Workplace Violence Prevention: From Best Practice to Baseline Expectation   

In my role as Compliance Counsel at Traliant, I spend a lot of time talking with HR, Legal, and Compliance leaders across industries. Increasingly, those conversations reflect a shared realization that workplace violence was once seen as a remote risk, until a real incident made it impossible to ignore.  

Workplace violence is no longer a hypothetical risk or a rare headline. It’s a persistent, escalating reality that organizations are being forced to confront head-on. And as a result, workplace violence prevention has shifted from a “nice to have” or “best practice” to something far more urgent: a non-negotiable obligation, legally, ethically, and operationally. 

That shift is being driven by three converging forces: the real human impact of workplace violence, a growing wave of regulation aimed at preventing it, and rising employee expectations around safety and employer accountability. 

A Crisis That Feels Personal — Because It Is 

The data alone is sobering. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, workplace violence claimed 740 lives in 2023. Those numbers are staggering, but they’re also deeply personal. Each statistic represents a real person who didn’t make it home from work, and a workplace forever changed. 

Workplace violence doesn’t always show up as a single catastrophic event. More often, it starts with warning signs: threats, intimidation, harassment that escalate into conflict.  

It’s important to take those early signals seriously.  

In 2024, the FBI reported 24 active shooter incidents nationwide. While these events receive the most attention, they’re just one part of a much broader spectrum of workplace violence that affects retail employees, healthcare workers, educators, office staff, and frontline teams alike. 

The business impact is significant as well. Workplace violence creates significant direct costs, including medical expenses, legal fees, workers’ compensation claims, and higher insurance premiums, as well as indirect costs such as lost productivity, absenteeism, turnover, and reputational damage. But beyond the dollars, there’s a quieter cost I hear about often: fear. 

That fear shows up clearly in employee sentiment. Traliant’s 2025 Employee Survey on Workplace Violence and Safety found that: 

• 30% of employees reported witnessing workplace violence, up from 25% the year before 

• 15% said they had personally been targeted, up from 12% 

These aren’t just numbers trending upward; they reflect employees who are questioning whether their workplace is truly safe, and whether their employer is prepared to protect them. 

States Are No Longer Waiting for Something to Go Wrong 

Regulators are paying attention to these same trends, and they’re acting. One of the biggest changes I’ve seen is that lawmakers are no longer treating workplace violence as unpredictable or unavoidable. Instead, the message is clear: it’s foreseeable, preventable, and part of an employer’s duty of care. 

Several states have raised the bar significantly: 

• California’s SB 553 requires most employers to implement a written Workplace Violence Prevention Plan, conduct risk assessments, maintain incident logs, and provide annual training. 

• New York’s Retail Worker Safety Act, effective in mid-2025, introduces new training, reporting, and “silent response” requirements for large retail employers. 

• Texas has enacted mandates focused on healthcare settings, acknowledging the elevated risks faced by frontline staff. 

• At least five additional states including Massachusetts, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington are actively considering similar legislation for general industry and healthcare settings. 

When I talk with employers navigating these laws, many are surprised by how detailed and proactive the requirements are. But taken together, these regulations reflect a broader shift in philosophy: prevention is no longer optional, and reaction is no longer enough. 

Why “Checking the Box” Falls Short 

One of the most common mistakes I see is treating workplace violence prevention as a one-time policy update or annual training obligation. Organizations that approach it that way often miss the bigger picture and expose themselves to greater risk. 

Employees notice when safety efforts feel performative. When people don’t feel protected, trust erodes. Engagement drops. Turnover rises. And once that sense of security is gone, it’s incredibly difficult to rebuild. 

From a legal standpoint, the stakes are just as high. After an incident, regulators, plaintiffs’ attorneys, and insurers tend to ask the same questions: 

• Did the organization identify foreseeable risks? 
• Were employees trained to recognize and report warning signs? 
• Were there clear procedures for responding to threats or violent behavior? 
• Was leadership proactive or reactive? 

If those answers aren’t well-documented and well-supported, the consequences can extend far beyond fines or lawsuits. They can permanently damage an employer’s reputation and employee trust. 

What Real Prevention Looks Like in Practice 

Organizations that approach workplace violence prevention effectively tend to have a few things in common: 

1. A documented prevention plan that reflects their specific risks, roles, and work environments; not a generic policy pulled off the shelf. 

2. Ongoing risk assessments that evolve as operations, staffing, and external threats change. 

3. Clear, trusted reporting and response processes, including confidential or silent options where appropriate. 

4. Training that actually resonates: practical, engaging, and focused on real-world decision-making. 

Training, in particular, plays a critical role. Employees are often the first to notice concerning behavior, but only if they know what to look for and feel supported in speaking up. 

Training That Supports a Culture of Safety 

Based on both regulatory expectations and real-world risk, many organizations are moving toward a layered training approach that includes: 

• Workplace Violence Prevention training to establish awareness, responsibilities, and expectations 
• Active Shooter Response training to prepare employees for high-risk, low-frequency events 
• De-Escalation training to help employees manage conflict before it escalates into violence 

When training is done well, it doesn’t create fear; it creates confidence. Employees understand that safety is a shared responsibility, and that leadership is invested in prevention, not just response. 

The Bottom Line 

Workplace violence prevention is no longer optional, and it’s no longer something organizations can afford to address only after an incident occurs. The data, regulations, and employee expectations are all pointing in the same direction. 

For HR, legal, and compliance leaders, the question isn’t whether to act. It’s how quickly and thoughtfully. 

Organizations that lead on workplace violence prevention aren’t just keeping up with emerging laws. They’re building safer, more resilient workplaces where people can focus on their jobs without fear.