Workplace Violence 1
Running head: WORKPLACE VIOLENCE
Violence in the Workplace: A Continuing Issue
R. Bryan Kennedy, AthensStateUniversity
Brenda Harper, AthensStateUniversity
Sam Campbell, AthensStateUniversity
Susan D. Herring, AthensStateUniversity
Linda Shonesy, AthensStateUniversity
AthensStateUniversity
300 North Beaty Street
Athens, AL35611
Address questions or comments to:
Bryan Kennedy
(256) 233-8259
Abstract
This paper presents statistical information collected on violence in the workplace from a study conducted at AthensStateUniversity during 2005-2006. The results of the ASU survey are compared to statistical data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics National Crime Victimization Survey and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Violence in the Workplace: A Continuing Issue
Violence in the workplace is a serious safety and health issue that we cannot ignore any longer. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI), there were 551 workplace homicides in 2004 in the United States, out of a total of 5,703 fatal work injuries (U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety & Health Administration, 2005). Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), defines workplace violence as “ Violence or the threat of violence against workers. It can occur at or outside the workplace and can range form threats and verbal abuse to physical assault and homicide” (OSHA Fact Sheet, 2007).
In 1986, a postal worker killed 14 of his fellow co-workers in Oklahoma City, this incident along with multiple others, brought workplace violence to the forefront of the American Public. From this incident and other subsequent incidents involving postal workers and homicide, the phrase “going postal” entered the American lexicon and a myth was created (U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2004; Beck & Schouten, 2000; Temple, 2000).
“Prior to 1980 such terms as ‘violence in the workplace’ and ‘occupational homicide’ did not exist” (Muchinsky, 2000, p. 296). This is not to say that workplace violence or occupational homicide were non-existent until the 80’s; however, the severity of the problem was not realized by the public until media coverage of the Oklahoma City and other events brought it to the public’s attention. This awareness brought forth a demand for research on violence in the workplace to provide the government and organizations with information to prevent and deal with the problem. This demand for information and solutions continues today (Griffin & O’Leary-Kelly, 2004; U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2004; Allen, 2003; Lipscomb, Silverstein, Slavin, Cody, & Jenkins, 2002).
Some studies conclude that workplace violence is increasing in severity (Kelleher, 1996 as cited in Muchinsky, 2000). Other studies find that the increases are occurring in some sectors or areas while violence is decreasing overall (Lipscomb et al., 2002; Gilmore, 2006), and still others conclude that workplace violence is decreasing (Duhart, 2001; Beck & Schouten, 2000).
The research study discussed here was conducted to examine these trends by investigating the prevalence of workplace violence experience among a selected population and comparing the data gathered through this survey with data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics National Crime Victimization Survey and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Study Methodology
The authors developed a short survey instrument designed to gather data on the prevalence of individual experiences of workplace violence. The survey asked participants to identify whether they had seen or experienced any of the following in their place of work over the past three to five years:
- violence involving a deadly weapon (knife, gun, etc.)
- violence involving physical force (hitting, shoving, etc.)
- verbal violence or abuse (threats, yelling, harassment, etc.)
- deliberate damage to company property or equipment
From 2005-06 academic year, students in selected business classes at AthensStateUniversity completed the survey. The survey was distributed following a class lecture and discussion regarding workplace violence. Students were divided into groups for group/individual thought and discussion, and then asked to complete the survey form.
Statistical Findings
A total of 335 students responded to the survey. Of these, 14.6% had witnessed violence involving a deadly weapon. Over one-quarter of the respondents (27.5%) had witnessed instances of physical violence not involving a deadly weapon. Just over half (54%) had witnessed instances of harassment, threats, yelling, or other verbal abuse; and 23.6% witnessed instances of deliberate damage to company equipment. The results are summarized in Table 1.
Total No. / Total %Number of Respondents / 335 / 100%
Violence with
Deadly Weapons Present / 49 / 14.6%
Physical Violence
(No Deadly Weapons Present) / 92 / 27.5%
Harassment, Threats, Yelling,
or other Verbal Abuse / 181 / 54.0%
Damage to Company Property or Equipment / 79 / 23.6%
Table 1. AthensStateUniversity Workplace Violence Survey Breakdown
Comparison with National Data
The AthensState utilized a convenience sample and the questions do not exactly replicate those of other reliable surveys, making a side-by-side comparison difficult. However, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) utilizes two categories that invite comparison: aggravated assault, which is comparable with violence with a deadly weapon; and simple assault, which is comparable to physical violence and verbal abuse. See Figure 1 for a breakdown of the NCVS results (Duhart, 2001). In the first comparison, 14.6% of AthensState respondents had witnessed violence involving a deadly weapon, as compared with 18.6% nationwide who experienced aggravated assault. Considering the category of simple assault, 27.5% of the AthensState respondents had witnessed or experienced physical violence and 54% had witnessed or experienced verbal abuse, compared with 75.2% who experienced simple assault nationwide. It should be noted that the overall violent crime rate in Alabama falls slightly below the national average, with 2004 figures showing a rate of 426.6 compared with the national average of 465.5 (U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Crime trends).
Figure 1. Breakdown of Types of Violence from the
National Crime Victimization Survey, 2001.
The survey category dealing with damage to company equipment or property cannot be compared to other statistics due to a lack of available information on the subject. Other than a statement in a special report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (2004), which states that the loss from workplace violence to U.S. businesses is in the billions, no statistical data could be found. This indicates a need for further research into the destruction of company property and equipment resulting from workplace violence to establish the extent and severity of economic loss to American industry and business.
In a special Bureau of Labor Statistics report released in 1998, Greg Warchol stated that from 1992-1996 there were a yearly average of 2 million incidents of workplace violence with a yearly average of 1.5 million simple assaults ( In a second special report released in 2001, Detis T. Duhart stated that, from 1993-1999, the yearly averages were 1.7 million incidents of workplace violence and 1.3 million simple assaults (Duhart, 2001). Duhart also stated that workplace violence decreased by 44% while all violent crime in the U.S. decreased by 40% over the same period.
In viewing information from the Bureau of Justice Statistics on crime victimization between 1996 and 2003, statistics indicate that the percentage of workplace victimizations has remained fairly constant, ranging from a high of 16.8% in 1996 to a low of 14.7% in 2003. At the same time, the total number of violent crimes decreased from a high of 8.3 million in 1996 to a low of 4.923 million in 2002 with a slight increase to 4.949 million in 2003 (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2002-2005). This indicates an overall continued fall in the total number of workplace violence incidents.
Policies, Procedures and Protection
In recognizing workplace violence as a problem many scholars, organizations, associations, and institutions state that the key to finding solutions to this problem lies in developing, implementing, and continuously improving policies and procedures for prevention of and managing workplace violence (Montgomery & Cook, 2005; Griffin & O’Leary-Kelly, 2004; U.S. FBI, 2004; DelBel, 2003; U.S. OSHA, 2002; Lipscomb et al., 2002; Smith, 2002; Beck & Schouten, 2000; Denenburg & Braverman, 1999; VandenBos & Bulatao, 1996). The AthensState study indicated that a majority of respondents’ employers – 81% -- had written policies on workplace violence. According to Sarah J. Smith, such policies should include “the means to identify potential for violence; procedures to prevent the occurrence of violence; and, in the event that prevention fails, plans to respond to the incident and minimize further damage” (2002, p. 36).
What can employers do to help protect their employees? According to OSHA, (2007), “the best protection employers can offer is to establish a zero-tolerance policy toward workplace violence against or by their employees”.
- Provide safety education for employees so they know what conduct is not acceptable, what to do if they witness or are subjected to workplace violence, and how to protect themselves.
- Secure the workplace. Where appropriate to the business, install video surveillance, extra lighting, and alarm systems and minimize access by outsiders through identification badges, electronic keys, and guards.
- Provide drop safes to limit the amount of cash on hand. Keep a minimal amount of cash in registers during evenings and late night hours.
- Equip field staff with cellular phones and hand-held alarms or noise devices, and require them to prepare a daily work plan and keep a contact person informed of their location throughout the day. Keep employer provided vehicles properly maintained.
- Instruct employees not to enter any location where they feel unsafe. Introduce a “buddy system” or provide an escort service or police assistance in potentially dangerous situations or at night.
- Develop policies and procedures covering visits by home health-care providers. Address the conduct of home visits, the presence of others in the home during visits, and the worker’s right to refuse to provide services in a clearly hazardous situation.
In addition, as Smith points out (2002), workplace violence policies and procedures can only be effective when they are shared with all employees and implemented consistently, fairly, and promptly.
Conclusion
The study conducted at AthensState, in which the majority of respondents reported experiencing some level of violence in their work environment, illustrates the continuing prevalence of workplace violence. Regardless of whether the national trend is increasing or decreasing, the number of violent incidents, the cost to individuals and businesses, and the lack of a safe and healthy work environment are not, and should not be, acceptable to the American public. According to the Department of Labor, “The Occupational Health and Safety Act’s (OSH Act) General Duty Clause requires employers to provide a safe and healthful workplace for all workers covered by the OSH ACT” (U.S. OSHA, 2002). All employers should seek to provide a similar, safe environment for all employees. Our intent of this paper was and is to enlighten the public of an awareness of workplace violence and prayerfully become involved in preventive measurements.
References
Allen, Z. (2003, July 21). Unions demand protection from workplace violence. New YorkAmsterdam News, 94(27), 3-4. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (10207811).
Beck, J. C., & Schouten, R. (2000, Winter). Workplace violence and psychiatric practice. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 64(1), 36-48. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (2772258).
DelBel, J. C. (2003, September). De-escalating workplace aggression. Nursing Management, 34(9), 31-34. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (10718124).
Denenburg, R. V., & Braverman, M. (1999). The violence prone workplace: A new approach to dealing with hostile, threatening, and uncivil behavior. Ithaca, NY: CornellUniversity Press.
Duhart, D.T. (2001). Bureau of Justice Statistics special report: National Crime Victimization Survey: Violence in the workplace, 1993-1999. Retrieved July27, 2006, from
Gilmore, J. (2006, May). Violence in the workplace. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 33(3), 254-255. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (21135202).
Griffin, R. W., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (Eds.). (2004). The dark side of organizational behavior.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lipscomb, J., Silverstein, B., Slavin, T. J., Cody, E., &Jenkins, L. (2002, Fall). Perspectives on legal strategies to prevent workplace violence. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 30 (Suppl.) (3), 166-172. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (8679303).
Montgomery, J. G., & Cook, E. I. (2005). Conflict management for libraries: Strategies for a positive, productive workplace.Chicago: American Library Association.
Muchinsky, P. M. (2000). Psychology applied to work:An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2007). Fact sheet.
Smith, S. J. (2002, November). Workplace violence: 10 tips for a proactive prevention program. Professional Safety, 47(11): 34-43. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from Business Source Premier database.
Temple, P. (2000, October). Real danger and ‘postal’ mythology. Workforce, 79(10), 8. Retrieved July 23, 2006 from Academic Search Premier database (3678914).
U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2004). Crime trends. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2004). Table 64: Percent distribution of incidents, by victim’s activities at time of incident and type of crime. Criminal victimization in the United States – Statistical tables. Retrieved July27, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002, April). Cases involving assaults and violent acts by person(s), 2000. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2003, March). Cases involving assaults and violent acts by person(s), 2001. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2004, March). Cases involving assaults and violent acts by person(s), 2002. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2005, March). Cases involving assaults and violent acts by person(s), 2003. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006, March). Cases involving assaults and violent acts by person(s), 2004. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from
U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Criminal Incident Response Group. (2004, March 1). Workplace violence: Issues in response. Retrieved July27, 2006, from
U.S. Occupational Health and Safety Administration. (2002). OSHA fact sheet: Workplace violence. Retrieved July 27, 2006,
VandenBos, G. R., & Bulatao, E. Q. (Eds.). (1996). Violence on the job: Identifying risks and developing solutions. WashingtonDC: American Psychological Association.
Warchol, G. (1998). Bureau of Justice Statistics special report: National Crime Victimization Survey: Workplace violence, 1992-96. Retrieved July27, 2006, from