Workplace violence prevention laws in the bellwether states of California and New York are poised to influence legislative approaches in other jurisdictions that must decide whether to focus prevention efforts solely on high-risk industries.
A New York measure that Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed into law this month requires retail employers to set up violence-prevention plans and train their employees on risk factors and techniques such as de-escalating conflict and responding to gun violence. It’s one of the most expansive workplace violence laws for retailers in the country, but pales in comparison to the California law that took effect July 1, requiring similar safety measures for employers across most industries.
New York and California’s legislatures responded to growing concerns about violence, particularly mass shootings, that few workplace safety laws have addressed explicitly. Just over 20,000 US workers suffered from a workplace attack that caused them to miss at least a day of work in 2020, and 392 workers were victims of homicide on the job, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Although the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited employers particularly in health care for failing their “general duty” to protect workers who were attacked by coworkers or patients, federal law and most states don’t lay out specific obligations for employers related to risk of violence, leaving an opening states are beginning to fill.
While well-intentioned, the California law creates a long list of onerous requirements for employers even in workplaces where there’s no interaction with the general public and risk of violence is relatively low, said Andrew J. Sommer, a workplace safety lawyer with Fisher & Phillips LLP in Los Angeles.
“There is real value in a workplace violence program or policy, but to have one with the degree of minutiae and very prescriptive requirements for a worksite that has a very low risk of workplace violence is a concern,” he said.
Union leaders who backed the New York law hope to see other states follow its lead in passing workplace violence laws targeting high-risk industries such as retail, said Stuart Appelbaum, president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.
“Retail workers feel particularly vulnerable, because anyone can come in off the streets,” he said. “And in many retail establishments there are fewer and fewer people working. A lot of employers are under-staffing, and workers can feel like they are on their own.”
The Covid-19 pandemic helped raise awareness of heightened safety risks that retail and other public-facing service workers face, Appelbaum said.
“This concern about safety has just increased since we’ve gotten to the other side of the pandemic, but now the safety we’re talking about is more than just protection from getting Covid,” he said.
Of the workers affected by nonfatal attacks in 2020, more than three-fourths worked in health care, whereas 30% of the homicides were retail or customer-facing employees, according to the BLS data.
Panic Buttons
A first-of-its-kind provision in New York’s law would require retailers with 500 or more employees nationwide to install a panic button. This would mean installing a physical button that when pressed immediately contacts local law enforcement.
While that provision of the law doesn’t go into effect until Jan. 1, 2027—giving time for the state’s labor department to provide more clarity on it—Rebecca Goldstein of Littler Mendelson PC says questions surround the scope of this specific provision.
Unanswered questions include the potential for false alarms, the proper location for panic buttons, and how many should be installed, Goldstein said.
Employers could also opt for a wearable device or cell phone-based app with a panic button, but that could come with a large cost, especially if retail companies don’t already supply phones, Goldstein noted. “If the goal is that it’s truly a panic button, we need to make sure we’re developing software or using software that limits its purpose for that reason.”
“We are pleased with the amendments that were agreed to by Governor Hochul and lawmakers, as they generally address our initial concerns,” said Melissa O’Connor, the president of RCNYS.
While not specific to the retail setting, Illinois, New Jersey, and Washington state require employers to provide panic buttons to certain employees who work alone and face a heightened risk of assault or harassment, such as hotel housekeepers.
Training Requirement
There isn’t a major cost to New York by implementing its law, which likely made it easier to pass, noted Stewart J. Schwab, a Cornell University professor of law.
“It’s more notice requirements that every employer is supposed to give to its employees, and training programs that the private sector employers are supposed to do themselves,” Schwab said. The law requires worker training on handling certain emergency situations.
And while major retailers like Walmart and Target may already do some sort of training on preventing workplace violence, Schwab said the new law likely won’t impose too much of a cost on them—more so somewhat smaller employers.
In California, employers have gotten their initial prevention and training plans down on paper to meet the July 1 deadline, and now they’re putting the plans into practice and seeing what might need revision, said Rachel Conn, an attorney focused on workplace safety at Conn Maciel Carey LLP in San Francisco.
“Over the next six months, we’re going to really see a lot of activity in the area from employers kind of pivoting as they figure out what works and what doesn’t work,” she said. “And from Cal/OSHA too,” as the agency figures out its enforcement strategy.
Cal/OSHA, the state’s workplace safety agency, also is scheduled to issue a proposed regulation by December 2025, potentially expanding or clarifying the workplace violence law’s requirements, Conn added.
Influence Across State Lines
Employers should prepare for the likely spread of workplace violence prevention laws and regulations, as California tends to lead the way for other states on workplace policy, particularly for its West Coast neighbors, said Karen Tynan, who co-leads the workplace violence prevention group at Ogletree Deakins.
“Typically Oregon and Washington state follow suit or take a close look at what California does,” Tynan said.
California and at least 10 other states already require violence prevention efforts by employers in hospitals and other healthcare settings, where workers face the threat of attacks by patients. Similar proposals were floated but failed to pass this year in Colorado and Massachusetts.
Goldstein said she wouldn’t be surprised if other states follow New York’s panic button requirement for retail workers, but said it will depend on how the new law works out in practice.
Although implementing laws to train employees on workplace violence is a proactive approach, they still appear as the second best and easier hurdle to legislate rather than addressing other broader questions like, for example, whether to strengthen gun control laws, according to Schwab.
“That’s where the real workplace violence dangers come from and this is sort of a second-best that is less controversial and maybe people can more agree on,” Schwab said.
Lilah Burke in Washington also contributed to this story.
To contact the reporters on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: