How Can the Security Manager Deal with Violence in the Workplace - Essay Example

How can the security manager deal with violence in the workplace? Workplace violence can be the bodily force exerted for the purpose of violating or damaging or any act of physical violence, harassment, bullying, or threatening, unruly actions that take place at the work spot. Various diverse actions in the work atmosphere can activate or cause workplace violence. This may happen even as a consequence of non-work-related conditions such as domestic violence or violence caused by a rude employee, a manager, supervisor, co-worker, customer, family member, or even a unfamiliar person. Whatever may the cause workplace violence is to be prevented. But to deal with such situations, there is no definite means to foresee human activities; even though, there may be some warning signs, there is no exact outline of a highly unsafe person. Recognizing any problem at the early stage and dealing with them is the best prevention (USDA, 1998). When one hear the term ‘workplace violence’ usually brings up the frightening images of unhappy or disturbed employees and events that occasionally appear in newspaper headlines and national TV news. This news may have supported to create a general consciousness of workplace violence. Normally, workplace murders are done by non-employees more often than by co-workers. But other types of workplace violence are much more common than killing. As far as the majority of employers are concerned, managing the workplace violence is dealing with harassment, threats, non-fatal physical attacks, and other behaviours that elevate an anxiety for the security of public or assets. These events are the root cause of the workplace violence problem which spreads to industries and have an effect on large and small employers equally. The meaning of workplace violence include all behaviours that can cause injury, damage property, hinder the usual course of work, or make workers, managers, and customers panic for their security. Workplace violence can be understood as follows: Workplace violence indicates to a wide range of manners that, because of the character and/or harshness, considerably influence the workplace, cause an anxiety for individual security, or effect in physical harm or death. The lower level of the workplace violence can stretch out to the unruly, destructive, antagonistic, or sensitively insulting behaviours that produces concern or develops an environment of mistrust, and that harmfully influence efficiency and self-confidence. These psychologies of anxiety may possibly rise into added harsh actions further all along the workplace violence range; nevertheless, these activities are harmful and because of that deserve awareness and efficient intervention. Additionally, through the spectrum are words that are rationally seen to be threatening, frightening, or intimidating to employees and that cause a reasonable anxiety for individual protection. The higher levels of the spectrum are activities of explicit violence resulting in bodily harm. These actions consist of non-fatal physical attacks with or without arms. Further the workplace violence contains terrorization or harm to corporation assets and words or actions showing that an employee could hurt him or herself at the workplace. Anywhere aggressive or brutal actions are provoked by a feature that is lawfully guarded in opposition to prejudice, that is, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, and so on, workplace violence incorporate behaviour that can produce an aggressive work atmosphere as legally defined under existing discrimination and harassment laws (ASIS, 2005). In a work ethnicity, where workers think that they are considered fairly, and judges that the firm is worthy of their loyalty, lessen the chance of violence. The assurance towards the welfare of workers can be mirrored in company policy for promotions and salary increments, management, and employing. The companies having high confidence, give significance to worker, even prior to the customer, and stress communication between worker and management, continuous training, and team work. The assurance of top management to worker confidence is vital. Lessons of work-related protection reveal that, whilst top management puts a quality on secure work environment, protected working measures are appreciated by the employees. The employee’s involvements with management regarding workplace decisions making are important to boost confidence in employees. In the case of grievances, which are basically against, are probable to be controlled through compromise and mediation by labour-management groups. Employees, who has faith in management, can pay attention, discuss, and take criticism gravely, are less probable to react aggressively to the disappointments of workplace living. These employees can work under pressure for long duration with less argument with management, with less accident, and with superior efficiency (Center for Mental Health Services, 1994). The major cause of fatal work-related damage in the United States considered as homicide. Approximately, 1,000 workers are killed and 1.5 million are physically attacked in the workplace every year. As per the report of Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI), there were 709 workplace killings in 1998 and estimated for 12 percent of the total 6,026 deadly workplace injuries in the United States. From report of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2 million attacks and bullying of violence against Americans at workplace happen every year. The majority of workplace offence was physical attack with an average of 1.5 million a year. The actual figures likely to be more since all violent activities happening at workplaces are not reported (Heathfield, 2007). According to the reports of US Department of Justice, Bureau of Statistics, from 1992 until 1996, outsiders committed 59.6% of all activities of workplace violence. The outsider with whom the victim had association committed 36.7% of workplace violence episodes. This details shows that the need for employers to know both features of workplace violence, those did by strangers and those committed by person with whom the victim had an earlier association (Buffy, 2001). An untoward incident occurred in August 20, 1986, a part-time postman, Patrick H. Sherrill, rushed into the Edmond, Oklahoma, post office, and shot 14 people to death before killing himself. This dreaded tragedy was not the first incident of its kind during this period. In another incident, four postal workers were killed by co-workers in separate shootings in Johnston, South Carolina; Anniston, Alabama; and Atlanta, Georgia. The Edmond homicides raised public consciousness to the kind of event linked with the phrase ‘workplace violence’ the act of murder or other brutal acts by a distressed, upset employee or co-workers or supervisors. Because of this apparently new trend, group murders in the workplace by unstable workers have become media sensitive events. The repetition of incident following the Edmond post office killings was shocking. From mid-1989 to mid-1997 within span of eight years, in Southern California alone, there were 15 workplace murder cases, six with multiple victims that killed 29 people. Further to this there was major workplace violence’s reported throughout the country (Isaacs and (Ed.) Rugala, 2002). The majority of experienced people agree that there are ‘trigger’ in the workplace that causes unbalanced employees over the edge. The usual causes for trigger comprise of terminations of employment, layoffs, poor performance assessment and failure to be promoted to higher level or lack of training. Learned experts think that unhappy employees need a way to vent disappointments and a method to redress complaints to higher authority and they believe that if such a system existed, there would be fewer triggers (DeBelle, N.D.). Since last two decades, the American workplace has transformed radically. Till now the focus was on getting the job done, and employees were told to keep their personal troubles at home or be ready to lose the jobs. Today employers/managers understand that personal problems have an effect on job performance, and job performance influences the production line. Therefore, employers are ready to offer workers various support and assistance to help them in the fields such as drug addiction, family problems and AIDS. More and more, employers throughout U.S. are trying to solve domestic violence by executing plans and strategies that act in response to and assist stop violence. The domestic violence has become today’s Workplace Issue: One out of three American women complaints that they have been abused physically by husband or boyfriend at some instants in their life. Senior executives of fortune 1000 reviewed state that they believe their companys financial activities would profit from solving household violence among their workers. As a result of domestic violence hundreds of millions of dollars spend for the employees health care costs in the U.S. American employees get absent from paid work 175,000 days per year because of household problems (Sherman, N.D.). The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) explains workplace violence as brutal acts (including physical attacks and threats of attacks) aimed toward people at work. This includes terrorism as demonstrated by the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001 which caused the deaths of 2,886 personnel in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania. Even though the steps taken do not solve violence specially, this type of violence stays as a risk to U.S. workplaces. So many years, health care and social service workers have suffered major risk of work linked violence. Attacks symbolize a serious security and health risk within these industries. OSHAs violence prevention steps offer the agencys suggestions for lowering workplace violence. OSHA gives confidence to employers to set up violence prevention plans and to track their improvements in lessening work-related assaults. Even though not all occurrences can be stopped, a lot of can, and the harshness of injuries can be lessened (OSHA, 2004). To implement workplace violence program the security agencies must make a decision whether to issue a black and white policy statement. The important benefits of issuing a statement are: It notifies workers that the violence policy covers threats, harassment, and other wrong activities that intimidates or frightens them; it gives confidence to employees to report violence; it gives information’s regarding whom to call in case of such emergences; and it reveals senior security managements obligations in dealing with reported events. The security agencies have right to take action against employees who engage in unruly or hostile activities even though they have not announced a written policy statement. A workplace violence strategy declaration should express that: all employees are accountable for preserving a safe work atmosphere; the policy covers all acts of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, and other unruly behaviour; the policy covers events relating to co-workers and incidents relating to individuals from outside the agency committing aggression against agency employees; the agency will act in response suitably to all reported events; the agency will act to stop all wrong actions; and managers and all concerned in taking action to incidents will be helped by security agency management in their efforts to solve violent and potentially violent situations (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, N.D.). University of British Columbia (UBC) polices and the Worker’s Compensation Board Regulations wants to carry out a plan and training programs to deal with workplace conduct and violence prevention. The responsibility lies with the employer and security manager to make sure those actions are carried out and that a plan is developed to deal with workplace conduct and violence. WCB Regulation 4.25 states that: A person must not engage in any improper activity or behaviour at a workplace that might make or comprise a hazard to them or to any other person. Improper activity or behaviour includes: the challenge by a worker towards another worker by physical strength to cause harm, and includes any threatening report or activities which gives the worker sensible reason to believe he or she is at threat of injury (UBC, 2001). Governments are taking initiatives and have emphasized the need of reporting for employers. Over and above Governments have obligatory reporting systems. In the UK there is a legislative responsibility to report to the executive authority about any accident causing in death, major injury or inability for usual work of three days or more. The explanation of accident covers physical brutality done to a person at workplace. The purpose of the reports is to make aware the regulatory people who can interfere at the workplace. Also in New South Wales, Australia, death or grave personal injury, to an employee, subcontractor or visitor at the workplace has to be reported to the executive authority. Reporting schemes must be healthy and simple to give confidence to staff to process them. Reporting facilitates employers to know the full coverage of aggression, study from the occurrence, make sure that risks can be analyzed and, shunned in the future. In order to assess violence an employer should have basic information to be able to evaluate ensuing data. Hence capable reporting systems use casualty reports to record problems, this data is the keystone of evaluating risk, a basic element of any management approach. A basic reporting form usually includes: details of employee, location of incident, date and time, details of the assailant, employees work at the time of incident, the circumstances of the assault or abuse, details of the outcome, and information about any remedial action (Richards, 2003). It is widely acknowledged the requirement to train employees regarding workplace violence. The goal is to educate workers on issues and circumstances which can lead to workplace violence and if it can be identified earlier of its occurrence such event can be avoided to a great extent. The training should be based on: the way to detect and identify issues before they become violent; understanding the law about workplace violence; avoidance and management of domestic violence in the workplace; support in shaping policies and procedures; implementation of brief & complete employee programming. For instance, Business Controls, Inc. conducted number of training sessions that varied from large session trainings for employees to small group sessions for HR and security management. Following the training sessions, employees understood to do their part in sensing and avoiding violence and what contribution they could offer as employees. This was applicable throughout the company, from management to supervisors, employees, and Human Resources. As per the security manager the after effect of the training sessions was very positive. Comparing the expenditure of having to deal with a workplace violence issue is more costly than training the employees before hand to recognize and stop it from happening (Business Controls Inc., N.D.). The basic reason of unwanted actions are: Some employers/managers think such events could never happen in their company, and often pay no attention to behaviours that signify warning symbols for an accident or an act of violence. Lack of knowledge remains pleasant only until the adverse episode occurs. The quality of prevention measures needs to foresee and guard against even nearly all improbable of incidence, particularly when the effects such incidents are so harsh. Employers and security managers can do lot to guard against events of violence if they use their common sense to plan, so that every one can understand and follow (Glader, 2007). There are various aspects to prevent workplace violence. First of all, prevention signifies the capability of an institution to interfere at the earliest occurrence when activities of anxiety observed. Usually, perceptible warning symbols often precede acts of obvious violence. Institutions that take an adequate alertness of these warning symbols can effectively process for taking action and lessen the risk workplace violence. Secondly, prevention indicates an institutions capability to rapidly and efficiently take action when faced with conditions that have avoided discovery until they have arrived at a dangerous point. At last, prevention signifies a complete move towards safety. From this once can understand that the institution has, accepted employment, human resources, security, and management practices all that work jointly to improve workplace security. A workplace ethnicity that promotes professional method and mutual respect can assist to stop threats and violence, and prepare the institution to enhanced respond when threats or violence happen. The general principles set out can prevent the workplace violence and guide the institution toward a successful approach to maintain work place violence prevention (ASIS, 2005). As per the responsibilities of supervisors are concerned they are to notify workers of department strategies and procedures and make sure that employees have through knowledge regarding definite procedures for dealing with threats and urgent situations, and how to inform police, fire, and other safety and security staffs. Further they have to make sure that employees with special requirements are aware of crisis solving methods and have support. They should respond to possible threats and serious circumstances by making use of resources from: law enforcement, medical services, Federal Protective Service, human resources staff, and the Employee Assistance Program. The security manager should take all threats gravely. Before appointing the prospective employee’s managers should examine the background and serve as liaison with law enforcement. Further they should conduct regular threat appraisal reviews of the facility and keep management aware of the risk of violence, and the means to improve security (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2001). To understand the problems at the work place, the employer should carry out hazard analysis and would evaluate the experience of the business over the previous years. This includes gathering and probing present records that might show the extent and frequency of the risk of workplace violence. A small number of reported cases of workplace violence should not underestimate that violence is not a setback in a workplace. There are incidents not reported and erratically recorded. Over and above, management may not be aware of events of low level clash or threats of violence at workplace. To know about such events, the employer could directly approach workers about their experience while working for the company (U.S. Department of Labour, 1998). To diffuse the workplace violence an impartial person should be chosen as a mediator. The mediator should not be a security officer, police officer or high-ranking executive. The people with authority, and in a sensitive violent situation, authority can make a person feel unsafe and activate violence. The selection for this job could be a plainclothes security person well trained in intercession and crisis analysis. In case if required, take the person to an unbiased site in the office. This could further ease him from the cause of his anger. The site selection for mediating could remove the potential for violence away from other employees (Berinato, 2005). There are various bodies of law, with anti-discrimination rules and common law, cover violence in the workplace, plus domestic violence. Usually, these laws provide employers to take rational, timely and efficient corrective or protective actions in reply to activities or threats of violence in the workplace. Work-related security and health laws needed employers to manage a secure workplace, which is of violence-free. For the purpose of women’s safety at workplace federal and state laws are fast shifting to mirror the countrys serious obligation to stop all violence towards women. Congress enacted the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which opened multi-strategic proposals to eradicate violence against women. VAWA endorsed financial support to boost services, education and research covering domestic violence, rape and sexual attack, formed new federal crimes, and added significant provision announcing that all citizens have a civil right to be free from gender-based violence at workplace. Additional federal legislation has been introduced, that specially covers the impact of domestic violence on the workplace (Family Violence Prevention Fund, 2007). Even though there are efficient agencies’ strategies and plans in sensing and avoiding events, there are no assurances against workplace violence. Even the most efficient quick to respond employers face this problem. When a violent incident does happen, it is necessary the response is timely, suitable to the situation, and carried out with the credit that employees are disturbed and that the events after effect has just begun. Since work situations and surroundings vary so greatly from one agency to another within US, it is the responsibility of the individual agency to develop and publish the exact measures for taking action to workplace violence events (The Freeman Institute, N.D.). On every occasion, an employee is exposed to an upsetting incident he should be considered at risk for developing signs constant with a sensitive stress response and shall be provided with support services by trained persons. Human Resources should have the require information to provide employee help. In case the employee is contacted by the media, intimate the management who will discuss with suitable National news agencies for legal and public affairs procedures. When some incident occurs, the details of those concerned should be carried out within 24 to 72 hours of the incident. This should be conducted under the supervision of Facility Manager and Security Manager (Ho-Chunk Nation Code, 2002). Teaching managers to create motivating, optimistic, collaborative relationships with employees is an important factor for reducing workplace violence. Though, company managers and team members have put all work to create a peaceful work environment, an expressively fit place to work, some persons choose to harbour anger, perceive themselves as permanent victims, and separate themselves from any group knowledge that could cause the suspicion. This category of employees can become dangerous. The most fatal combination is an indifferent, controlling; high-strain workplace where a person inclined to suspicion, hostility, and violence develop into more and more irritated and frustrated and finally blow up (Smallwood, 2006). A research carried out by the Workplace Violence Research Institute indicated the cost of workplace violence to American businesses establishments to be at least $36 billion per year. This covers medical and psychiatric care, lost business and productivity, repairs and cleans up, higher insurance rates, increased security costs, and finally the loss of treasured workers. Additionally, the employers are more and more held accountable for not making their premises safe for workers and clients. Possible areas of workplace violence-related lawsuit which should alarm employers consist of civil actions for careless appointment, workers compensation claims, third-party claims for damages, assault of privacy actions, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration violation charges (all-biz.com, 2006). It is considered that the employers who take responsibility and accountability for the aggressive behaviour of its employees are employers who pursue their Security Policy, Plans and Programs. Simply punishing the performer without a meticulous knowledge of the details and situation does not do justice to morale, performance, production, future reimbursement claims and safety. This is a failure to recognize the source of cause or the causative activity of the members (Nater, N.D.). It is to be understood that every disaster has a forerunner occurrence before the triggering action. Knowledge about the Risk Indicators warns all of the doubtful objectives. Once there are clear reporting methods all concerned will benefit from the early warning and teamwork. When capable to carry out a correct inquiry, take remedial actions will help with the rehabilitation process. References all-biz.com, (2006) Dealing with Workplace Violence, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. ASIS, (2005) Workplace Violence Prevention and Response, [Online] ASIS international commission on guidelines, Available from: [Accessed on 10 May 2007]. Berinato, S. (2005) How to Prepare for Workplace Violence, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Buffy, (2001) Understanding and Preventing Violence in the Workplace, Criminal Profiling, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Business Controls Inc., (N.D.) Manufacturer uses Training to Identify and Prevent Workplace Violence, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 12 May 2007]. Center for Mental Health Services, (1994) Preventing Violence in the Workplace, [Online] SAMHSA’S National Mental Health Information Center, Available from: [Accessed on 12 May 2007]. DeBelle, Susan (N.D.) Workplace violence triggered by instability, frustration, [Online] Closed Circuit, Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Family Violence Prevention Fund, (2007) Workplace Policies and Programs, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 10 May 2007]. Glader, G. (2007) How do we deal with the angry spouse, customer or other individual bent on causing trouble, [Online] PlantServices.com, Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Ho-Chunk Nation Code, (2002) Workplace Violence Prevention, 6 HCC § 8-17, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Heathfield, S.M., (2007) Workplace Violence: Violence Can Happen Here, [Online] About: Human Resources, Available from: [Accessed on 11 May 2007]. Isaacs, A.R. and (Ed.) Rugala, E.A., (2002) Workplace Violence : Issues In Response, Critical Incident Response Group National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime FBI Academy. OSHA, (2004) Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Health Care & Social Service Workers, [Online] U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Nater, F.P. (N.D.) Workplace Security and Corporate Responsibility, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Richards, Jon (2003) Management of Workplace Violence Victims, [Online] Workplace Violence in the Health Sector, Available from: [Accessed on 10 May 2007]. Sherman, Mary (N.D.) Working to End Domestic Violence: American Workplaces Respond to an Epidemic, [Online] Faculty and Employee Assistance Program, Available from: [Accessed on 10 May 2007]. Smallwood, B. (2006) Violence in the Workplace: Recognition and Prevention, [Online] The Sideroad: Practical advice straight from the experts, Blue Boulder Internet Publishing, Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. The Freeman Institute, (N.D.) Workplace Violence: Awareness and Prevention, [Online] PART IV: Identifying Potentially Violent Situations Responding To Violent Incidents Resource Guide, Available from: [Accessed on 10 May 2007]. USDA, (1998) The USDA Handbook on Workplace Violence Prevention and Response, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. U.S. Office of Personnel Management (N.D.) Dealing with Workplace Violence: A Guide for Agency Planners, [Online] U.S.Office of Personnel Management : Ensuring the Federal Government has an effective civilian workforce, Available from: [Accessed on 11 May 2007]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, (2001) Workplace Violence Prevention and Response, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. U.S. Department of Labor, (1998) Recommendations for Workplace Violence Prevention Programs in Late-Night Retail Establishments, [Online] Available from: [Accessed on 12 May 2007]. UBC, (2001) UBC Safety Program : Workplace Conduct and Violence Prevention, [Online] Department of Health, Safety and Environment, Available from: [Accessed on 9 May 2007]. Read More