and managers will need to be centers of influence and lead by example in being able to recognize the potentially volatile workplace environments and have the backing and ability to mitigate risks on the spot.

Success will be predicated on management’s commitment to empathetic leadership while providing for a safe workplace in addressing inappropriate conduct through root cause analysis. Treating employees with dignity and respect will take on a different meaning that shows sincerity, care and concern for their emotional and mental well-being.

If you are the safety or security manager you may find yourselves as “Ambassadors of Change and Influence”. You might view challenges as new duties and responsibilities in addressing social distancing relating to workforce, customer and vendor interactions; support management decisions in the removal of employee(s) who indicated positive during the infectious decease screening process; and enforcing violations of the workplace violence policy in response to nonviolent volatile acts of violence (verbal outburst, yelling, screaming) to name a few.

Until such time when “new normal” stability is gained, Covid-19 Return to Work may very well be the “new emerging threat”.

Workplace Violence Prevention will require a different mindset that engages with the workforce in finding amicable solutions rather than hasty swift actions to discipline and removal. Containment of emotional reactions will drive the need for management and workforce civility.

Enforcing the Workplace Violence Prevention Policy may take on a more compassionate approach in some incidents by addressing root causes and contributing factors before disciplinary action. In other words management may need to become more transparent in adjudicating workforce discipline so as to promote sensitivity and flexibility.

The “new normal” may require understanding of the unintentional consequences of new policy changes and personnel decisions affecting business and organizational reorganizations, consolidation and required learning of new functions. The transition from disgruntled to aggression may become more apparent and a frequent occurrence during these turbulent periods were VUCA concepts (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) may prevail and creating opportunities of their own.

Whereas prior to Covid-19, Employers might have been more inclined to act swiftly on the disciplinary and separation process in addressing misconduct and acts of violence, during the “emergence phase”, prevention and de-escalation may necessitate an empathetic response where appropriate before eventual administrative action is taken.

Because of the workplace turbulence and employee perceptions of unfair labor disparate treatment there will be a tendency for more frequent emotional outbursts. As such, there will be a need for supervisory training in aspects of workplace violence prevention that includes defusing conflict, de-escalation, warning signs, risk factors, contributing factors and issues around managing the potentially volatile workplace environment.

The real challenge awaiting Employers in this “new normal’ will be the employee perception of disparate unfair management decisions masked as Covid-19 Pandemic Return to Work Labor Management Employment actions. Being honest and above board could very well diminish anger and reduce frustrations.

The manifestation of frequent nonviolent acts of defiance and episodes of anger by employees will be more frequent in response to workforce reactions to disagreeable news. In short, increased tensions will become more apparent and frequent as management and workforce resolve perception issues during this “emergence period”.

How will you respond to the Covid-19 Return to Work ‘new normal”? Will you be proactive or reactive?

Felix P. Nater, CSC is a security management consultant who helps Employers implement and manage workplace security strategy and policy with an emphasis on workplace violence prevention. He believes that workplace violence prevention is an ongoing process involving multiple intervention strategies. He derived his experiences and consulting model while working as a Postal Inspector on U.S. Postal Inspection Services’ New York Division Violence Interdiction Team.

Contact Felix P. Nater at 1-877-valu101 or 1-877-825-8101. Visit his website www.naterassociates.com

A Paradigm Shift in Thinking and Philosophy of Workplace Violence Prevention is Needed…

Archive for the ‘Disgruntled Employee’ Category

Call Felix