Workplace violence is a rising concern across industries, with incidents ranging from verbal threats and harassment to physical assaults and mass shootings. In the wake of such events, the legal scrutiny companies face can be intense—especially when they have failed to prevent foreseeable harm or respond transparently and responsibly. Under tort law, three key legal principles come into play: duty of care, standard of care, and duty to disclose. When a company neglects these obligations, the legal, financial, and reputational consequences can be severe.
1. Duty of Care: The Obligation to Protect Employees
At the heart of any negligence claim involving workplace violence is the duty of care. Employers have a legal obligation to provide a safe working environment. This duty extends to protecting employees, contractors, and sometimes even customers from foreseeable acts of violence.
Application to Workplace Violence:
- If there were warning signs—such as prior threats, aggressive behavior, or complaints about an employee or outsider—and the employer failed to act, it may be considered a breach of duty of care.
- This duty also applies to third-party risks, such as known dangers posed by clients, vendors, or visitors.
Failing to uphold this duty can open the company to lawsuits from injured employees or their families, often under negligent hiring, negligent supervision, or negligent retention doctrines.
2. Standard of Care: Reasonable Measures to Prevent Harm
The standard of care defines the level of precaution a reasonable employer would take to prevent workplace violence. What constitutes “reasonable” can vary based on the industry, location, prior incidents, and known risks.
Examples of Reasonable Standards:
- Conducting thorough background checks during hiring
- Providing de-escalation or active shooter training
- Implementing access controls and surveillance
- Responding promptly and adequately to employee complaints or threats
- Maintaining clear workplace violence policies
A company that fails to meet these standards, especially after being made aware of potential risks, can be found negligent in court. Plaintiffs in such cases often argue that the employer should have taken proactive steps to mitigate foreseeable dangers.
3. Duty to Disclose: Transparency After an Incident
Following a violent workplace incident, a company also may have a duty to disclose certain information. While this obligation is sometimes seen in a regulatory context, tort law may recognize it when nondisclosure causes further harm.
In the Context of Workplace Violence:
- Employers must be honest with employees about safety risks following an incident.
- Failing to notify staff of threats or a known danger could lead to additional harm and liability.
- Publicly traded companies may be legally required to disclose such events to investors under securities law, especially if it has a material impact on business operations or stock value.
A lack of transparency—or worse, attempts to cover up the incident—can be viewed as gross negligence or fraudulent concealment, increasing the risk of punitive damages.
Real-World Examples:
- FedEx Workplace Shooting (2014): Legal scrutiny focused on whether there were missed warning signs or inadequate security measures.
- YouTube HQ Shooting (2018): Questions were raised about the adequacy of the company’s response to a known disgruntled individual.
- Walmart Mass Shooting (2019): Victims’ families sued the company for failing to provide enough security, arguing that the incident was foreseeable given prior violent events in retail spaces.
Consequences of Legal Failures:
If a company is found liable under tort law for negligence related to workplace violence, it may face:
- Monetary damages: Including compensatory and punitive damages
- Injunctive relief: Court orders to revise safety protocols
- Regulatory fines: From OSHA or local labor boards
- Reputational harm: Resulting in loss of talent, customers, and investor confidence
Mitigating Liability: Best Practices for Employers
To fulfill their legal obligations and protect their workforce, companies should:
- Implement and regularly update a workplace violence prevention policy
- Train employees and managers in early warning sign recognition
- Conduct regular risk assessments
- Create safe, anonymous channels for reporting threats or harassment
- Respond swiftly and transparently to incidents
Conclusion
In the aftermath of workplace violence, companies must reckon not only with the human toll but also with potential liability under tort law. By understanding and enacting their duty of care, adhering to an appropriate standard of care, and honoring their duty to disclose, organizations can reduce the risk of harm—and the legal consequences that follow.
Failure to do so invites litigation, damages morale, and signals to stakeholders that the company prioritizes cost-saving over human safety. In an era where employee well-being is inseparable from corporate responsibility, proactive prevention is both a legal requirement and a moral imperative.
