WORKPLACE VIOLENCE NEWS – continued


FBI Warns of Rise in Disgruntled Employees Stealing Data – continued from page 3


disruption by disgruntled and/or former employees.‖ Such employees have led to "several significant FBI investigations in which individuals used their access to destroy data, steal proprietary software, obtain customer information, purchase unauthorized goods and services using customer accounts, and gain a competitive edge at a new company.''


In recent cases, the victimized businesses suffered losses ranging from $5,000 to $3 million, the agencies said. The bulletin didn't identify any companies or describe specific cases.


Read more (subscription to TheWall Street Journal online may be necessary)


Federal Agencies Are Lagging in Addressing Physical and Psychological Violence in the Workplace


Every week, the major media and the trade press have stories on physical and/or psychological violence in the workplace. After 43 years in the federal government and 12 years studying workplace violence, I wanted to know whether federal departments were planning for workplace physical and psychological violence.


The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance about planning for physical and psychological violence in the workplace to federal agencies this in 1998, but I have questions if those agencies have done anything to comply with the guidance in the 16 years since it was released.


So, earlier this year, I wrote to Katherine Archuleta, the director of OPM. To improve my chances of getting a response, I sent my letter through the office of my congressman, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D, Md.). Federal agencies pay attention to letters from members of Congress.


Read more


Vaughan Foods Beheading Attack Prompts Some Oklahoma Employers to Re-Examine Firearms Policies


In the wake of the brutal attack Thursday at Vaughan Foods in Moore, at least some Oklahoma employers are considering ways to allow guns in their workplaces versus no weapons across the board., said Nathan Whatley, labor and employment attorney with McAfee & Taft. ―They realize that situations like the one in Moore


can happen so quickly,‖ Whatley said. ―If someone isn‘t able to respond immediately, a lot can happen before law enforcement arrives.‖


Employers can set rules for who can carry as well as where and how weapons may be kept on its premises, he said.


Without such flexibility, Whatley added ―employers feasibly could open themselves up to lawsuits from victims or their families, who could argue employers, by banning weapons, didn‘t allow them to protect themselves.


Read more


Federal Bureau of Investigation - A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2000 and 2013


In 2013, the president signed into law the Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012, which granted the attorney general the authority to assist in the investigation of ―violent acts and shootings occurring in a place of public use‖ and in the investigation of ―mass killings and attempted mass killings at the request of an appropriate law enforcement official of a state or political subdivision.‖1


To provide further clarity on these threats, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014 initiated a study of ―active shooter‖ incidents2


. The goal of the FBI study is


to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement with data so they can better understand how to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from these incidents.


Active shooter is a term used by law enforcement to describe a situation in which a shooting is in progress and an aspect of the crime may affect the protocols used in responding to and reacting at the scene of the incident.


The agreed-upon definition of an active shooter by U.S. government agencies is ―an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area.‖3


Implicit in this definition is that the


subject‘s criminal actions involve the use of firearms.4 For purposes of its study, the FBI extended this definition to include individuals, because some incidents involved two or more shooters.


This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings, but rather a study of a specific type of shooting situation law enforcement and the public may face.


Read full study


Send a copy of this edition to a colleague in HR, Security, Safety or Management.


4


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25