Paul Leodler

SHRM Seattle

1/17/2013

Sent Home, Worker Returns And Shoots 3 June 5, 1998 | From Tribune News Services

ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA — A worker at a food-service plant was sent home for disciplinary reasons Thursday, then returned to shoot three supervisors before killing himself, police said.

William Muth Jr., 41, who worked in the warehouse at the U.S. Foodservice Inc. distribution center for 12 years, was told to take the rest of the day off in what officials called a disciplinary action.

He returned with a handgun to confront the supervisors, according to police. They said Muth shot warehouse manager Earl Moritz, 48, and human resources manager Timothy Kita, 37; Moritz was killed.

He then shot John Leodler, 46, vice president of operations, in the face and shot himself.

Leodler was in stable condition and Kita, who was shot in the chest, was listed as critical.

Countering Workplace Violence:

Identifying Pre-Incident Indicators & Developing

Effective Strategies

Agenda

Workplace Violence – Defined

Scope of the Issue

Understanding Pre-incident Indicators

Developing a Model WPV Program

Training

Criminal Risks to Workplace

Workplace Violence

RobberiesHijackingsTheftsProduct

TamperingFraud

Bomb ThreatsInappropriate Use

of Email and Internet

Misappropriation of Assets/Resources

Breaching/Tampering IT Networks

Statistics of NoteWPV Resulting in Homicide

• 21st Century we average 522 workplace homicides annually

• 2010 saw 270 workplace suicides

• Per BLS 1992 – 2010 saw 13,872 workplace homicides - average 700 per year

• Highest year 1994 – 1080, lowest - 2011 - 480

• In 2010 - 78% homicides by shooting

• 86% workplace killings occur in private sector

• 18% deaths in workplace though WPV

Non-Lethal WPV Incidents

• Estimated non-lethal WPV incidents: 2 million annually

• Nonlethal incidents Aggravated assault Simple assault Rape Hostage taking Hijacking Kidnap

• Highest incidence of WPV (39%) – Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

WPV Impact on Women

33% women killed in workplace at hands of former intimate partner

2005 phone survey found 44% personally experienced impact of domestic violence in workplace

21% reported being victim of domestic violence in workplace

WPV is THE leading cause of death for women in the workplace (OSHA)

More than half ER nurses assaulted at work

Origin of WPV

Percentage BreakdownCustomers - 40%Strangers - 25%Domestic Spillover - 6%Former Em-ployees - 3%Current Em-ployees - 26%

Cost of Workplace Violence

• NIOSH estimates $121 billion annual cost to business

• Domestic violence causes 175,000 lost work days annually

• Non-fatal assaults account for 876,000 lost work days annually

• Average out of court settlement for WPV is $500,000

• Fatal WPV ranges from $800,000 to $5 million each

• VA Tech shooting (32 victims) cost the University $8mm in expenses alone not including OSHA fines and financial settlements

• Cost of reacting to a serious WPV incident is 100 times greater than preventing an incident

Intangible Cost of Workplace Violence

Loss of morale

and productivi

ty

Departure of

employees

Damage to brand

and compan

y reputati

on

What is Workplace Violence?

Harassment

Intimidation

Threats

Violence

Harassment – Definition

To annoy or torment repeatedly

and persistently

Intimidation - Definition

A statement of condition that must be met in order to avert harm. Contains IF, UNLESS, UNTIL, OR ELSE.

Threat - Definition

A statement or indication of intention to do harm:

• Offers no conditions, exceptions or options

• It is like a promise

Violence - Definition

Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing another

Escalation to Violence

Discourtes

y

Disrespect

Intimidatio

n

Harassmen

t/Bullyi

ng

Retaliation

Verbal

Assault

Physical Aggression

Pre-Incident Indicators

Distorted perception of being picked on

Holding grudges

Non-violent criminal behavior

Belligerence, insubordination

Inappropriate communications Email Spoken words Gestures Notes/letters

Pre-Incident Indicators

Morbid jealousy (i.e., false belief spouse is cheating)

Repeated, strong racist or sexist behavior

Unreasonable grievances

Substance abuse Alcohol, over-the counter drugs, prescription drugs,

illegal drugs

Preoccupation with violence, police, military, or survivalism Pictures of guns and gun range targets in the office Pictures of movie violence that have been altered with

real-person faces Intimidating comments about violence/weapons

Pre-Incident Indicators

Threatening or intimidating behavior Bluster, forceful language, pictures, gestures,

screensavers

Anger, hostility, temper tantrums Persistent pursuit or

stalking/Aggressive sexual behavior Misuse of firearms Prior violence Homicidal or suicidal thoughts Active psychotic symptoms

Voices Delusions

Myths

WPV is an “epidemic,” or a “public health crisis”

U.S. Post Office has a unique WPV problem

WPV doesn’t exist at my company

WPV is only committed by disgruntled employees

He just snapped!

Stakeholders in WPV Program

Executive Leadership

Human Resources

SecurityLegal CounselEHS

Union LeadersCrisis

Management Risk

ManagementCorporate

Communications

Precursor to Model WPV Program

Assess organizational vulnerability to violence

Evaluate current intervention practices

Evaluate physical security

Components of a Model WPV Program

Effective policy: Zero Tolerance, Requirement to Report, Requirement to Act

Interdisciplinary threat management team

Team approach and use of external experts

Incident management process

Formal protocols to address situations of heightened risk and emergencies

Training, training, training

Resources for Help

Available on the Rampart Group website or by request:

www.RampartGroup.net or 877.871.4827

• ASIS/SHRM WPV Prevention and Intervention American National Standard

• Risk Escalation sequence

• Rampart Group WPV Training

• Virtual Security Director Program™

• OSHA Guide to Preventing WPV in Hospitals

• Our Workplace Violence Blogs/RSS Feed

Your Role

CriticalAnd Trusted

Thank youRampart Group is happy

to stay after the meeting to answer specific questions.