Workplace Violence Type 3 - Employees or former employees

On February 25, 2016 a man recently served with a restraining order walked into his workplace, a lawn mower factory in Kansas and went on a shooting spree, killing three people. On August 4, 2010 a man being fired from a beverage distributorship in Connecticut fired back with two handguns he had concealed in his lunch bag, killing eight people.  On September 24, 2011 a man killed his boss in a food co-op in Vermont after an employee performance evaluation and on September 24, 2014 a suspended employee beheaded one worker and critically stabbed another at food processing plant in Oklahoma.

There are, unfortunately, many more examples of Type 3 workplace violence, violence committed by an employee or former employee.  There are a variety of special challenges these situations present, but there are also opportunities for prevention and early alerting.  The aftermath of these incidents may also present unique challenges to deal with, which we’ll discuss at another time.

One of the first issues with a coworker turning violent is that person will be familiar with the response plans of the company, making many of the responses that you train on less effective or less safe options.  If your company emergency plan includes a specific gathering area or tactics for example, a worker familiar with these plans will be able to plan his or her attack around these tactics, or to include gathering areas or routes of travel into the plan of attack.  This makes disgruntled employees particularly dangerous.

Another issue with employees becoming violent is access control.  An employee that shows up without prior problems, such as the contractor for the US Navy in the Washington D.C. shipyard in September of 2013, may have full access to the building, even if access control prevents non-employees gaining access.  If a shooter has keys, pin codes, rfi cards or simply knowledge of which buildings are locked and which doors are not locked, he or she poses a higher threat for lethality.  It is critical in the development and training for active shooter response that companies and employees understand the basic considerations for decision making and be able to apply them while under significant stress.

A disgruntled employee may be focused on harming a specific employee or group of employees as revenge or to right some perceived wrong.  The targets may also be random, depending on the intent and mindset of the criminal.  This kind of intent may result in different tactics or movements by the perpetrator, but they will not likely be identifiable at the time, nor is intent likely to lessen the risk of a person between the perpetrator and the focus of his intent.  The problem, at the moment, isn’t why he or she is there to kill you; the problem is that he or she is there to kill you.  That is what you have to respond to.

There are some proactive steps to take when dealing with at risk employees.  The first is developing a culture of reporting concerns within the company.  Interviews after the fact revealed that other employees knew the shooter in the beverage distributorship carried guns at work, but that information had not gotten to the people involved in his disciplinary proceedings.  The idea that every employee is responsible for the safety of the company and is encouraged to bring concerns forward is critical.  The company must also have a process to respond to concerns brought forward in a way that supports both employees and fosters trust within the company.

Inside this environment the company should also encourage recognizing employees whose habits or demeanors have changed, or who are going through substantial life difficulties.  Depression, change in work habits, substance abuse, marital difficulties or job lay-offs are a few or many factors that can lead to violence behavior.  Having an employee assistance program to provide formal services, or at least an informal structure of flexibility and understanding for smaller companies, can help decrease the potential for violence by diffusing employee frustrations.

When disciplinary procedures are necessary, structure the process for safety.  Conduct the proceeding in an area away from other employees, at a time when fewer employees are present, or off-site.  If an employee is being terminated, consider access control ahead of time, either recovering keys or changing or turning off access codes or devices.  Have someone outside the proceeding that will be able to call for help if something goes wrong.

The company should have an established process for following up after an employee has been let go.  Offer information on unemployment services at the time of termination and hold the process on a day and time where the person can go to get assistance right away, to lessen the stress and anxiety.  If there were risk factors that warrant public notice, that notice should be made with consideration to privacy and defamation laws.  Think about these topics ahead of time, rather than trying to make complex decisions on the spot.

If an employee or former employee is engaged in violence at the workplace, realize his or her intent is probably to cause as much harm as possible to either specific people or many people.  When a person has decided to go on a rampage, they have for the most part given up on life and indeed, expect not to survive the incident.  Your response then should be only about survival, rather than trying to reason or calm the person.  As difficult as it may be to think of hurting your coworker, than is exactly what he or she is there to do.

We’ll discuss more specifics for defending yourself in the future.

Stay Safe.