The killer in the next cubicle: Workplace violence and strategies to mitigate the risk

Perpetrators of deadly incidents in the workplace may transmit clues to their behavior well ahead of their vicious attacks.

The ultimate impact of workplace violence can range from psychological issues to physical injuries and even death. (Photo: Monkey Business Images/Adobe Stock)

According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), homicide is currently the third leading cause of occupational death in this country. OSHA has long been concerned with workplace violence as a leading threat to worker safety and has dedicated a portion of its website to this topic for the past several years.

In November 2022, the City of Chesapeake, Virginia issued “A Declaration of Emergency in the City of Chesapeake, Virginia: Response to the Mass Casualty Shooting Incident at Walmart, 1521 Sams Circle” concerning the occupational murders of six Walmart employees. All six were horrifically shot dead while at work on the overnight shift on November 22, 2022, in front of other surviving workers.

The City’s declaration determined “the existence of a local emergency” mandating that impacted citizens faced “the need for continuing emergency resources and support necessitating the proclamation of a local emergency to alleviate this condition…”

The declared local emergency was applicable to the entire City of Chesapeake and was effective for the 14-day period from November 22, 2022, through December 5, 2022.

The tragedy inside the Chesapeake Walmart store occurred approximately 36 hours before the beginning of the 2022 Thanksgiving holiday. The murdered workers ranged in age from 16 to 70 years old.

Investigators suspect that a team leader who turned the gun on himself at the scene was the perpetrator of this episode of mass workplace violence. Reportedly, he was armed with a handgun and a shotgun and had been employed by Walmart since 2010.

In February 2018, I published an ebook entitled, “The Killer in the Next Cubicle: The tragedy of workplace violence in America and 161 recent employee-on-employee homicides” which focused on “friendly fire” events like the one that occurred in Chesapeake, Va. It evaluated 161 then-recent acts of employee-on-employee occupational murder as opposed to workplace incidents at the hands of a customer or visitor.

The assertion in the book was that “the ultimate impact of workplace violence can range from psychological issues to physical injuries and even death.”

Strategies to mitigate the risk of workplace violence

OSHA defines workplace violence as “any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site.”

After addressing the acts of occupational murder, the book identified various human resource programs designed to mitigate the risk of employee-on-employee violence, and those recommended strategies are just as applicable today and include:

On occasion, an employer may be tempted to take shortcuts when engaging in pre-employment recruiting and hiring. This may be particularly true during labor shortages, where there may be pressure to fill open positions, or in situations involving temporary or seasonal employment.

Utilizing a consistent and in-depth vetting process should include but not be limited to conducting a background screening and engaging in “behavioral-based interviewing” in lieu of traditional interviewing in the pre-hiring stage of employment.

The former method of interviewing asks such probing questions as, “Please give me an example of a time when a dispute existed between yourself and a co-worker. Describe what happened and what the ultimate outcome was.” Conversely, an example of the latter would be, “Do you get along with others while at work?”

While is it relatively easier to respond to the traditional question in the affirmative with a simple reply of “yes, I have always gotten along great with my co-worker,” whether or not it is true, asking the interviewee to relate a detailed real-world past situation is much more difficult to “fake.”

Furthermore, the words selected, the manner in which the response is given, and non-verbal clues such as body language when responding to such an inquiry, may be extremely helpful in deducing how the applicant would behave should a future dispute arise at work based on what the candidate explains occurred when confronted with a similar past situation.

A leopard doesn’t easily change its spots. Therefore, if it is determined that the applicant behaved unreasonably, inappropriately or seemed to have had a short temper in a past interaction with co-workers, the employer should carefully evaluate whether it is prudent to hire such an applicant or keep looking.

Another recommendation involves the employer immediately addressing any observed problems in an employee’s behavior and job performance rather than waiting to deal with it on another day — if at all.

Interestingly, in some of the analyzed cases of occupational homicide, the future murderers had transmitted what appeared to be strong clues of budding problems.

In 2015, one individual who shot two former co-workers to death and then committed suicide long after his involuntary termination had shown troubling behaviors related to getting along with others at work. Reportedly, he had similar difficulties at another job.

If an employer notes a concerning change in an employee’s behavior or job performance, it should be taken as a warning sign that immediate management intervention is required. It is much better to address budding problems before they become insurmountable.

For example, if a long-term, dedicated employee begins having difficulties with co-workers, management should not chalk it up to an odd bad day and take no action. Rather, they should meet with the employee as quickly as possible to address the situation in a private, one-on-one, non-threatening coaching session to bring the recent behavior change to the employee’s attention.

The mindset should be to evaluate if management can assist the employee in returning to prior standards of conduct and performance, rather than risk having the situation deteriorate any further.

The conference may help management determine that the employee has been experiencing personal problems at home that have nothing whatsoever to do with work. Nonetheless, it is not easy to leave such problems at the proverbial workplace door. They can and do affect workplace performance and conduct, and not in a good way.

During the coaching session, the manager may determine a solution to possibly remedy the problem may be to authorize a short-term leave for the employee to address the personal issues. Another potential solution may be to bring to the employee’s attention the availability of services through the company’s Employee Assistance Programming (EAP).

Sometimes, speaking with a qualified professional helps the employee realize that these personal dilemmas are not as insurmountable as one may think.

Although many employers offer EAP benefits with access to immediate, low-cost, and confidential financial or mental health counseling, frequently, employees are unaware these benefits exist. In addition, there may be misconceptions that a counselor or psychologist offering assistance through the EAP program will submit a report to management regarding the services provided, and this could lead to employees rejecting these benefits. Employers should routinely remind workers that EAP programs exist, that the services are confidential, and explain how to access them.

Timely management interventions can mean the difference between addressing an incident early on and keeping it small vs. allowing a minor problem to escalate into a significant workplace violence event further down the line.

Kathleen M. Bonczyk, Esq. has represented insurers and insureds in various breach of contract, declaratory judgment and bad faith actions since 2004. She was named 2022’s pro bono attorney of the year by Community Legal Services of mid-Florida, and devotes her time to mitigating the risk of school and workplace violence through her organization, the Workplace Violence Prevention Institute. Contact her at bonczyklaw@gmail.com. Bonczyk will be presenting at the ALM Complex Claims & Litigation Forum in Las Vegas, Nevada, Feb. 28-March 1 on Common Mistakes and Identifying Best Practices to Avoid Litigation.

Related:

Keys to preventing workplace violence incidents

Preparing for and addressing workplace violence