“Workplace Violence”: Towards a Global Standard for Workplace Conduct

This is the first in a series of segments which together comprise a larger paper presented at the  Ninth World Conference on Injury Prevention & Safety Promotion, Merida, Mexico, focusing on workplace violence from a “global” perspective. In its entirety, this paper examines the contributing factors of workplace abuse which plague both developed and developing nations.     

Regardless of how “workplace violence” is ultimately defined, the broader issue has galvanized the attention of legislators, unions, employers and others who are involved in welfare of workers worldwide. The study of workplace violence is both multi-faceted and highly complex. This demands a multidisciplinary approach which draws on expertise from law, psychology, medicine, labour relations and policy development, to name a few. However, arriving at a better understanding of the etiology of occupational aggression is admittedly the first step in a longer journey to eradicate this escalating Occupational risk. Understanding and minimizing violence at work is now much harder given the “globalization” of labour. In addressing this already complicated issue, we must take into consideration, international law, monitory policy, trade regulations, not to mention the thorny issues associated with cultural accountability and compatibility. This is a flashpoint in today’s world.

 The task before us is monumental which requires a concerted effort of international, national and regional governments. Working in cooperation with transnational corporations, NGO’s, unions and human rights groups, these organizations continue to drawn attention to this cause.  

 No one person or organization can claim absolute authority over this emerging issue of workplace violence. Nor can any publication provide simple answers to the multitude of questions, which plague this subject matter. This article is, but an overview of work done by my colleagues, many of whom I have never met, yet somehow I have become acquainted with them through their research and commentary. Each has contributed to the study of workplace violence and this article is, in part, a tribute to their hard work, dedication and foresight. My contribution is to weave some of their concepts and ideas together, mixed with my own, to attempt to present a coherent picture of workplace violence from a global perspective, ever mindful that I will in all likelihood fall short of such an ambitious goal.

 My hope is that you the reader, will have your interest peaked. However, more importantly, may it prompt you to join us in our collective efforts to better understand this troubling phenomenon, from whatever vantage point you choose.

 The Essence of Work

 At this time, over two thirds of the world’s populations live on less than two dollars a day. Child poverty and forced labour continue unabated, yet the benefits of “Globalization” have not reached fruition. The mere mention of “workplace violence” might seem trite and almost insignificant. Some might argue that this preoccupation with occupational etiquette is a “privileged worry” and confined to nations where an individual’s survival is no longer in question. The stark reality is that many have little alternative but to endure hazards at work, when faced with the shame and hardship of poverty. For many, this is a choice made every day; a choice, which is a basic affront to human rights, personal dignity and self worth.    

 Regardless of the country, culture or time, “work” is a universal pursuit, providing the recipient with the very fundamentals of living; ranging from “self actualization” to the most basic of physiological needs. The nature and importance of Work straddles a wide continuum of experience, depending on the circumstances. For the indentured or enslaved worker, the overriding goal is simply to survive in a dangerous and hostile environment, their workplace. This is in marked contrast to the North American or European businessperson who has the luxury of enjoying the personal and financial rewards of an occupation, which has little or no bearing on their day-to-day survival. According to Maslow (1962)[1] and other pioneering theorists in Humanistic Psychology, (Alderfer, 1972[2]; James, 1962[3]; Mathes, 1981[4]; Deci et al., 1991[5]), our intrinsic need is for a safe environment, amongst others. It is a common requisite for humankind, regardless of their position in life or the work they do; or the shared culture in which they live.

 “Safety Needs”, as defined by Maslow (1943)[6] refer to protection from physical harm. Such harm can come from other people, such as an attacker, or it can originate from a precarious or dangerous environment, such as a fire or explosion. Similarly we can feel just as unsafe when faced with the ridicule or taunts of our peers. Psychological safety, although some might argue is “in the mind” can be every bit as real as a physical attack, and can most certainly render the victim vulnerable (Zapf, 1999[7]; Vartia, 2001[8]; Wilson, 1991[9]; Leymann, 1990[10]; Janoff-Bulman, 1992[11]; Mikkelsen and Einarsen, 2002[12]).

 In light of our intrinsic need for personal “safety”, and the seemingly endless appetite for new frontiers of commerce, it is not surprising that the “workplace” has become a laboratory for the study of “violence”; for it is here…at work…that we feel most unsafe and yet spend so much time. Sadly, for many employees, work is fundamentally about violence.

 American journalist Studs Terkel (1974) perhaps described it best in his classic book Working[13]  in which he provides us with a stark analysis of work within the 20^th and 21^st centuries:  “Work is, by its very nature about violence – to the spirit as well as to the body. It is about ulcers as well as accidents, about shouting matches as well as fistfights, about nervous breakdowns as well as kicking the dog around. It is above all (or beneath all), about daily humiliations. To survive the day is triumph enough for the walking wounded among the great many of us.” Like Maslow decades before, Terkel found, “work”, at least for the North American worker, was a search, sometimes successful, sometimes not, “for daily meaning as well as daily bread”.

 In our examination of “workplace violence”, we should never loose sight of the intrinsic importance of the work that men and women do. Labour is not a “commodity”, it is about the humanity and dignity which each person expects and deserves, regardless of their life circumstance; the country in which they live, or the position they occupy. Most would agree that “violence” in whatever form has no place in the workplace. The challenge before us is to raise awareness and integrate the knowledge we have with international mechanisms available to reduce the presence violence and to intimately curb its spread.  

Next:  “Workplace Violence” in a Globalized World

---