Violence against staff is an area of increasing concern for the security industry, writes Noel Walsh, Head of Workplace Safety, Weightmans Solicitors; and Bill Fox, chairman of conflict management trainers Maybo. The majority of all physical attacks on staff arise due to the prevention of theft, angry customers or trouble makers.
When a member of staff is injured, either psychologically or physically as a result of an assault, they may seek compensation under the Government’s tariff based Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. However, lately, there has been an increasing trend to pursue claims for compensation directly against the employer through the civil courts. Primarily on the grounds that the employer has failed to reduce the risk of violent assault, or dealt appropriately with the employee following such an incident.
In December, the Government launched a green paper on supporting victims of crime. The paper suggests changes to the present system for compensating victims of crime to include focusing compensation payments on those who have suffered serious injury, thereby excluding compensation entirely for lesser injuries and excluding injuries incurred during the course of employment. Here, it is suggested, that any compensation should be met by employers.
It is anticipated, that the green paper will lead to changes in the law during 2006. If, the suggested changes occur, then they will impact on security providers in two ways. First of all, your standard "employer’s liability" insurance policy is unlikely to cover injuries to staff arising out of violent crime, if there is ‘no fault’ on the part of you their employer. Secondly, the withdrawal of the scheme to provide compensation to victims who have suffered lesser injuries is likely to encourage more claims through the civil courts. As a consequence, should these changes be adopted then you will need to look carefully at your insurance provision. It is unfortunately inevitable, that in the light of increased risk and the burden which apparently will now be placed directly on you as employers, insurance premiums will rise.
The green paper is presently at the consultation stage. It is not the first time that the government has suggested that the burden for compensating the victims of crime in the workplace should rest with employers and their insurers. This was first raised in a consultation paper launched in January 2004, and it met with strong resistance from the Association of British Insurers (ABI).
Whilst the direct cost of increased premiums is obvious; what is less obvious are the indirect costs, both financial and personal incurred as a result of violence. Three quarters of all victims of violent physical assaults attend their GP resulting in an estimated 2.2 million working hours lost per year. Fear of violence amongst sales staff is likely to lead to low morale and reduced quality of customer service, resulting in unmet sales targets and lower profitability. Staff are more likely to feel aggrieved and more likely to seek recompense from their employer where they perceive management to be indifferent to their concerns.
Whilst, it is impossible to prevent all assaults, a number of steps can be taken to reduce the incidence and impact of workplace violence. Violence is a health and safety risk and should be managed within the health and safety framework that protects workers against other hazards arising from business activity. Most employers are now familiar with the concept of ‘duty of care’ and of the specific requirements of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. Yet many fail to recognise that violence must be managed with the same rigour as other hazards.
Risk assessment lies at the heart of any preventive programme yet most employers struggle, or make no attempt, to assess the risk of violence in any meaningful way. Workplace violence is a complex risk to manage, involving the unpredictable nature of people and some understanding of criminal motivation. The risk assessment should equip the employer with a deep understanding of the problem, including vulnerable times, locations, trigger situations, patterns and trends. The information can be gathered from a variety of sources including reported incidents and from local police. Front line staff often have the best insight into the problem and it is vital that they are included in the assessment process.
The assessment can then be used as a starting point to address issues in your organisation with a view to eliminating or reducing the risks. Control measures could include appropriate training on handling difficult customers/troublemakers and what to do in case of a robbery and/or shoplifter. Training needs to be commensurate with the risks and will therefore vary in light of the role and tasks performed. For example, staff assuming security and loss prevention roles will need comprehensive training if they are likely to confront suspected thieves.
Other controls may involve the introduction or enhancement of physical security measures such as access control, CCTV, remote monitoring, safe areas, panic alarms and personal protective equipment may be appropriate. In some circumstances it may be possible to re-design the way in which the work is carried out to eliminate the activity that gives rise to the risk or otherwise reduce the risk. For example if robbery en-route to the bank is a local problem then cash collection could be considered as an alternative.
Assistance and support may also be available through a local business crime partnership, through liaison with trade bodies and local police crime prevention advisors.
There are no simple solutions to the problem of workplace violence and there is no universal blueprint for success. What works in one environment may not work in another. Measures that deter an opportunist thief may not deter a determined robber. What is important is that the measures implemented to control the risk form part of a coherent preventive strategy based upon a comprehensive understanding of the problem.
What is clear is that violent crime is on the increase. It carries with it has both an economic cost to you and a personal cost to employees who fall victim, therefore workplace violence should be placed high on your Health and Safety agenda in 2006.
