Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:526497 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
Introduction
Violent acts cost employers too much to ignore. Because violence in the
workplace is on the rise, companies should take steps to prevent and prepare for
potentially violent events.
Fidel Gonzalez, Jr., an employee of the state of California, entered his super-
visor’s office, shot his boss and then himself. The note Gonzalez left behind said:
“I hope this will alleviate a lot of stress from my co-workers and set them free.”
Numerous studies and reports show the amount of violence and conflict in
the workplace has dramatically increased in recent years. According to one study,
the rate of workplace homicide has tripled in the last decade.
Other acts of violence have also become more prevalent at work. More than a
third of the 479 Human Resources professionals who responded to a recent survey
conducted by the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM), said their
organisations have experienced violent acts. Thirty-two percent of the respon-
dents said that one or more violent acts had occurred since 1989. Among those re-
porting more than one altercation, 54 percent saw between two and five violent
workplace incidents during the past five years. (Smith, p.6)
12
Volume 22 Number 8 1999
The causes of workplace violence are many. Among the factors that have
been identified are economic conditions, layoffs, stress over job security, authori-
tarian workplaces, drug and alcohol problems and the effects of domestic disputes
that flare up at work. Contributing factors include the easy availability of weapons
as well as the books, television shows, movies and songs glorifying violence.
Downloaded by ACADEMIA DE STUDII ECONOMICE DIN BUCURESTI At 04:08 03 November 2016 (PT)
(Anonymous, p.8)
In a recent Minnesota case, an employee of Honeywell was sent to prison for mur-
dering a co-worker. After his release, he was rehired by Honeywell but was trans-
ferred twice because of problems with co-workers. After threatening a third
worker, the company accepted his resignation. Eight days later he killed a co-
worker with a shotgun at her home. The appellate court held that Honeywell could
be sued for negligently hiring a co-worker with dangerous tendencies. (Patterson,
p.4)
As violent incidents in the workplace have increased, so has the potential li-
ability for employers. Some believe the problem of workplace violence can be
solved by carefully screening job applicants and developing profiles of persons
with a high propensity for violent behaviour. But employers exploring screening
proposals must be aware of liability issues. (DiLorenzo, p.55)
13
Management Research News
about job applicants. Also, screening can only reveal past behaviour, it cannot ac-
curately predict future behaviour. As an alternative to screening, some employers
use profiles to identify potentially violent employees. The theory behind profiling
is that employers can spot potentially violent employees before they harm co-
workers.
First, the violent worker’s profile is not out of the ordinary and may fit many
applicants: he is a white male, over 30 years old, with an average education, past
military service and without apparent grounding in religion or family. Second, the
profile of a person likely to commit murder differs from the profile of one who
stalks, rapes, or commits other crimes. Third, employers run the risk of violating
an employee’s civil rights if they take adverse actions based on a profile.
(DiLorenzo, p.56)
One likely source of civil rights liability is the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). Employers with profiling programmes run the risk of acting on a pro-
file that, in essence, merely describes a mental impairment protected by the ADA.
An employee who fits a profile of persons with violent tendencies and is termi-
nated because the employer fears co-workers will be harmed, may file a lawsuit
against the employer for discrimination on the basis of disability and for failure to
make a reasonable accommodation. On the other hand, companies that hire or
continue to employ individuals may be subject to another form of legal liability.
(DiLorenzo, p.56)
Negligent referral claims can arise when companies give “barebones” refer-
ences on former employees. Many employers, fearful of being sued for defama-
tion, give only minimal information and avoid any negative comments about
former employees. If the employee is hired by the second employer and then in-
jures a third party, the third party may sue both the current and former employee
for negligence. The elements are basically the same as those required for a negli-
gent hiring or retention case.
The theory behind these claims is that employers owe a duty of care to any
person the employer could reasonably expect to be harmed by an unfit employee.
Plaintiffs must show that the employer could reasonably expect them to be harmed
and failed to use reasonable care under the circumstances. Employers are usually
faulted for nonexistent or inadequate background investigations of applicants
14
Volume 22 Number 8 1999
which, if properly performed, would have disclosed that the employee was unfit.
(DiLorenzo, p.57)
Workplace violence poses a dilemma: employers may be sued for taking ag-
gressive actions to prevent violence or for not taking sufficient precautions. Em-
ployers must balance their efforts to ensure a safe work environment with laws
protecting employee rights.
What can companies do to protect their employees and themselves against work-
place violence? An employer can take several measures to prevent workplace vio-
Downloaded by ACADEMIA DE STUDII ECONOMICE DIN BUCURESTI At 04:08 03 November 2016 (PT)
lence, beginning at the hiring stage and continuing throughout employment to the
point of termination. The following are specific actions recommended to prevent
and prepare for violent incidents:
15
Management Research News
likelihood that the violent worker has experienced some sort of problem at a previ-
ous employer, complete reference checks are critical. Besides providing a means
of monitoring risks and preventing violence, the background check may be evi-
dence of “reasonable care” in a lawsuit alleging negligence. All employment ap-
plications should include a waiver allowing the employer to examine a
candidate’s prior employment history.
3. Establish a system to report and respond to threats and acts of violence. Warn-
ing signs often foreshadow violent events. Although it is difficult to list every
symptom that a potentially violent person may display, the following actions or
conditions have proven to be some of the best predictors of violent behaviour:
overt threats of violence or threatening actions; major changes in habit; expression
of unusual or bizarre thoughts; a fixation with weapons; a romantic obsession; se-
vere depression; and chemical dependence. (Smith, p.6)
Another way to defuse potential violence is to ensure employees can get help
when they need it. Companies should provide and identify resources for employ-
ees to seek assistance with personal and/or work related problems. Human Re-
sources representatives should be well-trained in receiving and reacting to work
related complaints. Employee Assistance Programmes are also good resources for
troubled employees.
16
Volume 22 Number 8 1999
should not ignore the potential for workplace violence in the hope that “it will not
happen here.” Companies should ‘play it safe’ by taking prudent measures to pre-
vent violence from occurring and to ensure mechanisms are in place to respond ap-
propriately in case it does.
Conclusion
Violence in the workplace has continued to increase in recent years and, unfortu-
nately there is no reason to believe the trend will subside. This fact places employ-
ers in a difficult position. They must balance their obligations to ensure a safe
work environment with restrictions that limit their ability to weed out individuals
most likely to engage in violent behaviour. Companies need to be proactive with-
out being overreactive. Simple and common steps such as installing security sys-
tems, developing reporting procedures and using careful employment practices
are measures that can be effective determents to workplace violence.
17
This article has been cited by:
1. Mohammad Ahmad Al‐OmariBased in the School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia Husna
JohariBased in the College of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia Ling Suan ChooBased in the School of
Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia. 2012. Workplace violence: a case in Malaysian higher education
institute. Business Strategy Series 13:6, 274-283. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by ACADEMIA DE STUDII ECONOMICE DIN BUCURESTI At 04:08 03 November 2016 (PT)