Hostages at Work

Last Friday, Leeland Eisenberg walked into Hillary Clinton's campaign office in NH with road flares strapped to his chest, demanding to speak to the candidate about the state of mental health services. About 5 hours later, he was arrested after releasing a handful of hostages.

If only all hostage situations could end this way. There are many cases where a person with a gun or bomb takes people hostage in the workplace. Some cases end violently, sometimes with only the perpetrator ending his or her own life.

There were two hostage situations that occurred at the same Caterpillar plant in Clayton, NC. Once in November 2004 and then again in January 2006. In both cases, it was a situation that stemmed from a domestic dispute involving violence against women.

On exactly how to survive these incidents can never be completely fool-proof but there are several key points that are emphasized often:
1. Stay as calm as you can. Panic will only lead to bad decisions and raising the anxiety of the hostage taker.
2. Do not try to disarm the hostage taker. Instigating an assault will raise the chances of you or another hostage getting hurt. If the event of shooting or immediate threat, respond quickly and decisively.
3. It is often easier to escape than to try to disarm the perpetrator(s).
4. Follow the instructions of the captors within reason. Do not be confrontational with them.
5. In the event of an Emergency Response Team (SWAT) intervention, stay low, do not rush towards them and follow their instructions.

More advice can be found at
Canadian Department of Corrections Report

Surviving Kidnapping While Traveling

State of Wyoming Powerpoint Presentation

Worker Call Deputies when Threaten and They Catch Him

A worker makes a threat and is sent home. He then calls back to say some threatening things to his co-workers. They leave, call law enforcement and meet them at a gas station. That is where he is caught as he is coming in. No one was hurt.




It is unknown if anything would have happened if he was not caught. Maybe he was just coming to get his things as he claimed but it was the people who took it seriously that called for support.

Feel free to comment if you think he was planning to commit violence or how you would have handled the situation.

King County, WA Metro to Deny Benefits specifically to DV Victims

In an clear act of discrmination, the Metro of King County, Washington has considered denying death benefits to only adminstration assistants if they die from domestic violence.
While there is a movement to provide specific support measures for victims such as non-discrimination in hiring decisions or special leave options, this is the first time I have read about a policy to specifically discriminate against domestic violence victims. Additionally, it is targeted only towards a specific position.

While it is unlikely that this provision will pass, it is outrageous considering the history of the city with the Police Chief murdering his wife just a few years ago.

Sex Offender sent as Service Man

In this case of a service man sent to reface the cabinets of young woman, the news investigation team interviewed the woman, the employer and the offender. Earlier this year, Kelli L. asked Home Depot to remodel her home. It was discovered later that he was a registered sex offender with a lengthy record of assault.
Watch the video and comment in our survey link below. We will publish your responses in our next newsletter.



Please let us know your opinion and a little about your own organizational preparedness at this short survey.

Need for an accessible, accurate, comprehensive Background Check System

There have been numerous articles and posts about how the VA Tech tragedy may have been prevented if the assailant had been prevented from purchasing firearms because of his mental health history. While there are various legislative bills and orders looking to remedy this loophole, the bigger issue of how criminal histories are compiled and accessed needs to be addressed.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System does not contain a complete list of the crimes, civil trespass orders, arrests and mental health issues that some may consider it to be. According to their site, "The NICS is a national system that checks available records in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Interstate Identification Index (III), and the NICS Index to determine if prospective purchasers are disqualified from receiving firearms."

The culprit appears to be the inconsistency of the different states in what they report and how. Some states do not provide complete information as even their database does not contain all the information available at their county level. Additionally, funding is needed to bring them into compliance with the federal regulation.

Unfortunately, it appears that it takes tragedies such as occurred in Blacksburg, VA to bring attention to the general population to motivate their representatives to make changes. We can only hope that the issue remains in the spotlight till the necessary laws and funding is put into place.

Criticism of Virginia Tech Security Response

In regard to the horrible events that occurred today at Virginia Tech, I wanted to share a few observations. While the investigation is still underway and the details of the tragedy are still largely unknown, some in the press have started the arm-chair quaterbacking routine.
There are so many experts being called and quoted that will point out everything that the security team did wrong. As the news at this moment describe two separate shooting incidents and much of the criticism has focused on the warnings provided to students after the first attack, the lack of a lock-down response and the ensuing investigation.
Every emergency situation can be handled better after given the time and respite for reflection. Emergency and crisis planning is crucial and as the details of the incident unfold, there will be mistakes identified. But if we are to assign blame, it falls squarely on the individual who allegedly chose to avoid responsibility by killing himself.
It is this knee-jerk response to find fault and for the appetite of the press to find people who want to distinguish themselves as "experts", that we criticize those who were trying their best, using the resource and knowledge they had at the time, to save lives. I pray that there are no lawsuits that spawn from this tragedy.

Stalking at Work- Who can respond?

In this month’s e-newsletter, we feature the issue of stalking in the workplace. As this crime focuses narrowly on one individual, the question emerges on who and how should the situation be handled. What can the targeted individual do and what are the responsibilities of the employer and more importantly, what should be done when there is a conflict of opinion.
Very often, especially in domestic violence cases, the victim does not want to take legal action against the perpetrator. There are a myriad of reasons for this stance and perhaps in another entry we can discuss those reasons but the point is that often the employer and employee may be in conflict on how to handle the situation.
In terms of legal issues, only the actual victim or target of the crime can take out the criminal charges such as Communicating Threats or Stalking (while states vary, all have similar statutes for these crimes). While a Law Enforcement officer can charge someone with these crimes, it often requires the support and approval of the victim. They are the one who suffers from the action. However, employers can take out charges such as Trespassing (as it is their property) or even Telephone Harassment (as it their phone being called).
In terms of restraining orders, the commonly known domestic violence restraining order can only be taken out by the person (employee) who has to want utilize this relief. An employer cannot obtain this type nor can they “persuade” an employee to obtain one. In Gavin de Becker’s acclaimed book, "The Gift of Fear", he describes the Laura Black case of the mid-1980’s where Richard Farley killed 7 workers at the ESL Corporation. He alleges that Black did not want to get the restraining order against Farley and it was just before the court date of that order when the tragic assault occurred.
However, there has been the growth of workplace restraining orders (pdf) where employers can obtain one against a stalker but just as it pertains to the workplace. In many of these laws, there are requirements to inform the targeted employee but they do not need their permission.
Naturally, it is the best option is when the employer and employee communicate and come up with a plan together to ensure the safety of everyone. However, when there is a disagreement, every party has to take the action that they believe is best. For employers, it is prudent to take the victim’s concerns into their assessment. They are often “the experts” in surviving this perpetrator. And they should never make it a condition of employment that they victim take any legal course of action. This heavy-handed approach is sure to discourage disclosure and communication. This not to say that employer is without options or the right to secure the workplace. A thorough investigation should be made and appropriate measure taken to meet any potential threat.
Your views and experience in this issue are welcome.