Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention, but it seems there has been a recent (within the past decade) rise in the number of reported workplace violence incidents. Am I imagining it? Am I imagining the recent push by businesses, large and small, to put policies in place for the prevention of such incidents?
I just recently went through my employer’s annual ethics compliance course. The course is a requirement of employment, and restates all of the company’s polices about ethics, security, harassment, and violence. I find this course fascinating mainly because it seems to be full of common-sense advice that, if we were being honest with ourselves, we would be following on a daily basis in our personal life. Before I go off on a tangent, though, I want to return to my thoughts on corporate anti-harassment and anti-violence policies.
When I first entered the workplace, the closest thing any of my employers had to an anti-harassment policy was the United States Equal Employment Opportunity act. Anti-harassment policies? What are you talking about? Companies were still having trouble figuring out how to deal with the implications of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
As the years passed, people became more comfortable with discussing previously taboo topics: inter-office dating, sexual harassment (but only when it came to women being harassed, because men didn’t get sexually harassed in the workplace), and even rape. Once the media accepted the topics as valid discussion points in newspapers and news shows, corporate America tried to make the shift to allow these discussion in the workplace. Not without federal encouragement, though.
Slowly over the years, the definition of harassment changed. It went from the obvious “don’t touch me” and “boss requiring the employee to sleep with him to get that promotion” to acknowledging that swimsuit / Playboy calendars, tasteless innuendo, and the “it wasn’t directed at you” kind of sexual jokes could also create a hostile work environment. And when the words “hostile work environment” were put on the board, suddenly people begin to take notice of workplace violence. The person who puts their fist through the wall next to the cube of someone he doesn’t like, the shouting arguments some people called meetings, vandalizing other employee’s equipment. Then, somewhere along the line, a disgruntled postal service worker walked into a post office, unloaded a gun on his fellow employees, and the American zeitgheist had a new catchphrase: “going postal.”
This time the federal government didn’t push companies to react. It didn’t have time, really. That incident, and several others that appeared with growing frequency, galvanized corporate America into coming up with zero tolerance anti-violence policies. Weapons were banned from most workplaces, coworkers were encouraged to report violent or threatening behavior. Harassment was no longer just about the touchy-sexual stuff, it became a term that covered any flavor of unwelcome attention. Employees were watched carefully for any signs of (what I call) Disgruntled Employee Syndrome, and many were hustled off the job and out of the office at the first perceived sign of problems.
But what really impresses me about many of corporate American’s anti-harassment, anti-violence policies is the shift from the internal-only policies (employee to employee) to the internal-external approach to the problem. This is a major coup as far as I’m concerned. After working retail where John Doe can come in and shake fists at sales associations for inventory shortages we have no control over, or answering a phone and getting thirty minutes worth of invective-filled screaming (which we were not allowed to hang up on, because the customer was always right and anyone who hangs up on a customer gets fired), it seems businesses have finally woken up to the idea that harassment and violence don’t just come into the workplace carried on their employees’ coattails. Finally, someone has acknowledged that customers and vendors also engage in workplace harassment and offer workplace violence.
So, again without prompting from the federal government, the policies have shifted to protect employees against both internal and external threats. It is now okay to hang up on the verbally abusive customer (so long as it’s done politely). It is now okay to report the supply delivery guy feeling up the receptionist or the construction contractor who waits to threaten an employee the minute said employee steps off company property. Not only do businesses give their employees options for getting out of a bad situation, but these companies are now offering additional “wellness” benefits in the spirit of preventing situations leading to D.E.S. Substance abuse counseling, divorce counseling, financial management and anger management courses are among many of the free-to-employees offerings I’ve seen.
But I admit my view is biased. I’m also glossing over a lot of information about the above transitions. That makes me curious. How do you see the evolution of workplace harassment and violence policies? Has it caused you problems, or helped you through a particularly difficult time?
Please, tell me your stories. Share your thoughts. How do you feel about these policies? Help me keep the discussion going.
