3 Ways CA Employers Are Getting Workplace Violence Prevention Wrong

Sometimes you have to be the bearer of bad news. If this were the Sopranos, I’d preface what I’m about by saying, “with all due respect.”

But, many employers are getting California’s new workplace violence law wrong. And that’s problematic for your employees and for your organization.

Though, if it helps, it’s not your fault. 

California’s done a lousy job of educating employers about their responsibilities under the new workplace violence prevention law. I’ve spoken with a lot of employers who didn’t even knw that there’s a workplace violence prevention law they’re required to comply with. 

The state can and should do better with that.

But, not knowing about the law doesn’t exempt you from its requirements. All employers must be in compliance with the law’s requirements right now.

Further, misinformation about the workplace violence prevention law, some of it coming from otherwise solid organizations, has caused confusion about who’s covered under it.

And there are those peddling generic templates, and training videos, to employers unaware that California requires that your workplace violence prevention program to be built around your employees’ unique safety hazards.

In this piece, we’ll look at the three biggest ways employers are getting California’s new workplace violence law wrong, and what you can do to fix that.

And right now, it’s really important that you get workplace violence prevention right. Economic uncertainty and stress has skyrocketed. And that will lead to a rise in violence in the community and in the workplace. 

The number of announced layoffs in March was the 3rd highest on record. And the number of people continuing to collect unemployment benefits is the highest it’s been since 2021. And the ISM employment index for March dropped 7.7% into contraction territory. And that’s a big drop because over 80% of Americans work in the service sector.

I spent 30 years investigating violence in the community and in the workplace. There’s no pound of cure once violence happens. And truth be told, it takes a lot more than an ounce of prevention to get violence prevention right.

That’s why I help California employers implement effective workplace violence prevention programs.

California requires employers to establish, implement, and maintain an effective workplace violence prevention plan. If you haven’t done so, my California employers workplace violence prevention checklist can help you get that process started right now. 

The Biggest Misconception: Who’s Covered Under the Law

By far, the biggest misconception surrounding California’s workplace violence prevention law is who the law covers. Many employers believe that they’re exempt from the law because they have fewer than 10 employees.

But, that’s wrong.

Here’s what the law states, “Except as provided in paragraph (2) this section applies to all employers, employees, places of employment, and employer provided housing.”

All means all…unless your organization falls under very specific exceptions to the law.

So what are those exceptions listed in paragraph (2)? 

Primarily they exist for law enforcement and corrections. And for some healthcare facilities and services, but only for those already covered under the violence prevention in healthcare act. If you’re a healthcare facility, or healthcare service, not covered under that law, you must comply with the new workplace violence law.

What about employees?

The only stated exception written into the law covering employees is for, “employees teleworking from a location of the employee’s choice, which is not under the control of the employer.” That’s it. All other employees are covered by the law.

So where does the misinformation regarding excepting employers with fewer than 10 employees come from? It’s a misinterpretation of the the sole exception in the law for places of employment.

The law excepts:

“Places of employment where there are less than 10 employees working at the place at any given time, and that are not accessible to the public, if the places are in compliance with Secrtion 3203 of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations.”

That’s places of employment, not employees. And not employers either.

To qualify for this exemption, the place of employement must meet all 3 elements listed in the exemption. And the most critical element of this exception is not the number of employees, but the requirement that place of employment is “not accessible to the public”. 

If the place of employment is accessible to the public regardless of the number of employees, your place of employment must comply with the law’s requirements. 

So if you’re a retailer, a restaurant, a law firm, an accounting practice, a dental practice where clients, their family, vendors, customers, patients, witnesses, contractors etc. come into the office, your workplace is covered because it is accessible to the public even if you have only 1 employee.

And even if your place of employment has less than 10 employees, and you’re not accessible to the public, you’re still covered if you don’t already comply with California’s requirements for a safe and healthy workplace under Section 3203 of the California Code of Regulations.

Employers Must Involve Employees Throughout the Workplace Violence Prevention Process Unlike Preventing Other Workplace Issues

Effective workplace violence prevention requires significant employee participation in all phases and at all levels. That requires a completely different approach than the way employers go about preventing other types of workplace incidents.

California’s workplace violence prevention law requires the extensive, and active, involvement of “employees and authorized employee representatives, in developing and implementing the plan, including, but not limited to, through their participation in identifying, evaluating, and correcting workplace violence hazards, in designing and implementing training, and in reporting and investigating workplace violence incidents.”

There’s a couple of reasons for this requirement. There are 4 different source types for workplace violence, and 3 of those 4 source types don’t fall under an employer’s control.

So the normal types of policies and disciplinary actions that employers use to prevent other types of workplace issues simply don’t prevent 75% of workplace violence.

And secondly, employees are the ones targeted by the viiolence, and they know better than management, how that violence happens, and what will help them to lessen the risks for physical harm from violence.

And that’s especially relevant to the types of training they believe to be most helpful for them. Yes, there are generalized trainings the state requires about definitions, and the elements of your workplace violence prevention plan.

But the nature of the trainings in strategies to avoid physical harm from violence, and the approaches to remediate the safety hazards they face, must come from the employees and not from management.

Involving employees in every phase of establishing, implementing, and maintaining an effective workplace violence program elevates employees’ role giving them a greater say in how the workplace operates. 

But with that comes a powerful benefit to your organization when you do so, as there’s nothing more empowering for employees than to feel that they’re employer has their back. And that kind of support benefits your organization in so many ways.

California Requires That Your Workplace Violence Prevention Traiining Be Specific to Your Employees’ Unique Safety Hazards

California requires that an employer “shall provide effective training to employees” in the “workplace violence hazards specific to the employees’ jobs, the corrective measures the employer has implement, how to seek assistance to prevent or respond to violence, and strategies to avoid physical harm.”

Simply put. Those fill in the blank, generic templates, and training video trainings don’t work.

Sure, they can be helpful to  extent some

But they don’t meet the state’s requirements that employers make workplace violence prevention trainings specific. And they don’t train your employees in the right skillsets and strategies needed to deal with the specifics of the safety hazards that they face.

Why would you devote resources to train employees in things that aren’t relevant to their actual safety?

Workplace violence safety hazards are job dependent. They vary depending upon the nature of the work you do , who you encounter when you work, where you do your work, and the type of community you work in. 

The front desk staff of a law firm that does family law, faces different safety hazards, than does the front desk staff of a law firm that serves as corporate counsel for an organization. And the legal professionals in both types of firms face different safety threats as well.

And employees working for the same organization can face entirely different safety hazards depending upon the work they do. So training must reflect the specific hazards for those different positions. Your front desk staff face different safety hazards than outside sales, HR, shipping, or delivery drivers face.

To effectively keep your employees safe, you must determine the specific nature of the safety hazards that your different employees face, and provide them relevant training to minimize the risk of physical harm from those specfic safety hazards.

Effective workplace violence prevention training, and California’s workplace violence law, requires that level of specificity.

Training your employees in strategies to avoid physical harm from workplace violence is the most important, yet least understood, requirement in California’s workplace violence prevention law. I’ve put together a great training that demystifies this type of training so that you can determine the best strategies for your employees specific safety needs.