Workplace violence: Examination of the tensions between duty of care, worker safety, and zero tolerance

Conclusion Despite policies supporting zero tolerance, staff do not enact these because they prioritize duty of care to consumers before duty of care to self. Zero tolerance, with incongruent legislation, compounds this tension and impairs decision-making. Practical Implications This article exposes the underlying values, beliefs, and flawed assumptions underpinning practice related to WPV. Managers need to amend policies to reduce staff confusion, adopt a trauma-sensitive and resilience approach, and develop a clearly written framework to guide decision-making related to duty of care to consumers and staff safety. Incident reports and staff well-being/satisfaction surveys need to evaluate the effects of zero tolerance on staff and consumers. Regulators need to ensue legislative requirements are congruent with staff safety and well-being.
Source: Health Care Management Review - Category: American Health Tags: Online Only Source Type: research