In comments submitted recently to Cal/OSHA, a coalition led by the California Chamber of Commerce continues its ongoing effort to make sure the workplace violence prevention standard will be workable for small businesses and large employers alike.
The comments reiterate that the standard shouldn’t blur the line between hazards created at the workplace and those created externally. Workplace violence may fall into either category, depending on the factual circumstances surrounding the violence, CalChamber notes, and it is important to separate the two as Cal/OSHA moves forward in drafting the workplace violence prevention standard.
Small Employers
The CalChamber coalition continues to be concerned about the feasibility of the standard for small businesses, particularly those with about 10 employees, because the rule could involve the business acquiring new materials and devices in the workplace and pushing businesses to hire professional security guards and more staff.
The coalition proposed that the regulation apply where multiple employees are present at any given time, thus mirroring the legislative standard set in SB 553, the 2023 law creating the workplace violence prevention program.
Aligning with Law
The coalition expressed concern about Cal/OSHA introducing references to the Penal Code in the draft regulation, noting that Cal/OSHA inspectors or administrative law judges don’t have expertise in the criminal statutes or the court cases interpreting criminal law to apply the penal codes in the workplace.
For example, one section of the draft regulation adds “stalking” to the definition of workplace violence and another relies on the Penal Code definition of “self-defense.”
The “stalking” definition in the Penal Code includes lesser conduct than the definition of workplace violence in SB 553, the coalition noted.
The “self-defense” language in the draft regulation, the coalition said, “is so broad as to prevent employers from disciplining employees who create or escalate a confrontation and then are forced to resolve that situation via so-called ‘self-defense.’”
The coalition suggested language for the draft regulation to address its concerns in both cases.
Other Suggestions
Other coalition comments were geared toward: making sure that the draft regulation doesn’t create employer liability for conditions inherent to the nature of the business, clarifying how employees of small businesses can reporting workplace violences concerns, and ensuring that exceptions to post-incident response procedures maintain the usefulness of the requirement.
