Post on 17-Dec-2015
SHARP
Economic Burden of Workplace Assaults in Washington State
Barbara Silverstein & Mike Foley
Darrin Adams, Randy Clark, Sarah Davison
Safety & Health Assessment & Research for Prevention (SHARP) Program
WA State Dept of Labor & Industries
SHARP
National Statistics
CFOI 1995-2000: average 6004 reported work related fatal injuries in US
• `13.5% homicides (n=809)• WA (7.0%)BLS: 19,582 nonfatal assaults• Rate of 2.3 per 10,000National Crime Victimization Survey (DOJ):
1.7 million assaults at work• Rate of 126 per 10,000
SHARP
Washington State Workers Compensation Assault Type 1998-2003a
Struck/beaten by fellow worker/patient 1,155
Struck/beaten during crime 344
Bitten 200
Kicked 112
Struck nec 143
Shot by another person 6
Stabbed 0
Average #
State Fund data
SHARP
Washington State Workers Compensation Assault Claims & Costs 1995-2000
SF SIAverage # claims 2,080Average # compensable claims 452 188Rate per 10,000 15.1Compensable rate/10, 000 3.3 2.9Average cost medical only $4,906Average cost compensable $20,469% Female 58.2%
55.4%Average age 35.4 38.3
BLS Rates: Private sector US 2.3, WA 2.2
State Govt:30.4
SHARP0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003Injury Year
Cla
ims
Per
10,
000
FTE
Psychiatric Hospitals
Residential Mental HealthFacilitiesOther Residential Care Facilities
Community Food/Housing Svcs
Nursing Care Facilities
Administration of HumanResource ProgsVocational Rehabilitation Services
WA State Fund Assaults per 10,000 FTEs Top 7 NAICS 1998-2003. (> 50% of all assaults in SIC 80, 83)
SHARP
Washington State Fund Accepted Assault Claims: WC Direct Cost by Industry Sector,2002
Industry N Total Average Median
Agriculture 31 $170,186 $5,490 $325
Construction 25 $426,721 $17,069 $797
Light Manufacture 13 $16,103 $1,239 $245
Heavy Manufacture 6 $2,652 $442 $217
Transport/Comm 20 $305,095 $15,255 $352
Wholesale/Retail 179 $604,563 $3,377 $435
FIRE 32 $35,415 $1,107 $497
Business Services 194 $410,405 $2,115 $295
Professional Srvs 998 $4,773,659 $4,783 $317
Public Admin 263 $1,878,795 $7,143 $423
SHARP
Washington State Fund Assault Claims by Type(%), 2003 (excludes health care & social services)
TYPE I II III IV
All 24.3 55.0 20.4 0.3
Agriculture(5) - 66.7 33.3 -
Construction(10) 10.0 20.0 70.0 -
Light Mfg (7) - - 100.0 -
Heavy Mfg (11) 27.3 9.1 63.6 -
Transport (17) - 82.4 17.7 -
Retail/Whole (114) 37.7 42.1 20.2 -
FIRE (28) 25.0 67.9 7.1 -
Srvc s prof/gov(139) 18.7 68.4 12.2 0.7
Avg TL:24 daysAvg $6,277Med age 35
SHARP
Washington State Fund Assault Claims by Type(%)b, 2003 (excludes health care & social services)
TYPE I II III IV
Female% 23.4 65.6 10.2 0.8
Male% 24.9 48.3 26.9 0.0
Mean Incurred $ $6,968 $5,278 $10,216 *$53474
Mean Lost days 25.7 16.1 48.5 *294 **
(*=1 case)
No sig diff between types on lost days
No sig diff between types on cost
Construction:$14,171 and 47.6 lost days on average
SHARP
STATE FUND CLAIMANTSWITH NO OTHER COMPENSABLE CLAIMS
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Quarters before/after injury
Ea
rnin
gs
as
Pc
t o
f In
jury
Qtr
MO
CMP
SHARP
A better estimate of burden
1. Compare WA BLS estimate of rates and counts of assaults resulting in at least one lost workday to WC
2. Case cost data from WA State Fund (excludes cost data for 400 largest employers)
3. Quarterly earnings profiles from Employment Security Dept data linked to WC cases, excluding those with other injuries 1994-2001. N=2434 in study
SHARP
Advise/Require: Type 1• Training workers (de-escalation techniques)• Post signs re minimal cash in register• Clear unobstructed view of cash register• Drop safe, limited access• Outside lighting• Address employee isolation factors• Provide security personnel• Communication method to alert police/security• Increase police patrol• Post laws re assault, stalking or other violent acts
5 or more admin controls associated with significant lower risk of fatal assaults, Loomis et al, 2002
SHARP
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)a, Crowe
• Direct relationship between design, use & management of environment to human behavior
• Environment: people and their physical and social surroundings
• Design: of physical space for bona fide users of space (physical, social, psych needs), expected use and predicted behaviors of bona fide users & offenders
• Uses natural access controls (spatial definition), natural surveillance, territorial reinforcement
SHARP
CPTED Strategy Examples b, Crowe
• Clear border definition of controlled space• Clearly marked transition zones public-semi-private• Locate gathering areas to locations with natural surveillance &
access control• Place safe activities in unsafe locations to bring along natural
surveillance & increase perception of safety• Place unsafe activities in safe spots• Overcome distance & isolation via improved communication &
design efficiencies• Lighting & windows• Two-way vs. one-way streets• Fortress effects destroy surrounding land use->no man’s land”
SHARP
What works?
• What do we actually know or need to know?• What role do companies have to play in and outside
the regulatory framework?• How effective are OSHA guidelines? How likely are
they to be followed? • What are the barriers to implementing violence
prevention programs?• What role does legislative action play in protecting
workers from workplace violence? • Why don’t other states follow Washington, California
and Florida?
SHARP
0
1
2
3
4
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
I
II
III
IV
unknown
Washington State Assault Related Fatalities by Type, 1998-2004
Washington FACE