DOCSLIB.ORG

Preventing Workplace Violence a “Catch-22” for Employers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preventing Workplace Violence a “Catch-22” for Employers EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE Preventing Workplace Violence A “Catch-22” for Employers By Daniel B. Klein, Esq., and Mark A. Lies II s the pace and emotional pressures of everyday CAUSES OF VIOLENCE life impact employees at home and in the work- While many incidents of workplace violence appear to be place, a distressing and tragic trend has been random and unpredictable, most commentators agree that such A incidents are predictable and result from the interaction of two occurring for some time—employees are unable to con- dynamics: trol their emotions at work, and violence erupts toward • Personal factors: Numerous factors occurring in the employ- managers, coworkers, customers or third parties. The ee’s personal life (e.g., marital problems, prior history of physi- unfortunate statistics show that homicide is the number- cal or mental impairment, drug or alcohol abuse, or the same one cause of death for women in the workplace and the circumstances occurring to a member of the employee’s imme- third overall cause for men and women. In times of eco- diate family). • Workplace factors: Real or perceived factors occurring in nomic uncertainty, particularly as employees face layoffs the workplace that simultaneously impact the employee (e.g., and corporate reorganizations, the potential for work- potential layoff s or reductions in force; lack of career opportu- place violence cannot be underestimated. nity; unequal or unfair opportunities for training, compensa- tion, benefi ts or overtime; or harassment by coworkers). No employer wants such incidents to occur. Ironically, how- ever, as employers attempt to avoid these potential legal lia- Fortunately for our society and the workplace, when these bilities through the creation and enforcement of employment two dynamics collide, most employees are able to control their policies, they face a host of federal and state laws that may pro- emotions and somehow deal with their day-to-day side eff ects. tect certain employee conduct. More importantly, because an However, because no employee will typically notify the employer employer has no objective “litmus test” for predicting which unambiguously that he or she is no longer able to maintain an employee may become violent under particular triggering cir- emotional balance when dealing with these dynamics and that a cumstances, there is no foolproof way to eff ectively eliminate sudden and potentially violent physical or emotional outburst is the hazard. Th is article will discuss certain factors that should imminent, the employer cannot conveniently schedule a police, be considered to anticipate and to avoid and respond to this medical, security, or other intervention to prevent such event. In threat, including the potential use of and restrictions on fi tness order to have any reasonable chance of predicting and avoiding for duty (FFD) evaluations. workplace violence, the employer (through its supervisors) musmustt 8 insightsinsights • Spring 2010 • InsightsInsigInsighhtss MagazineMaggazaziine isi publishedpublished byby tthehe NortheastNoNortrtheheasast HuHHumanman Resources AssociatioAssociationn become more sophisticated in observing, liability doctrines under common law or emotional status and relevant activi- identifying and understanding the signs (based upon a negligence theory) where ties outside of the workplace that might and symptoms that frequently telegraph an employer may be held liable for the vio- be essential in determining whether an that these dynamics are at work and may lent acts of an employee if the employer: employee poses such a risk. For exam- be about to overwhelm the employee’s • Negligently hired the employee (e.g., ple, many states now have laws that ability to cope in a rational manner. Once failed to investigate the employee’s prevent employers from taking adverse these signs and symptoms are identifi ed, work history to determine if there was job actions against employees for engag- the employer should take action, which prior violent conduct) ing in lawful off -duty conduct or using may include an FFD evaluation under the • Negligently supervised the employee lawful products (e.g., smoking), or for appropriate circumstances. (failed to warn or discipline an engaging in off -premises recreational employee who engaged in threatening activities outside of working hours. CONFLICTING EMPLOYER DUTIES conduct) Employer obligations. Based upon • Negligently trained the employee PREVENTIVE ACTION: several diff erent areas of federal and state (failed to provide training to employ- WORKPLACE VIOLENCE POLICY law, every employer has a legal duty to pre- ees regarding prohibited conduct that Against this potential liability mine- vent violence and the underlying behav- may have given rise to violence and fi eld, an employer should develop an ior that may generate it. Perhaps the most the consequences of engaging in such eff ective written workplace violence pre- well-known duty arises out of Title VII conduct) vention policy and should communicate of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. • Negligently retained the employee it to all employees to maximize its defense § 2000e et seq., and parallel state anti- (failed to terminate an employee who against these potential claims. At a mini- discrimination laws, which require an engaged in acts or threats of violence) mum, the workplace violence prevention employer to protect its employees against policy and program should include the unlawful forms of workplace harassment Every employer has a legal following elements: (e.g., based on sex, race, color, religion, duty to prevent violence • A stated management commitment to or national origin) that create a hostile or and the underlying protecting employees against the haz- off ensive work environment. Frequently, ards of workplace violence, including employee violence is triggered by such behavior that may both physical acts and verbal threats harassing conduct, which causes the vic- generate it. • A statement that the employer has tim (or the victim’s spouse or relative) to a “zero tolerance” policy toward react to the harasser (and sometimes to Employee rights. When employ- threats or acts of violence and will innocent coworkers or bystanders) with ers attempt to aggressively enforce a take appropriate disciplinary action a refl exive anger in the form of verbal workplace violence policy, they are fre- against employees who engage in such outbursts or even physical acts. Th e same quently confronted by federal and state conduct anti-harassment rules apply under the laws that protect employees against dis- • Identify means and methods for Age Discrimination in Employment Act, crimination involving mental or emo- employees to notify the employer of 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., and the Americans tional conditions that may constitute perceived threats of violent acts in a with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 legally protected disabilities. Under the confi dential manner et seq. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), • Establish a means to promptly investi- Under the Federal Occupational 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and similar gate all such threats or violent acts Safety and Health Act (OSHA), 29 U.S.C. state laws, an employer is limited in • Develop consistent, fi rm discipline for § 650 et seq., an employer is required to its ability to screen and reject a poten- violations of the policy protect employees against “recognized” tial employee on the suspicion that the • Provide training to managers and workplace safety and health hazards individual may become violent because employees to identify signs and symp- that are likely to cause serious injury or of a mental or emotional impairment. toms of employee behavior which death. OSHA has identifi ed workplace Further, aft er the employment relation- may predict potential violence (erratic violence as such a hazard, particularly in ship exists, an employer may have to behavior; employee comments regard- the health care, retail and taxicab indus- accommodate a disruptive employee ing homicide or suicide; provocative tries. Th e agency has issued citations with with a mental or emotional disability communications; disobedience of pol- monetary penalties alleging that employ- until such employee engages in conduct icies and procedures, presence of alco- ers hhaveave failed to develop appropriate which renders the employee “unquali- hol, drugs or weapons on the worksite; workworkplaceplace violence policies. OSHA has fi ed” to continue to perform the job physical evidence of employee abuse of aalsolso issuedissue guidelines that can be useful or which poses a “direct threat” to the alcohol or drug use) which should be iinn ddevelopingevelop such programs (which can safety or health of the employee himself reported to the employer be found at its website, www.osha.gov). or to other employees. In addition, many • Establish a team of qualifi ed individu- In aadditiondd to the federal laws and state state right-to-privacy laws may severely als (e.g., human resources, risk man- anti-discranti-discrimination and occupational restrict an employer’s ability to obtain agers, legal, medical, security) either safesafetyty lawlaws,s most states have also developed information about an employee’s mental within the company or via readily Insights Magazine is published by the Northeast Human Resources Association • Spring 2010 • insights 9 available third parties, to respond to a this process. Because of the heightened the investigation, the employer should potential or actual incident sensitivity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Whistleblowing, Workers' Comp and Mobbing
    Whistleblowing, Workers’ Comp and Mobbing ©2011 Gail Pursell Elliott Mobbing is an organizational dynamic. When mobbing and covert bullying are part of the organizational culture, they can be quietly used as retaliation for whistle blowing and/or to move workers out of the workplace who have become perceived liabilities due to work injury. If you are appalled by this concept, you are not alone. However this does occur and deserves a closer look on the part of ethical human resources administrators and risk management professionals. The Ethics Resource Center’s 2009 survey reported that fifteen percent of surveyed employees who reported misconduct experienced both subtle and overt behaviors which they construed as retaliatory. When asked to specify these behaviors, the following were reported. 60% other employees gave employee a cold shoulder 62% supervisor or management excluded person from decisions and work activity 55% verbally abused by direct supervisor or someone else in management 48% almost lost job 42% verbally abused by other employees 43% not given promotions or raises 27% relocated or reassigned 20% any other form of retaliation 18% demoted 4% experienced physical harm to person or property* The majority of these are included in the five categories of observable mobbing behaviors. While statistics are indicative of issues worthy of investigation, it may be helpful to look at some individual cases with which I have had experience within the past year. These situations occurred in a variety of industries as diverse as public works, education and health care. It should be noted that not only those persons reporting misconduct were subjected to this type of behavior but also those who had become aware of such concerns as misallocation of budgetary funding or grants, cutting corners which seriously put consumers or others at risk, not following written procedures, and so forth.
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Bullying and Harassment Information and Support
    Workplace bullying and harassment Information and support Introduction There is good evidence that disruptive behaviour, inappropriate behaviour and harassment occurs in the medical workplace. A New Zealand study reported that 50% of house officers and registrars had experienced at least one episode of bullying behaviour during their previous three or sixth-month clinical attachment.1 An Australian study found that 50% of junior doctors had been bullied in their workplace.2 International research has shown that bullying in the healthcare profession is not associated with specialty or sex; it appears that bullying is endemic and occurs across all specialties and at all levels of seniority although it is fair to say that where bullying occurs it is more common to be by a more senior employee over a more junior one3. Examples of bullying could be a registrar that bullies a medical student or a charge nurse that bullies an enrolled nurse4. Behaviour that is disruptive to patient care and ideal workplace conditions can occur between colleagues, students and employees, and any contractors, patients, and family members with whom they are dealing. The aims of this resource are to: provide a guide for all doctors, medical students, hospital and practice managers to identify and manage workplace bullying and harassment, raise awareness and reduce the exposure of doctors and medical students to workplace bullying and harassment, and assist the medical profession in combating its perpetuation. Definition The Equal Employment Opportunities Trust defines harassment as “any unwelcome comment, conduct or gesture that is insulting, intimidating, humiliating, malicious, degrading or offensive". It might be repeated or an isolated incident but it is so significant that it adversely affects someone's performance, contribution or work environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying
    1: Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying Workplace Bullying Clinical and Organizational Perspectives In the early 1980s, German industrial psychologist Heinz Leymann began work in Sweden, conducting studies of workers who had experienced violence on the job. Leymann’s research originally consisted of longitudinal studies of subway drivers who had accidentally run over people with their trains and of banking employees who had been robbed on the job. In the course of his research, Leymann discovered a surprising syndrome in a group that had the most severe symptoms of acute stress disorder (ASD), workers whose colleagues had ganged up on them in the workplace (Gravois, 2006). Investigating this further, Leymann studied workers in one of the major Swedish iron and steel plants. From this early work, Leymann used the term “mobbing” to refer to emotional abuse at work by one or more others. Earlier theorists such as Austrian ethnologist Konrad Lorenz and Swedish physician Peter-Paul Heinemann used the term before Leymann, but Leymann received the most recognition for it. Lorenz used “mobbing” to describe animal group behavior, such as attacks by a group of smaller animals on a single larger animal (Lorenz, 1991, in Zapf & Leymann, 1996). Heinemann borrowed this term and used it to describe the destructive behavior of children, often in a group, against a single child. This text uses the terms “mobbing” and “bullying” interchangeably; however, mobbing more often refers to bullying by more than one person and can be more subtle. Bullying more often focuses on the actions of a single person.
    [Show full text]
  • OSHR Workplace Violence Policy
    STATE HUMAN RESOURCES MANUAL Workplace Environment, Health. Wellness & Work/Life Section 8, Page 15 Revised: April 1, 2008 Workplace Violence ________________________________________________________________________ Contents: Purpose Definitions Coverage Prohibited Actions and Sanctions Authorized Exceptions to Policy Support and Protections Retaliation Reporting Responsibilities Agency Responsibilities Purpose It is the intent of the State Human Resources Commission to provide a workplace for State employees that is free from violence by establishing preventative measures, holding perpetrators of violence accountable and by providing assistance and support to victims. Committing violent acts, whether on-duty or off-duty, has the potential to impact an employee’s ability to perform their job. In implementing this policy, the State is guided by the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 that requires employers to provide their employees with a safe and healthy work environment. It is intended that all useful management tools be employed to accomplish the dual purpose of reducing the effects of violence on victims and providing consequences to those who perpetrate violence. It is also intended that management utilize available resources such as an Employee Assistance Program (EAP), law enforcement, and applicable personnel policies and procedures. ______________________________________________________________________________ Definitions Workplace Violence includes, but is not limited to, intimidation, bullying, stalking, threats, physical attack, domestic violence or property damage and includes acts of violence committed by State employees, clients, customers, relatives, acquaintances or strangers against State employees in the workplace. Intimidation is engaging in actions that includes but is not limited to behavior intended to frighten, coerce, or induce duress. Workplace Violence STATE HUMAN RESOURCES MANUAL Workplace Environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Violence Prevention Requirements for New York State Public Employers
    New York State Department of Labor Division of Safety and Health Workplace Violence Prevention Requirements For New York State Public Employers What is the New York State Workplace Violence Prevention Regulation? On April 29, 2009 12 NYCRR Part 800.6 was promulgated and published in the State Register as a final rule. This Part requires public employers (other than schools covered under the school safety plan requirements of the education law) to perform a workplace evaluation or risk evaluation at each worksite and to develop and implement programs to prevent and minimize workplace violence caused by assaults and homicides. The rule is designed to ensure that the risk of workplace assaults and homicides are regularly evaluated by public employers and that workplace violence protection programs are implemented to prevent and minimize the hazard to public employees. What is the effective date of the Regulation? At the time of publishing the rule included a stepped compliance period. As of August 27, 2009 employers are required to be in compliance with the entire Part. What public employers are covered? According to the regulation, the term public employer includes the state, a political subdivision of the state, a public authority, a public benefit corporation and any other governmental agency or instrumentality. Employers defined in Section 2801-A of New York State Education laws are exempt from the provisions of the Workplace Violence Prevention Regulation since there is existing law requiring them to develop and maintain “school safety
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Bullying and Harassment
    AMA Position Statement Workplace Bullying and Harassment 2009 Introduction There is good evidence that bullying and harassment of doctors occurs in the workplace. One Australian study found that 50% of Australian junior doctors had been bullied in their workplace, and a New Zealand study reported that 50% of doctors had experienced at least one episode of bullying behaviour during their previous three or sixth-month clinical attachment. 1 2 Workplace bullying of members of the medical workforce can occur between colleagues students and employees, and any contractors, patients, and family members with whom they are dealing. The aims of this position statement are to: • provide a guide for all doctors, hospital and practice managers to identify and manage workplace bullying and harassment, • raise awareness and reduce the exposure of doctors to workplace bullying and harassment, and • assist the medical profession in combating its perpetuation. Definition Workplace bullying is defined as a pattern of unreasonable and inappropriate behaviour towards others, although it may occur as a single event. Such behaviour intimidates, offends, degrades, insults or humiliates an employee. It can include psychological, social, and physical bullying.3 Most people use the terms ‘bullying’ and ‘harassment’ interchangeably and bullying is often described as a form of harassment. The range of behaviours that constitutes bullying and harassment is wide and may include: • physical violence and intimidation, • vexatious reports and malicious rumours, • verbal threats, yelling, screaming, offensive language or inappropriate comments, • excluding or isolating employees (including assigning meaningless tasks unrelated to the job or giving employees impossible tasks or enforced overwork), • deliberately changing work rosters to inconvenience particular employees, • undermining work performance by deliberately withholding information vital for effective work performance, and • inappropriate or unwelcome sexual attention.
    [Show full text]
  • Preventing Workplace Violence
    Preventing Workplace Violence 1 Staying Safe on the Job As you have been learning, potential hazards are all around. Learning to identify those hazards and knowing what to do so you and others stay safe is the best way to avoid a harmful incident. Every year in the United States thousands of people are injured or killed as a result of workplace violence. If you are ever faced with a potentially violent situation, knowing what could happen, what to look for, and what actions to take could help you prevent injuries or even save lives. So, let’s start learning how to help prevent workplace violence. 2 Preventing Workplace Violence • What is violence? • Who is at risk? • Prevention strategies: - Employer and employee involvement - Warning signs - Coping skills 3 1 What is Workplace Violence? Violence may include: • Abusive language – swearing and insults • Harassment – behaviors that demean, embarrass, humiliate, or alarm • Intimidation – fist shaking, throwing objects, or yelling • Physical assault – hitting, kicking, squeezing, stabbing, or shooting • Threats of assault – any expressed intention to do harm of any kind 4 What is Violence? When violence occurs at your place of employment or while working for your employer at any other location, this is considered workplace violence. Violence in the workplace may come from a stranger, customer, co-worker, acquaintance, or intimate person (such as current or ex- boyfriends, girlfriends, or spouses). 5 Who is at Risk? In today’s workplaces, violence can affect anyone. No workplace is immune to the threat of workplace violence. However, due to their nature, certain occupations do place employees at a greater risk of workplace violence.
    [Show full text]
  • What You Need to Know Developing Workplace Violence and Harassment Codes of Practice
    Developing Workplace Violence and Harassment Codes of Practice What You Need to Know March 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 2 Who Should Use This Guide 2 SECTION 1 3 Guideline for Developing and Implementing a Workplace Code of Practice for Harassment SECTION 2 6 Assessing Your Workplace’s Risk for Violence SECTION 3 8 Guideline for Developing and Implementing a Workplace Code of Practice for Violence CONCLUSION 11 APPENDICES A. Sample Template – Code of Practice for Managing Workplace Harassment 12 B. Sample Template – Reporting Harassment 13 C. Sample Template – Harassment Investigation Report 14 D. Sample Template – Risk Assessment – Fixed Workplaces 15 E. Sample Template – Risk Assessment – Project Sites 17 F. Sample Template – Risk Assessment – Work Practices 19 G. Sample Template – Code of Practice for Managing Workplace Violence 20 H. Tips for Dealing with a Potentially Violent Person 21 I. Frequently Asked Questions 25 J. Occupational Health and Safety Act, General Regulation 91-191 – Violence and Harassment 29 WorkSafeNB | Developing Workplace Violence and Harassment Codes of Practice 1 INTRODUCTION Every worker has a right to a healthy and safe workplace. Because both employers and employees benefit from a healthy and safe workplace, they both have a role in creating and maintaining it. For workers, a healthy and safe workplace protects them from injury, illness and wage loss. Employees who feel that the employer cares about their health and safety are more productive and engaged. For employers, a strong safety culture leads to a decrease in absenteeism and staff turnover, resulting in an increase to their bottom line and reputation. A healthy and safe workplace must be a respectful one, one that is free of harassment and violence.
    [Show full text]
  • BOT Report 09-Nov-20.Docx
    REPORT 9 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (November 2020) Bullying in the Practice of Medicine (Reference Committee D) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the 2019 Annual Meeting Resolution 402-A-19, “Bullying in the Practice of Medicine,” was introduced by the Young Physicians Section and referred by the House of Delegates (HOD) for report back at the 2020 Annual Meeting. The resolution asks the American Medical Association (AMA) to help (1) establish a clear definition of professional bullying, (2) establish prevalence and impact of professional bullying, and (3) establish guidelines for prevention of professional bullying. This report provides statistics and other information about the prevalence and impact of professional bullying in the practice of medicine, and makes recommendations for the adoption of a formal definition and guidelines for establishing policies and strategies for preventing and addressing incidents of bullying among the health care staff. Bullying in the practice of medicine for physicians can begin in medical school and can endure throughout a physician’s career. Bullying is not limited to physicians and can happen among other members of the health care team. Bullying has many definitions, all commonly referring to the repeated abuse of a target by a perpetrator in a work setting. Bullying occurs at different levels within the practice of medicine, and affects the victim as well as their patients, care teams, organizations, and families. Nationally recognized organizations have established guidelines on which health care employers can base their internal policies, and many organizations have implemented anti-bullying or anti-violence policies. Bullying in medicine needs to be stopped and prevented for the sake of patients and care quality, the well- being of the physician workforce, and the integrity of the medical profession.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Retaliation/Whistleblower, Human Resources
    Policies and Procedures – Section 8 HR 49 Subject: Human Resources – Non-Retaliation/Whistleblower Policy: 1. General Statement of Purpose May Institute is committed to maintaining an ethical and compliant workplace where employees are free to raise good faith concerns (See the Rights/Ethics section of May Institute Policy and Procedure manual for additional information). This Policy provides the Organization’s guidance on: (1) how employees may report a concern about workplace conduct including any behavior that employees believe to be in violation of Organization policies or potentially in violation of applicable laws, rules, and regulations; and (2) the Policy sets forth the Company’s commitment to prohibit retaliation against those employees that report such concerns to management. This Policy does not replace the provisions found in the Employee Handbook concerning the reporting of unlawful harassment and workplace violence. 2. Reporting Responsibility It is the responsibility of all managers and employees of May Institute to comply with May’s policies as well as state and federal law regarding business practices and to report suspected violations in accordance with this Policy. Good faith reports of such suspected violations should be made in the manner described in the Procedure section listed below. Employee reports of suspected violations must be in good faith and must provide honest information to management. To the extent possible, May Institute’s management will handle the report in a confidential manner. Any person who knowingly makes a false statement, or who otherwise intentionally misuses the complaint process, may be subject to discipline, up to and including immediate termination of employment.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers
    Guidelines for Preventing workp ace vio ence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers OSHA 3148-06R 2016 www.osha.govU.S. Department of Labor www.osha.go v Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 “To assure safe and healthful working conditions for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions; by providing for research, information, education, and training in the field of occupational safety and health...” This publication provides a general overview of worker rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act). This publication does not alter or determine compliance responsibilities which are set forth in OSHA standards and the OSH Act. Moreover, because interpretations and enforcement policy may change over time, for additional guidance on OSHA compliance requirements the reader should consult current administrative interpretations and decisions by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and the courts. Material contained in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced, fully or partially, without permission. Source credit is requested but not required. This information will be made available to sensory-impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 693-1999; teletypewriter (TTY) number: 1-877-889-5627. Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA 3148-06R 2016 This guidance document is advisory in nature and informational in content. It is not a standard or regulation, and it neither creates new legal obligations nor alters existing obligations created by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards or the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act or Act).
    [Show full text]
  • State of Kansas Workplace Violence Policy
    STATE OF KANSAS WORKPLACE VIOLENCE POLICY The safety and security of State of Kansas employees and customers are very important. Threats, threatening behavior, acts of violence, or any related conduct which disrupts another's work performance or the organization's ability to execute its mission will not be tolerated. Any person who makes threats, exhibits threatening behavior, or engages in violent acts on state-owned or leased property may be removed from the premises pending the outcome of an investigation. Threats, threatening behavior, or other acts of violence executed off state-owned or leased property but directed at state employees or members of the public while conducting official state business, is a violation of this policy. Off-site threats include but are not limited to threats made via the telephone, fax, electronic or conventional mail, or any other communication medium. Violations of this policy will lead to disciplinary action that may include dismissal, anest, and prosecution. In addition, if the source of such inappropriate behavior is a member of the public, the response may also include barring the person(s) from state-owned or leased premises, termination of business relationships with that individual, and/or prosecution of the person(s) involved. Employees are responsible for notifying the agency's Personnel Office of any threats which they have witnessed, received, or have been told that another person has witnessed or received. Employees should also report any behavior they have witnessed which they regard as threatening or violent when that behavior is job related or might be carried out on state-owned or leased property or in connection with state employment.
    [Show full text]