Trauma 2003 - Violence to
Public Service Workers report
Contents
1.0 Executive Summary *
2.0 Introduction *
3.0 Campaign Objectives *
4.0 Research Partners *
THE RESEARCH *
5.0 Definitions, Scope and Methods *
6.0 The Legal Context *
7.0 Survey Results *
8.0 Managerial responses *
9.0 Additional Information *
10.0 Conclusions & Recommendations *
1.0 Executive Summary
In October 2002 UNISON adopted a six-point action
plan for Zero Tolerance of Violence in the NHS. The aim now is
to extend these principals throughout Scottish public services.
Almost exactly half of the survey respondents indicated
that they went to work in fear of some form of violent incident.
According to this survey men are more worried about
violence than women. This is despite the fact that sexual harassment
and related assaults are a major element within those incidents
that take place.
Questionnaire respondents reported 238 specific
violent incidents which led to injuries. Of these, 34 were described
as assaults leading to major injuries requiring medical assistance
over and above first aid.
If threats and verbal abuse are included, then at
least half of the sample had personally experienced some form
of attack in the previous 12 months.
When applied to the overall UNISON membership in
Scotland, this questionnaire suggests that something in the region
of 50-70,000 UNISON members in the Scottish public services were
victims of a verbal abuse or physical attack at work in the last
year.
On a national level, if the UNISON membership is
typical of public sector workers generally then, with over 400,000
employees in health, education and social work in Scotland, the
frequency of verbal abuse and physical attacks must be in excess
of 100,000 per year.
Thirty four people indicated that they had received
a major injury in the last twelve months. Four of this group reported
two major injuries.
Just under one 10% said they had received a minor
injury in the last year. The total number of recorded injuries
was 242.
Nearly two thirds of those experiencing minor injuries
(64%) said they received no assistance from their employer in
the aftermath of the assault.
Eighty-three people said they had been threatened
with a weapon. Of those, around half reported multiple incidents
including two people who said they had lost count of the number
of such incidents.
The total number of cases where use of some form
of weapon was threatened was 135. The weapons referred to included:
stones, bricks, planks of wood, hot drinks, chairs, walking frames,
knives, snooker cues, hammers, bottles, cigarettes and airguns.
At 49.5%, threats or verbal abuse is the type of
incident that is most prevalent in Scotland with almost half of
the survey experiencing such incidents at some time in the last
year.
Excluding those people who said verbal abuse was
simply a daily event, the aggregate number of incidents where
staff received threats or verbal abuse was 2018.
Twenty six UNISON members reported racial harassment
by members of the public, each person reporting at least one incident.
Four people reported multiple incidents and the aggregate number
of incidents reported by this group was 48.
Fifty seven people (5%) said they had been sexually
harassed by members of the public. But this level of reporting
doubles to over 12% if we look at the level of sexual harassment
among women.
Of those who said they were sexually harassed, nearly
three-quarters said they received no assistance from their employers
after the incident.
Most worryingly, in the course of the research,
UNISON became aware of several serious sexual assaults. We intend
to draw this matter to the attention of the Scottish Executive
in the hope that an effective response can be encouraged.
Twenty-four people (2%) reported sectarian harassment.
Of the 24 respondents, four said such incidents were too common
to identify separately.
top
2.0 Introduction
UNISON members deliver essential public services
365 days of every year. Across Scotland UNISON members save lives,
build communities, support families, protect vulnerable people,
care for children and much more. But increasingly this essential
work is being done in the face of a threat the threat of
violent attacks.
UNISON takes the view that this type of behaviour
is unacceptable in any context, but it is particularly unacceptable
that valued public services workers should have to face this threat
in the course of their employment. For this reason UNISON's
health and safety committee is running its high profile campaign
for Zero Tolerance zero tolerance of violence at work.
UNISON activists are worried that growing levels
of violence indicate that, in some quarters, violence against
people in the public service has come to be viewed as an unavoidable
part of the job. The Zero Tolerance Campaign rejects that view.
Through this research, and the work of the campaign,
UNISON aims to expose the scale of the problem our members face,
give a voice to those who tolerate unrecorded violence, and build
a campaign through which UNISON members receive the support and
protection they deserve. No one should be asked to work for less.
In launching the initial findings of this research
UNISON is extremely grateful to Guardian Angels. The existence
of this company and the service it provides only serves to highlight
the fact that there are innovative ways to tackle violence, reduce
harm and give comfort and security to people working with the
fear of violence.
We look forward to building this campaign with the
help of our sponsors and using this research to plot the reduction
in incidents of violence as the Zero Tolerance message takes hold
across Scottish Public Services.
Millie Somerville
Chair, Scottish Health
& Safety Committee
Jim Devine
Scottish Organiser
top
3.0 Campaign Objectives
The role of this research is to expose the problem
as it is today, and to set up a process by which UNISON can use
future research to track progress towards the aim of Zero Tolerance.
In October 2002 UNISON adopted a six-point action
plan for the NHS. The aim now is to extend these principals through
Scottish public services. The six-point plan is as follows:
Employers and trade unions should adopt a joint
Staff Charter, reminding the public that it is not part of a public
service worker's job to be physically or verbally abused
at work.
There should be nation-wide adherence to standard
definitions, recording and follow up of violent and potentially
violent incidents, including verbal abuse, for all public service
workers.
Widespread use of agreed best practice in training
courses on the management of violent or potentially violent incidents.
The introduction of a 'yellow and red card'
warning system for members of the public who constantly abuse
staff. These warnings could lead to the banning of individuals
from premises if they persistently physically or verbally abuse
staff.
Clients, patients, tenants and relatives who physically
abuse staff must be automatically charged and prosecuted by the
Procurator Fiscal.
Every public service worker in Scotland must recognise
that, in addition to employer duties, every staff member has a
duty to ensure their own safety and the safety of their colleagues,
to use the reporting system for every incident, and accept that
a culture of zero tolerance is essential.
top
Health and safety is a top priority for UNISON.
Last year more than one million injuries and 258 deaths were reported
in the workplace. 24.3million working days were lost and over
27,000 people were forced to give up work due to injury. Since
1999 UNISON has won over £40 million in compensation for members
involved in work-related personal injury cases.
In a recent survey most UNISON members identified
health and safety as the most important workplace issue for them.
So, as the largest public service union UNISON is at the forefront
of campaigns on issues such as stress at work and violence in
the workplace.
In Scotland, UNISON's Health & Safety work
is organised through a lay elected Scottish Committee, a Senior
Regional Officer, UK headquarters staff and a network of branch
Health & Safety Reps.
top
Guardian Angel
Guardian Angel is the market leading mobile phone
based personal security service. Available across all of the United
Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, Guardian Angel already provides
peace of mind to over ten thousand users in professions ranging
from community nursing and social care to Domestic services and
Government departments.
top
Research Consultants
The survey and data analysis was conducted by Rachel
Harris and Kushtrim Ibrani. The research partners would like to
acknowledge their contribution and thank them for their enthusiastic
work.
top
THE RESEARCH
5.0
Definitions, Scope and Methods
The campaign aims to promote zero tolerance of all
violence against staff. This is based on a definition of violence
that includes threats, verbal abuse and harassment as well as
actual attacks and injury tostaff by clients and members of the
public.
This report is based on two primary sources. First
a short questionnaire was distributed to all branches in UNISON
Scotland. This distribution covered branches in the following
sectors: health, local government, public utilities, the community
and voluntary sector, higher and further education and other miscellaneous
branches.
In the twelve-section questionnaire UNISON members
were asked 27 questions regarding their experience or perception
of violence at work. In addition to numeric answers indicating
the frequency of different incidents, members were asked a series
of yes or no questions in relation to their work situation. These
answers are used to provide the statistical data used in this
report.
Finally in the questionnaire, members of the union
were given the opportunity to expand in more detail on issues
relating to violence at work. This qualitative data was then supplemented
by information received through a series of short semi-structured
interviews.
These qualitative responses have been used to inform
the interpretation placed on the statistics and exerts from the
interviews have been dispersed through the body of the report
to illustrate the views and perceptions of those who supported
the research.
Obviously UNISON would like to re-state its thanks
to those members who took part in the research, many of whom had
to re-visit painful memories of specific incidents in order to
participate in the project.
The profile of participants is set out at figure
1 (below). While the dominance of health and local government
does reflect the composition of the union's membership, there
are some notable deviations. First, the returns from health exceed
those from local government despite the fact that local government
is the larger membership area. Second, there is a disproportionate
response from individual subgroups such as A&E staff.
What this underlines is that, although large, the
survey sample is a sub sample of the overall UNISON membership
and is not necessarily a direct reflection of the experience of
the membership as a whole.
The key point here is that the participants are
self-selecting and therefore those who encounter violence are
probably more likely to participate in the process than those
who have no comment to make.
The result is that, although there is a considerable
volume of data, there would probably be a slight tendency towards
over-reporting if this data was extrapolated to cover the whole
population of UNISON members.
top
6.0 The Legal Context
Criminal law and workplace violence
All the elements of UNISON's definition of
violence are covered by the criminal law. In addition to assaults
and aggravated assaults, the use of threats and verbal abuse would
also constitute a criminal offence in most cases.
The enforcement of the criminal law is a matter
between the state and the alleged perpetrator. However, it is
important that employers recognise the importance of reporting
incidents to the police.
In an employment context, employers have a duty
to take such steps as are reasonably practicable in order to protect
the health and safety of employees. Where a failure to involve
the police contributes to an injury sustained by a member of staff
then it is possible that the employer may be viewed as negligently
contributing to the increased risk of injury.
top
Self defence in the face
of violent attack
Where an employee is
involved in a violent incident there is a risk that they become
the focus of police attention if their assailant sustains an injury.
However, staff can use reasonable force to protect
themselves or other people where they have a reasonable belief
that an assault is about to take place.
The Protection Against Harassment Act
Every employee has a right to be free from harassment.
The law states that a person must not pursue a course
of conduct which amounts to harassment of another.
Even if the perpetrator does not intend to harass an employee,
it is deemed to be unlawful if a reasonable person would view
the behaviour as harassment.
Risk assessments & safety management
Under European law there are various steps that
employers must take to manage the threat of violence. Central
to these is the risk assessment which is designed to identify
the circumstances when violence may occur. Employers then have
a legal duty to take steps to address the threat identified in
the risk assessment.
The scope for personal injury claims
Employers are liable for damages when they are negligent
in failing to take reasonable steps to prevent injury at work.
Even though some violence is unpredictable, employers are obliged
to take steps to reduce the risk of attack, and to reduce the
harm that occurs when attacks take place.
top
The employees' right to stop working
Where an employee perceives an immediate risk to
their health or safety they have the right to stop working in
order to remove themselves from the risk of injury.
Any worker who has a reasonable belief that they
are in imminent danger of attack should take the necessary steps
to make themselves safe. This is a clear legal right.
Asserting safety rights
Many employees are worried that they will be disciplined
or dismissed if they stop working without permission or assert
their safety rights in some other way.
However, it is unlawful to dismiss a worker, or
to subject them to any other detriment, where the reason for that
action is the fact that the employee asserted their safety rights.
Race Relations Amendment Act
All the main public service employers now have a
duty to eliminate discrimination and promote race equality. Under
the new law there are a series of general and specific duties
which employers must follow. Any failure to record, monitor and
actively address instances of racial harassment and violence against
staff would be a in breach of these duties.
top
Legal Summary
This legal overview provides a useful reference
point for the following analysis of the problem public service
workers face. It is clear that employees have a variety of rights
that are designed to protect them from violence at work. UNISON's
quest for zero tolerance clearly has a strong legal foundation,
the question is whether current practice meets this required standard
of care.
7.0 Survey Results
Profile of Participants
The questionnaires were circulated through UNISON
branches. 1212 people returned information to UNISON. It is safe
to assume therefore that the overwhelming majority of participants
are UNISON members employed in the Scottish Public Services.
However, some of the questionnaires do give additional
information on the profile of the sample population. In a small
but noticeable number of cases the respondents indicate that while
not UNISON members, they felt strongly about the issue and wanted
to submit their evidence for consideration.
Given that the intention behind the report is to
improve the safety and well being of all public service employees
including UNISON members, there was no reason to exclude non-UNISON
members from the project.
Figure 1 below sets out the sectors from which responses
were returned.
Figure 1: Questionnaire
Responses by Industrial Sector
Sector
|
Subgroup
|
Return
|
Health
|
|
|
|
Health General
|
28%
|
|
Accident & emergency
|
17%
|
|
All Health
|
45%
|
Local Government
|
|
|
|
Social work
|
17%
|
|
Housing
|
8%
|
|
Leisure
|
1%
|
|
Education
|
4%
|
|
Misc.
|
5%
|
|
All local govt.
|
35%
|
Further & Higher Education
|
11%
|
Community & Voluntary Sector
|
8%
|
Other
|
|
1%
|
There are two particularly significant features
in the data on returns by industrial sector. First, the proportion
of returns from health service members is disproportionately large
when compared with health service members as a proportion of UNISON
members overall.
If we assume that health service members are not
more efficient at the completion and return of forms, the data
appears to suggest that they are more highly motivated when given
the chance to comment on the threat of violence at work. As with
all such studies it is dangerous to make firm conclusions without
further research but it would appear that violence at work is
a source of greater concern in the health sector than other areas
of the union.
This possible finding is supported by the second
feature of the industry data. That is the significant over-representation
of accident and emergency staff in the sample. It is safe to assume
that staff in A&E are regularly exposed to violence at work
and this number of responses supports the hypothesis that high
levels of return from any sector indicate that these are hot spots
where fear of violence is heightened.
top
Fear of violence
Before going on to ask about the detail of actual
incidents, UNISON asked its members whether they worried about
violence at work. Almost exactly half of the 1200 respondents
indicated that they went to work in fear of some form of violent
incident.
The basis of that fear is something we will go on
to examine below, but some important questions arise at this stage?
-
What is causing this widespread fear?
-
Is fear of attack based on a history and culture
of violence or is it an unsubstantiated state of mind that
has taken root in the public services?
-
Even if there are a limited number of previous
incidents, is the lack of protection and effective policy
leaving people exposed in a way that leaves them worried and
anxious?
-
Who holds this fear? Are they men or women?
Where do they work? Have they been attacked before?
-
The ultimate question for this report is:
"What can be done to reduce attacks and the fear of attack?"
Fear of violence was particularly high in the following
areas: accident & emergency (86%), council housing (73%),
and primary & secondary education (75%). This is particularly
significant. It would be a remarkable survey that found that A&E
staffs were anything other than worried about violence. However,
it is perhaps surprising that education and housing staff also
dominate the list of those staff who work in fear of attack.
Reports from the teaching unions indicate that violence
by pupils against teachers is a growing problem. This survey suggests
that support staff in education also have a growing fear of violence.
The breakdown by gender is particularly significant.
According to this survey men are more worried about violence than
women. This is despite that fact that sexual harassment and related
assaults are a major element within those incidents that take
place.
Of those men who commented on fear of violence,
64% said they were worried about attacks at work. The equivalent
figure for women was 56%.
Various factors may explain this. For example men
may be employed in posts that are exposed to greater risk. Service
users may be more likely to attack men rather than women, or men
may be less skilled at defusing violent situations. But all of
this requires further research.
Perhaps logically the fear of assault was most closely
connected to recent experience of violence. Of those who had recently
received a minor injury, fear of violence was 83%. The very real
nature of the risk employees face is reinforced by the fact that
training and awareness of safety measures has little impact on
fear of violence among those who have previously been attacked.
In the final analysis, worry about violence is one
step removed from the focus of this report. One might assume that
if actual incidents are reduced then levels of anxiety might reduce
in a corresponding fashion.
However, there will be some workplaces such as an
A&E where a degree of violence may be endemic. Some people
might argue that in such cases a residual fear of unpredictable
violence may be a necessary element of self defence. However,
UNISON submits that this is dangerously close to a culture where
managers abdicate responsibility for managing risks and hazards
while violence and fear become an accepted part of the job.
UNISON calls for further work on the extent and
nature of fear among certain key occupational groups.
The aim should be a culture where fear is replaced
by an informed awareness among staff of the risks they face at
work.
This should be complimented by more consistent adherence
to effective systems within which the risk of violence is managed
in a context where awareness of risks and knowledge of appropriate
systems are deployed in order to avert incidents and reduce harm.
This study should seek to assess the extent to which
staff in hazardous occupations are working with a controlled awareness
of risk in an environment where risk is managed.
This is the method by which fear of attack should
be reduced.
top
Frequency of attacks
Questionnaire respondents reported 242 specific
violent incidents at work over the last year. Of these, 34 were
described as assaults leading to major injuries requiring medical
assistance over and above first aid. This excludes countless number
of instances of threatening or abusive language.
If threats and verbal abuse are included, then at
least half of the sample had personally experienced some form
of attack in the previous 12 months.
In the section on survey methods we pointed out
that the self-selection of survey participants does suggest that
those with a view on violence at work are more likely to participate
in the research and this creates a slight tendency towards over
reporting.
However, bearing that caveat in mind, when applied
to the overall UNISON membership in Scotland, this questionnaire
suggests that something in the region of 50-60,000 UNISON members
in the Scottish public services were victims of a verbal or physical
attack at work in the last year. Attacks that left the majority
of UNISON members worried about the prospects of a violent attack
at work.
On a national level, if the UNISON membership is
typical of public sector workers generally then, with over 400,000
employees in health, education and social work in Scotland the
frequency of verbal and physical attacks must be well in excess
of 100,000.
Perhaps the most worrying feature of the study was
the way many members failed to record the number of incidents
they had experienced. In doing so many adapted the questionnaire
and wrote in phrases such as "daily event" "too
many to recall" in the box where they were asked to provide
the number of incidents.
It is clear that for many staff in Scottish Public
services, threats, abuse, assault and the fear of such incidents
have become a permanent and regular feature of their working lives.
top
Nature of attacks
Incidents resulting in
major injuries
For the purposes of this survey, a major injury
was defined as requiring medical assistance. Thirty people indicated
that they had received a major injury in the last twelve months,
four of whom had been attacked and injured twice. The aggregate
number of serious injuries was therefore 34.
The evidence suggests that most of those with serious
injuries were women.
Of those who received major injuries, the majority
were aware of existing measures intended to address violence.
Similarly, the people who received major injuries were more likely
than not to have received training on existing measures in the
workplace.
Although the numbers are small, this does tend to
indicate that, despite the existence of workplace measures to
tackle violence, and training in those measures, the steps taken
are not adequate to prevent assault and major injury.
While the majority of people who received major
injuries (67%) said they received help after the incident, it
might be reasonable to assume that all employees who received
a major injury at work would receive assistance from their employer
in the aftermath of the incident.
Incidents leading to minor injuries
For the purposes of the survey minor injuries were
defined as those requiring first aid. Just under one in ten of
the people who answered this question said they had received such
an injury. In addition to comments such as "weekly occurrence,
or "too many to mention" the total number of recorded
incidents was 208.
According to this survey, women and men are at equal
risk of minor injury when working in the public services. Nearly
two thirds of those hurt received their injury despite the fact
that they said they were aware of the measures intended to protect
them from assault, and they had been trained in the observance
of those measures.
Nearly two thirds of those experiencing minor injuries
(64%) said they received no assistance from their employer in
the aftermath of the assault.
top
Staff who have been threatened with weapons
Eighty-three people said they had been threatened
with a weapon 7% of those who answered the question. Of
those, around half reported multiple incidents including two people
who said they had lost count of the number of incidents.
The total number of cases where use of some form
of weapon was threatened was 135. The weapons referred to included
the following: stones, bricks, planks of wood, hot drinks, chairs,
walking frames, knives, snooker cues, hammers, bottles, cigarettes
and airguns.
Women and men face an equal risk of such an incident
according to this survey. And, of those who were threatened with
a weapon, 57% said they received no assistance from their employer
after the incident.
Just over half of those who were threatened had
received training on how to deal with violent situations.
Threats or verbal abuse
At 49.5% this is the type of incident that is most
prevalent in Scotland. With almost half of the survey experiencing
such incidents at some time, 235 people reported multiple incidents
by indicating a specific number, while a further 183 said that
the there were two many incidents to recall a specific number.
Excluding those people who said verbal abuse was
simply a daily event, the aggregate number of incidents where
staff received threats or verbal abuse was 2018.
This is the type of incident that prompted the most
additional comments from UNISON members who said that violence
had become an endemic feature of work in the public services.
People reporting threats and verbal abuse were particularly
evident in the following areas: the health service (62%), A&E
(96%), council miscellaneous (67%) and the voluntary sector (64%).
Of those who experienced threats or verbal abuse
in the last 12 months, two-thirds said they had received no help
or assistance from their employer after the incident.
Of those who experienced threats or verbal abuse,
43% were not aware of measures to deal with violence and half
had not received relevant training.
top
Racial harassment
Twenty six UNISON members reported racial harassment
by members of the public, each person reporting at least one incident.
Four people reported multiple incidents and the aggregate number
of incidents reported by this group was 48. The incidents tended
to occur in either social work services or in the health service.
Bisha was a council official who, when conducting
a piece of routine work for the council, became surrounded by
an angry mob. Later a community councillor complained about the
work Bisha was doing and threatened to "punch the paki's
lights out". The council said that the use of racist language
and threats of violence were unacceptable. But, when challenged
by the community councillor, the council then withdrew its remarks
and gave a written apology for any offence caused.
Shortly after this Bisha was the subject of a racist
assault while working alone in the community. He was moved to
another job for reasons of safety, but his new work duties involved
working with a council tenant who had painted a Nazi swastika
across the living room window of his council home. The council
took the view that they were unable to remove the racist graffiti
and some time later Bisha was involved in racist incident in with
that tenant.
After a series of similar events Bisha eventually
went absent on sick leave before eventually resigning from the
council. Throughout the time when Bisha was exposed to racist
violence no risk assessment was conducted and no effective action
was taken. With UNISON's help Bisha achieved a comprehensive
settlement.
top
One person who reported racial harassment said that
lone-working was a regular occurrence and a particular problem.
There were numerous incidents at this office, all reports were
recorded but nothing had been done by management to rectify the
problem.
Another person described "countless" instances
of threatening and abusive behaviour, some of it racial harassment
and some of it sexual. Her principal concern was the recognition
of this problem because racial, sexual, and sectarian incidents
were not recorded separately. If this practice is widespread then
it suggests there may be a problem with the under-reporting of
aggravated or serious incidents within official data.
The concerns of this UNISON member are well founded.
Within the new duty to eliminate discrimination, employers need
to record details of incidents which indicate that additional
measures are required to combat racism. This is an area in which
action is required.
top
Sexual Harassment
Fifty seven people (5%) said they had been sexually
harassed by members of the public. But this level of reporting
doubles to over 12% if we look at the level of sexual harassment
among women.
Four respondents said that harassment was so common
that they could not quantify the number of incidents.
It is very alarming to note that over one in ten
of women working in the public services report that they were
sexually harassed in the last twelve months.
Over two thirds of those who were sexually harassed
said they were aware of the relevant measures to combat violence
and had received training in their use. This must cast serious
doubt on the efficacy of existing policies if harassment persists
despite the widespread observance of policy and practice by staff
in the frontline.
Of those who said they were sexually harassed, nearly
three-quarters said they received no assistance from their employers
after the incident.
Most worryingly, in the course of the research,
UNISON became aware of several serious sexual assaults. For obvious
reasons we have elected not to give specific detail of these incidents
in this report, not least because it is still possible that criminal
charges may be brought. The relevance for this study is that these
incidents highlight the potential seriousness of workplace violence.
We intend to draw this matter to the attention of the Scottish
Executive in the hope that an effective response can be encouraged.
top
Sectarian harassment
Twenty-four people (2%) reported sectarian harassment
with some people reporting being harassed because they had Irish
accents without choosing to label this as sectarian abuse. Of
the 24 respondents, four said such incidents were too common to
identify separately. Of the remaining 20, 16 experienced single
incidents while four people made multiple reports giving an aggregate
frequency of 30 incidents per year.
top
8.0 Managerial responses
In the survey UNISON members were asked whether
they thought their managers took the issue of violence seriously.
While over 78% said that managers did take the issue seriously,
that still leaves a significant minority around one in
five who have lost confidence in the willingness of managers
to combat violence at work.
Training
The majority of UNISON members have received no
training on how to deal with violence at work. Only 38% of members
said training was provided.
With the exception of housing and social work there
is virtually no evidence of training on this issue anywhere outside
the health service. In housing 46% of staff had access to training
and the equivalent figure for social work staff was 44%.
Outside A&E the position in the health service
is only marginally better at 49%, while 73% of A&E staff had
access to training.
Given the number of people who report being worried
about violence, the fact that the majority of UNISON members say
they don't have access to training is a significant problem.
One possible explanation for the variation in training
levels is that this resource is targeted at those areas where
the risk of violence is greatest. Bearing in mind that the average
participation rate is 38%, the following groups have a high level
involvement in training: victims with major injuries (83%), A&E
staff (73%), victims of sexual harassment (68%), victims of racial
harassment (63%).
However, there are at least three weaknesses in
this assumption that training is effectively targeted. There is
nothing in the research data to indicate whether the training
was in place before these reported incidents, or whether the training
was instigated in response to serious incidents.
Secondly, even if the training was in place before
the incidents, the continuing prevalence of violence does cast
doubt on the efficacy of the measures upon which the training
is based.
Finally, Only 55% of those threatened with weapons,
and 33% of those facing sectarian attacks said they had access
to training.
All of this suggests that employers should not assume
that the variation in training levels can be attributed to the
effective targeting of training provision. Training is a key element
of an effective response to violence and existing training strategies
must be reviewed.
The greatest apparent benefit of training is that
workers become aware of measures in place to protect their safety.
When asked about measures that had been adopted to improve staff
safety, only half the respondents thought such steps had been
taken. Looking at the group who had never been trained, knowledge
of workplace measures drops to 38%. However, where training has
been used, awareness of preventative measures rises to 70%.
In another example, example, 44% of people who had
not been on training did not know how to report an injury received
during an violent incident. Yet ignorance of reporting procedures
drops to below 10% when we look at the group who have been trained.
The clear implication is that training makes a significant difference,
in those places where it occurs.
top
Staff awareness of policies
and existing measures
Whether staff are aware of policies and procedures
is, perhaps, closely related to training arrangements. However,
the research data on staff awareness reveals more than just where
training is, and is not provided.
Interestingly, 70% of respondents knew their employer
had a policy which covered issues relating to violence. Just under
50% of the group also knew of measures that were introduced in
response to the risk of violence at work.
top
9.0 Additional Information
Many of the participants took the time to make additional
comments. Some gave detailed descriptions of recent incidents
while others listed measures they would like to see introduced.
The following are some common themes that emerged in this section
of the data.
Bullying
Although the survey we very specifically about violence
toward staff from members of the public, many participants took
the opportunity to complain about specific cases of bullying.
These cases are now being investigated by UNISON officers where
contact details were provided.
Good practice
It should be noted that a small, but identifiable,
group said that while there was some violence from time to time,
all appropriate measures were in place and reviewed from time
to time and the residual level of aggression was something respondents
felt able to deal with. It is also safe to assume that there is
a further group of UNISON members who share that positive experience
but were sufficiently content that they did not feel the need
to report the good practice they experience.
Lone working
The survey questionnaire made no specific reference
to Lone Working. Clearly on reflection, this was an unfortunate
omission. The frequency and depth of the comments on this issue
indicate that it is a major factor that contributes to the risk
of violence and the heightened fear of attack.
The evidence from our members is that staff cuts
under the Executive's policy of "Best Value Reviews"
has led to an increase in the frequency of lone working.
Necessary safety measures are not in place. For
example, in 1999 the Executive instructed trusts to issue all
community nurses with mobile phones linked to a comprehensive
safety system. This direction has been ignored in large parts
of the NHS.
Further work is clearly needed in this field and,
while this will be an immediate campaign priority for UNISON,
the union calls on the Scottish Executive to take the lead on
this area of work. (See recommendations)
UNISON therefore calls on the Executive to commission
independent research to identify:
-
The circumstances in which lone working arises.
-
The occupations ad industries where lone workers
are particularly at risk.
-
The extent to which lone working has increased
in recent years, especially since the introduction of best
value.
-
The essential and desirable components of
an effective policy on lone working.
-
And the prevalence of lone working policies
in the Scottish public services.
top
10.0 Conclusions & Recommendations
Conclusions
In research terms this is a comparatively brief
snap shot of the position in Scottish public services. The evidence
gathered is sufficient to support the following general conclusions:
-
Verbal and physical attacks are a common feature
of work in the pubic services.
-
UNISON members have described a fearsome arsenal
of weapons and objects which they have faced during the last
year.
-
Recent attacks include racial and sexual assaults,
sectarian attacks and some have resulted in major injuries.
-
While most managers are believed to be taking
the issue seriously, around a quarter of public services workers
have lost confidence in the their managers commitment to safety.
-
Exactly half of public service staff work
in fear of violent attacks.
-
Obvious measures such as risk assessments,
safety policies and training are not used universally as they
should be.
-
Critically, some staff report that they are
not forewarned of known risks where clients have a history
of violence.
-
UNISON members describe the deliberate under-reporting
of violent incidence and a culture where reporting and record
keeping are discouraged.
-
Worst of all, although not asked to address
this question specifically, numerous workers took the chance
to state their belief that violence had come to be viewed
as an accepted part of the job.
Much of what has been reported to UNISON is clearly
illegal. Every employer should have an up to date risk assessment
within which risks and hazards such as violent attacks are recorded.
Every employer should have information for staff which, so far
as is reasonably possible, indicates to them the circumstances
in which violence is known to occur, the elements of the job that
are particularly vulnerable, the names and descriptions of clients
who are known aggressors.
There should be policies and procedures on how to
deal with specific threats and the general risk of violence. All
necessary equipment should be in place, from screens and cameras
to personal alarms and mobile phones.
Credit must be given to those employers and manager
who have followed these legal obligations. But the Scottish Executive
is obliged to take steps to identify those workplaces where staff
are being placed at risk.
This is not a moral obligation. This is a clear
legal obligation. It's a legal duty in the sense that UNISON
can, and will sue, where our embers are injured. But, there is
an overriding legal obligation on the Government to ensure that
the rules are being followed.
The levels of harm and fear uncovered by this survey
suggests that public service managers are not being instructed
or resourced to take the steps that are required by law. In UNISON's
campaign for Zero Tolerance of Violence there is also Zero Tolerance
of organisations and agencies that fail to address the risk of
violence and fail to support and protect public service workers.
The evidence of good practice recorded in this study demonstrates
what can be done. This standard must be the target for all, and
not just some, of Scotland's public service employers.
Recommendations
Given the evidence in this report it would miss
the point to conclude with a list of recommended steps for employers
in each and every service sector. Lack of information on protective
measures is not the issue.
Good health and safety is not a checklist, it is
an ongoing process within which risk is observed, assessed and
tackled. The problem identified by this report is a systemic problem.
-
Levels of violence are high
-
People have become accustomed to an atmosphere
of aggression and violence.
-
Fear is a common element of life in the public
services.
-
Reporting is unreliable and risk assessment
is patchy.
-
The response to risk is unclear and training
is uncommon.
The specific use of CCTV, alarms, mobiles self defence
etc will only become apparent once the management of health and
safety improves. Solutions will vary from workplace to workplace,
but the common need across the country appears to be the acceptance
that violence can be effectively managed as a health and safety
issue.
UNISON therefore recommends:
-
A national initiative across the public sector
with the aim of achieving a step change in the quality of
health and safety management.
-
A clear government message to employers and
staff that the personal safety of employees is paramount and
overrides other factors such as efficiency, the needs of the
service, or indeed the needs of the client.
-
Key indicators should be identified to enable
better government monitoring of compliance with the EU Directive
on the management of health and safety.
-
In addition to data on assaults, we need data
on the extent to which risk assessments, personal safety policies,
training and related measures are being used to get to grips
with violence against staff.
-
In the auditing and monitoring of safety management
in Scotland, closer links need to be built between the police,
the Health and Safety Executive and public service employers.
-
There must a national review on the use, and
implications, of the practice of lone working right across
the public sector.
-
Public sector staff are demoralised when known
offenders are not prosecuted effectively. The criminal justice
system must offer better protection to staff in the Scottish
public services.
-
And, most importantly, every service user
in every school, hospital, college, housing office or other
public premises must be left in no doubt
Public service staff will not work in fear of
violent attack and offenders will reported to the police.
top
|