WORKPLACE VIOLENCE
conduct such as swearing, insults, and condescending language.” Many such acts, he says, can rise to the level of harassment, activity which attempts to “demean, embarrass, humiliate, annoy, or cause alarm.”
Any viable threat to cause bodily
harm is an act of violence and consti- tutes a crime under most state laws. Here are some examples in the form of statements made by one employee to another:
• “I’m going to beat you up after work.”
• “Employees who kill their supervisors have the right idea.”
• “I'm afraid I'm going to lose control, and I have guns.”
All such statements are serious mat-
ters. “You need to take action right away in response to any workplace threat,” says John M. White, president of Protection Management, a consult- ing firm in Canton, Ohio. “If you ignore it, other employees will believe that making threats is okay. Then, eventu- ally, someone may well carry out their threat.” All employees must realize that if they say it, it’s as bad as if they did it.
Grey Areas Some employee actions fall into the category of disruptive activity rather than workplace violence. Maybe Bar- bara tosses a pile of papers on the floor and begins to scream about how lousy the company is. The correct response to such an event is to counsel Barbara, come to a better understanding of the cause of her anger, and enlist her aid in improving the workplace environment. If Barbara were to knock a laptop off the desk in anger, on the other hand, she might be disciplined for destruction of company property.
Still other actions fall into a grey zone between harmless and harmful. What
should you do, for example, when hu- mor contains a violent element? Sup- pose Sam tells Andy in a joking tone of voice, “I’m going to knock your block off after work.” In such cases, experts advise taking the individual aside and counseling that you realized they were joking, but that such behavior is still not acceptable.
More troubling are statements for
which a humorous intent is unclear. Sam’s assertion in the previous para- graph, if uttered without sufficient humorous tone, might or might not be a serious threat. “Sometimes it can be hard to tell,” says White. “It all depends on tone of voice, the envi- ronment, and the body language. But the investigation process should try to come to a conclusion.”
In such cases, White suggests start-
ing to watch the employee’s behavior more closely. Does Sam have atten- dance problems? Is he violating other organizational polices? Does he have health or financial problems? “Try to observe the employee without being too invasive.”
A final category of event is the
statement that is obviously not a joke, but is so veiled as to call
into ques-
tion its violent intent. Suppose Alan tells his supervisor: “You had better not treat me like this.” His voice has a warning tone and his demeanor is dark, but is the statement a threat to commit violence or just a threat to quit and go work for a competitor? The answer’s elusive. The best response is to take Alan aside and counsel him on what caused him to make his state- ment and what he had in mind.
When in doubt, trust your gut and
don’t over-analyze. If you feel afraid, there is something amiss.
Act Early Barbara’s outburst, described previ- ously, while perhaps innocent of vio- lent intent, may also provide an early
22
warning sign of more severe trouble down the road. Identifying such warning signs, and addressing them promptly, is the best way to obviate extreme behavior.
“Supervisors should be alert for em-
ployees who start to behave in strange ways, such as barricading themselves in their cubicles, or making statements such as their supervisors are poisoning their food,” says Maxey. Be alert for those employees who are constantly un- able to get along with others, who re- fuse to take responsibility for their own actions, who are quick to anger, or who respond in inappropriate and exagger- ated ways when given minor directives. All can be early signs of greater issues down the road.
Employees should be trained to re-
port any such behavior to supervisors who can start
to more closely moni-
tor the troubled worker. “The key is to catch a problem early on. When supervi- sors fail to address early warning signs, the employee’s problems can marinate over time and then get to the point where there is some kind of damaging outburst," says Maxey.
Zero Tolerance Experts on workplace violence suggest that every employer establish a “zero tolerance” workplace violence policy that mandates termination for acts of violence or threats of such acts. For less extreme behavior, an employer should mandate a system of progressive disci- pline that may include administrative leave and mandatory psychological eval- uation and counseling.
A workplace policy should also ad-
dress the subject of weapons. “No weap- ons should be allowed in the workplace or in the business parking lot,” says Bon- czyk. “You would be surprised what peo- ple put in their purses and backpacks. Those things include knives and guns.”
A caveat is that some state laws allow
authorized firearm owners to keep guns in the trunks of their cars. Consult with
June 2021
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 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32
