Are Employers Prepared for California’s Workplace Violence Prevention Law?

California’s Workplace Violence Prevention Senate Bill 553, which is now in effect (July 1), requires businesses with exposure in the state to implement robust workplace violence prevention plans. SB 553, which modifies an existing California labor code, gives the state’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health the authority to enforce legislation addressing workplace violence planning, prevention and response.

SB553 goes into effect during a time of heightened risk. Political violence in the U.S. is at its highest point since the 1970s, and this year’s presidential election could trigger further violence. It is certainly an opportune time for businesses to acknowledge and prepare for the potential for violence in the workplace. But despite placing a clear responsibility on employers to develop these plans, the bill stops short of detailing what the plans should look like, and many businesses may find themselves unprepared as a result. With the deadline fast approaching, employers can’t afford to wait any longer to figure this out.

What Does SB 553 Mean for California Businesses?

The bill requires California employers, across most industries, with 10 or more employees to develop and implement a written workplace violence prevention plan providing for, among other things: hazard identification, reporting, investigation and analysis; incident response (before, during and after); employee training; and identification of persons responsible for developing and implementing the plan.

There are a few exceptions to these requirements. For example, healthcare facilities are exempt because they are already covered under an existing requirement. Businesses with fewer than 10 employees also need not comply – unless their workplaces are publicly accessible (retail stores, for example), in which case they also need to be SB 553 compliant.

Finally, SB 553 does not apply to the settings in which remote employees work, as long as those settings are not selected or controlled by the business, such as a home office. But by and large, most California employers will be required to develop and implement a written workplace violence prevention plan.

While California is the first state to enact such a broad workplace violence prevention law, other states are considering similar legislation. There were more than 100 workplace violence bills introduced last year across 27 states, with a quarter of those bills enacted and half still pending, according to LexisNexis State Net Insights. Employers in all those states should also be watching the rollout of SB 553 closely, as they may soon find themselves with similar requirements.

What Are The Consequences of SB 553 Non-Compliance?

Well-timed to the political risk landscape though the bill may be, many businesses lack the expertise and resources to address SB 553. Cal/OSHA has released a model written workplace violence prevention plan, however this document only details what to do, not how to do it. The detail can be overwhelming, and businesses may decide that what they have in place is already robust enough, or they may opt to wait and see if they will get an extension. But non-compliance comes with some costly risks.

Indeed, fines under the law can be steep: up to $15,873 for “General” and “Regulatory” violations; up to $25,000 for “serious” violations; and up to $158,727 for “willful” and “repeat” violations. In addition, non-compliance could result in enhanced litigation risk as plaintiffs use the law as the basis for novel theories of workplace safety liability.

This enhanced legal exposure comes on top of the severe impact of workplace violence generally, which can be multifaceted—with far-reaching financial, reputational, and sometimes legal, consequences for impacted businesses.

What Can Businesses Do to Help Mitigate the Risks?

A workplace violence incident can have far-reaching impact, but it doesn’t have to. Insurance companies, in addition to providing key coverages such as Deadly Weapons Protection and directors & officers, can help businesses bridge the knowledge gap when it comes to building a safer and more resilient workplace.

One way they can do this is by pairing expert risk management services alongside their insurance covers. Such services can provide businesses with access to valuable knowledge, insights, and resources as they develop and implement workplace violence prevention programs, including those required by SB 553. Given the stakes, businesses should work with their brokers to explore the insurance and risk management resources available to them.

Straker is U.S. focus group leader, political violence & deadly weapons protection, at Beazley. She is based in Charleston, South Carolina. Straker joined Beazley in 2014 to start up the U.S. stand-alone terrorism book.

Rizzo is product leader – U.S. D&O at Beazley. He is based in New York. Rizzo joined Beazley in 2010, with a specialty in D&O and employment practices liability for publicly traded and large private companies.