violence

Eldercare and Workplace Violence

by
Asier Romero/Shutterstock

Many of us have, or will have, to live through the process of finding care for our aging elders who are battling age-related dementia, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Most of us are unable to provide the escalating level of care that is required for our parents or grandparents with this disease, so that they can live safely in their own homes. As a result, we have to make the difficult decision to move our elders into a healthcare facility, such as a nursing or long-term care home.

As we know from multiple media sources, the demand for eldercare, especially critical care, far exceeds the availability of facilities and spaces for this aging and growing demographic. Public healthcare services are simply not able to keep up with the demand. Not only are the facilities filled to full capacity, the services needed once the elderly are in care are at maximum demand. Adding to this pressure for demand, the needs of those afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease can vary tremendously depending on the level or progress of the disease.

Included in the litany of miseries that comes with Alzheimer’s disease is the change in the affected person’s behaviour. People who have spent their adult lives as loving and thoughtful parents or grandparents, often turn into violent, aggressive, and abusive individuals. The cause for this dramatic and devastating change is the disease. While we know that the person who is raging abuse, and hurling objects at anyone who enters the room, is ‘not themselves’, the impact of the violent or aggressive behaviour is devastating to the person who is the subject of that abuse. Getting slapped, kicked, or punched feels the same on the receiving end, no matter what the age or mental state of the person doing the slapping, kicking, or punching.

In 2017, the results of a poll showed the impact of the escalating levels of workplace violence experienced by healthcare workers from patients in the Ottawa area. This risk of harm to workers increases for those who care for patients who have to move into extended healthcare programs, hospitals, and facilities.

Typically, people who have to live in long-term care facilities are not there by choice. Healthcare workers in these facilities find themselves working with patients in a closed environment—meaning that patients cannot leave—who may be easily triggered by the routines the workers must abide by in order to do their jobs. When coping with numerous patients suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, these triggers can multiply and range in level of severity, depending on any number of differing variables.

It is no wonder that the healthcare sector finds itself in need of more resources and training tools to reduce the risk of harm for both healthcare workers and the persons entrusted to their care.

In the fall of 2019, the Ontario government published ‘Workplace violence prevention in health care: A guide to the law for hospitals, long-term care homes and home care.’ While this document reinforces the regulatory requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, it also emphasizes the need for employers in the healthcare sector to train and support their workers, and instructs supervisors on how to work safely in the face of an increasingly unsafe workplace environment. A brief legal analysis of the guide is provided by the Canadian HR Reporter.

As noted in the analysis, the time for a cultural shift in healthcare, with the implementation of proactive workplace safety measures, is at hand. All of us will be the better for it.

Discussion Questions:

  1. As the Health and Safety leader in a healthcare workplace environment, how will you balance the rights of workers with the need to provide appropriate services to patients who may be violent?
  2. What are specific and proactive steps you could implement to reduce the risk of harm to healthcare workers in a long-term care home?

The Tsunami of Security Issues!

by

Employee Security: How Far should you go? Are you doing enough?

business man stop violence concept background
Sisacorn/Shutterstock

Click here to read the article on employee security.

Concerns regarding employee security have been building for years since Lori Dupont’s murder in her Ontario Workplace.

 Click here to read an article about this case.

Violence in the workplace legislation such as Bill 168 have been implemented, and now there is greater emphasizes on the courts to be less tolerant of employers who do not meet their minimal workplace security legal obligations.

Click here to read the legislation Bill 168.

All employers must take warning, the courts are giving clear direction on how far reaching an employers’ obligations is in for the prevention of violence in the workplace. The Ministry of Labour laid five charges against an Ontario mental health centre in relation to the security and the prevention of violence in the workplace and a ruling has been rendered:

“A mental health centre must install a new electronic alarm system at its site as well as provide improved employee training and hire properly trained security personnel who will be present 24/7.”

What the Union is saying about this case:

“For the first time in Ontario history, a quasi-judicial body has confirmed that security personnel have a role to play on a health care team,” he said. “This is an extremely significant conclusion, not just for Brockville Mental Health Centre, but for mental health care facilities across the province.”

The employer has been ordered to install security systems but also to hire security guards. So the tsunami is here and rightfully so: all employees deserve not to be exposed to workplace violence.

But why is this ruling so unusual? The courts have told an organization that they must hire specific employees, in this case security guards. This has an impact on an organization’s HR and staffing budgets. Usually workplace H&S violations result in fines and the organization must decide on its own on the direction it must take to comply. The courts in this case were very directive on what was required to ensure the prevention of violence in the workplace, and it requires the funding of more security guards.

As with most employment matters it is always better to pave your own path rather than having a third party or the courts order what you must do. It is clear in Ontario that employers must take workplace violence prevention as seriously as society and our courts are.

Discussion Questions:

  1. Please explain the value of conducting a violence in the workplace risk assessment.
  2. Research a tool that you could use to conduct a violence in the workplace risk assessment. Why did you pick that tool, and what value does it have to an organization?