California’s Workplace Violence Prevention Law Turns Two, Part 2: Training, Investigations, and Employer Action Items

Announcer: Welcome to the Ogletree Deakins podcast, where we provide listeners with brief discussions about important workplace legal issues. Our podcasts are for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. You can subscribe through your favorite podcast service. Please consider rating this podcast so we can get your feedback and improve our programs. Please enjoy the podcast.

Robert Rodriguez: Hello, everyone, and thank you for joining us for the Ogletree Deakins podcast. My name is Robert Rodriguez, and I’m a shareholder in the Sacramento, California office and co-chair of the Workplace Violence Prevention Practice Group. Here with me today is Karen Tynan, co-chair of our Workplace Violence Prevention Practice Group. We are here today talking about Cal/OSHA citations related to workplace violence and how employers can use that understanding for better compliance. Well, thank you for joining us, Karen.

Karen Tynan: Hey, this is awesome, and I’m real pleased to offer these podcasts about workplace violence and Cal/OSHA for our California employers.

Robert Rodriguez: Well, let’s dive right in. So, the first question I have for you is, at a high level, what are the workplace violence prevention citations that we are seeing this past year or so with the new law in effect?

Karen Tynan: So, if we look at 2025 and we look at the investigations, the citations that are issued, I see some areas, groupings of citations. And the first one I want to talk about is plan deficiencies, so deficiencies. So, when Cal/OSHA comes in and does an investigation or an inspection, and it can be, as we’ve said in other podcasts, completely unrelated to workplace violence, they could come in on heat illness, but in their document requests, that 1AY form, the inspector checks the box for Workplace Violence Prevention Plan. So, then they’re going to take that plan and they’re going to compare it to SB 553, to the law in the Labor Code, and see if that plan matches up with the plan requirements.

And what I’ve seen for some California employers is inspectors finding plan deficiencies just on paper. Somebody maybe purchased a plan online or they decided to develop their own plan without using a template, whatever way they got there, whatever reason, but then perhaps their wording in their plan around how they’re going to keep particular documents or how they’re going to investigate workplace violence are deficient. And so that’s an easy area to be cited on, but it’s also an easy area for an employer to be in compliance. So, I like pointing that one out because I think it is low-hanging fruit for employer improvements.

Robert Rodriguez: Agreed 100%. And what I’ve seen with some employers, you mentioned some of these templates out there, for example, one of the requirements is you have to have procedures for notifying employees of the presence, nature, and location of a workplace violence emergency, I’ve seen some generic plans that just say, “Employer will have procedures for notifying employees of the nature, presence, and location of an emergency,” with nothing else in there. And have you seen that?

Karen Tynan: I have. And the better approach would be that the plan, let’s say the plan was for a manufacturing location, the plan would be specific that the loudspeaker system is going to be used, or Slack messages or whatever, but that kind of generic language isn’t going to pass muster, Robert. And I see that as an area where citations can be issued. Now, also I want to talk a bit about PPE and engineering controls, administrative controls. So, when a plan is evaluated or if there is a workplace violence incident and Cal/OSHA is investigating, they are going to look at your hazard assessments. Did you have PPE that the employee should have had for instances or risk of workplace violence? And also, did the workplace have the proper engineering controls or administrative controls? So, if an employer’s listening to this, this is an area where they could make their own action list and say, “Hey, if this is where Cal/OSHA is issuing citations, maybe I can take a look at this and see not only is our written plan sufficient, but as far as implementation, do we have any other deficiencies?”

Robert Rodriguez: All right, moving on to question number two. How are Cal/OSHA investigations related to workplace violence started or initiated? How does this happen? How do they end up–

Karen Tynan: How does it get rolling?

Robert Rodriguez: Yeah. How does it get rolling? How do they show up at your work site? What have you seen?

Karen Tynan: Well, of course, the tried-and-true method is complaints. There’s a 1-800 number employees can call. They could email the local district office. That’s how complaints can get an investigation started.

Additionally, Cal/OSHA is required to follow up on complaints and to follow up and initiate investigations when there is a report of a serious injury or a fatality. Now, we have other blog posts and podcasts around reportable to Cal/OSHA for those serious injuries and fatalities. So, when a reportable happens and an employer has called in to the nearest district office and indicated that an employee’s been hospitalized, for example, Cal/OSHA will initiate that investigation.

And I want to talk about one other area that can get investigation started, and it’s a bit unusual, and that’s related to a news story. And we don’t typically see that, let’s say, in residential construction or scaffolding or manufacturing, but because workplace violence, let’s say a shooting or a domestic violence incident that makes the news, when those type of occurrences happen, it is not uncommon for that district manager to then assign an inspector to pursue that, even though there hasn’t been a report to them.
Have you seen that?

Robert Rodriguez: Very much so, yeah. It seems like these are…when you’ve got higher-profile incidents, those are reported, especially, I’ve seen them here in the Sacramento area on the Sacramento news. It seems like local news agencies pick up on these local stories about workplace violence, and definitely seeing some inspections resulting from those news stories and media coverage.

Karen Tynan: I think that’s important for employers to know that there is this other way that Cal/OSHA will find out about incidents, because it’s certainly not going to be on that 6:00 news in Sacramento that there’s been a fingertip amputation. That’s not going to make the news, but a shooting, these retail incidents that people get on their iPhones and then are on the news, those are also going to lead to Cal/OSHA investigations starting.

Robert Rodriguez: Thank you for that. So, can you describe what the average workplace violence investigation looks like? What happens during it?

Karen Tynan: Sure. So, for the California employers, you’re going to know that there’s an investigation when that Cal/OSHA inspector shows up at your doorstep, or you receive that investigation letter in your mailbox. And so those are two ways that investigations start. And when that inspector shows up, he or she will be starting the standard Cal/OSHA investigation process where there will be the opening conference, the discussion of the scope of the inspection, and the request to inspect the work site, job site, location of the incident. There will be document request, all of that.

And one of the distinctions that I think it’s important for us to talk about in this average workplace violence investigation, or typical one, that I’d like to call out for employers is that in these investigations, when the inspector comes and wants to interview employees, I find, Robert, that you and I are doing a balancing act, trying to not re-traumatize employees, trying to be respectful of employee privacy, trying to, I would even go so far as to say, thread the needle in being cooperative with Cal/OSHA, they’ve got their investigation to do, but also balancing the interest of employees who may have seen a coworker assaulted, a coworker killed, a fatality of a vendor. Do you think that’s something that we have to manage in these investigations that’s a little different?

Robert Rodriguez: Definitely. And one thing to note is generally on the higher-profile criminal acts that we’ve dealt with over the last year and a half, it’s not just Cal/OSHA interviewing them.

Karen Tynan: Sure.

Robert Rodriguez: It’s going to be law enforcement that’s going to interview them. I’ve also seen sometimes where workers’ comp investigators want to interview them as well. And so, we’ve got to be really cognizant of the fact that these folks have been through a traumatic experience at their work site, where you go day in and day out. It’s a very significant place where you spend a lot of your time outside of your home at your workplace. And so, to have them have multiple interviews can be traumatic.

And obviously for my practice, and I’m sure you do the same, is we try to really make them as gentle as possible, the interviews on the employees. I’ve employed strategies like we won’t even actually do the interview at the work site. We’ll do it at a hotel conference room, as not to traumatize them talking about it at the work site, conferencing with the inspector and letting them know, “Hey, they’ve already given a full interview to the homicide detective and relived all this two weeks ago. They’re getting some closure now, and you’re coming in and ripping the wounds open, so be very gentle with them.”

Karen Tynan: For sure. I think that is an important difference in these investigations and in how these cases get managed. Because even, let’s just pick one of our food manufacturing employers in California, if someone witnessed a fingertip amputation, it’s certainly unpleasant, but it’s not those same considerations.
And I also think that in these type of average workplace violence investigations, we also have to be consistent with the company culture. Do they have an Employee Assistance Program that we can help the employees utilize? Because we’re trying to be cooperative with Cal/OSHA and with the inspector and find that balance of not re-traumatizing and re-injuring the employees. So, I like calling out that difference, Robert.

And then as far as the citations and appeals in these cases, it follows the same process. I do see in a workplace violence incident, especially if there’s been prior public press releases, public scrutiny, that there can be other press releases and continued coverage in the media, which many times employees find unpleasant also.

Robert Rodriguez: Great point. Have you seen any California employers struggling in any particular areas as far as workplace violence and workplace violence prevention?

Karen Tynan: So, I like this question because it gives California employers an opportunity to learn from others. And so I’ve seen in 2025, some of the areas of struggling with the plan requirements with implementation have to go with maintaining documentation and confidentiality because, let’s give an example, Robert, if there was a domestic violence situation that spilled over into the workplace, either with threats or an assault in the workplace by a partner, that victim has other protections under various laws. So, we have to be cognizant of protecting victims of domestic violence, also confidentiality around maybe medical issues or anything else that is that personal identifying information, private information that is protected. So, I’ve seen employers really have to work to comply with that.

We’ve talked in some other podcasts about training at onboarding and the idea of how long do you have after someone’s hired to give them this very specific training? And unfortunately, the law is silent to how many days or weeks or months. Right, Robert?

Robert Rodriguez: Yes, very much.

Karen Tynan: So, then you and I get one of our favorite questions is, “Well, so can we wait a month? Can we wait 32 days? Can we wait…” And there’s no–

Robert Rodriguez: Can we do the next July when we do our yearly training?

Karen Tynan: And I don’t think there’s any one right answer for how soon after someone’s hired you’d have to do this training, this onboarding training. There’s no one right answer, but I could tell you, if you just say, “We’re going to train everyone once a year, and if you were hired 340 days ago, you’re going to wait for that training,” that’s not going to pass, right?

Robert Rodriguez: I don’t think so.

Karen Tynan: I do see that as an area that folks can learn from. And I also like to point out that I see some employers work and struggle around some generational differences. And I’m going to probably regret this, but I’m going to use my daughter as an example, Robert. She’ll hate me for this. But in some workplaces, younger employees do have expectations of maybe more rigorous training. They’ve grown up at a time where they’re having active shooter drills in their school, where violence in their life, or preventing violence or dealing with threats, may be handled a little differently than, I will be so bold as to say, someone in my generation who, we had tornado drills, Robert, in the South. You learned how to get under your desk, but we never had any kind of drills around workplace violence.

Robert Rodriguez: A lot different than–

Karen Tynan: A lot different. And so, I think understanding those differences in culture so that you can communicate effectively with your employees and meet their needs and be consistent across your company culture, but understanding your different employee needs.

Robert Rodriguez: Great. And so, in your experience, what are the industries that are getting the most attention from Cal/OSHA on workplace violence?

Karen Tynan: Well, I think at the top of the list would be social services, the traditional areas, hospitals, medical providers. There’ve been some high-profile cases where social workers or nurses have been attacked in the workplace. That’s always going to be a top priority. And the resources, whether it’s the inspector, multiple inspectors are going to be allocated to those incidents.

I also see retail as a continued high priority in 2026 and beyond just because of those customer interactions, the holiday rushes and the things we see on the videos where people have their phones out and someone’s reached across the cash register and that. Retail’s always going to be at the top. And maybe even I would say law enforcement agencies too, because a lot of anything with law enforcement typically is newsworthy.

So, we’re seeing enforcement across the board from Cal/OSHA. And I do say that workplace violence will remain a top priority in 2026 and beyond, and so for those employers that face these hazards, the preparation is surely key.

Robert Rodriguez: Excellent. Thanks for that insight. What are your recommendations or some choices for employers on active shooter training in the workplace? What are your thoughts on that?

Karen Tynan: Well, I think that is a top question, Robert. And there’s a couple of schools of thought. And I actually, when clients ask me, “Oh, should we have active shooter training?”, I do the typical lawyer response and don’t answer the question and say, “Well, let me ask you some questions.”

Robert Rodriguez: Yeah, it depends.

Karen Tynan: It depends. And so, what is your company culture? Do you have a risk from active shooters? Have you had any other incidents? And I don’t put my thumb on the scale. We’ve had some employers who do have, I would say, very robust active shooter training, and we’ve seen other employers take a pass on it and say, “Well, it’s traumatizing. We don’t see the hazards in it or the risk in it, and so we’re going to take a skip on that and we don’t consider it to be, say, part of our plan.”

I don’t have a super strong opinion, although you and I both know many services, many consultants do provide active shooter training with the run, hide, fight. I’m interested in, do you give the answer, “It depends.”? Do you pivot back towards the employer and solicit their thoughts on it?

Robert Rodriguez: Yeah, absolutely. And as you mentioned, it’s really dependent on the risks you have and what your company culture is. Not only are we going to do work or are we going to do active shooter training, yes or no, that’s one question, and then if we do that, what is it going to look like? And a couple of questions I’ve gotten from different employers is the FBI has actually produced a Hollywood production video of an active shooter, what you’re supposed to do. It takes place, I think, in a bar or a restaurant, but it is very graphic. It’s very disturbing to watch, quite frankly. And so, for the employers that have asked me, “Should this be part of my workplace violence training?”, again, you have to really assess what is your company culture? What is your risk? Do we need to show this to employees? And so that’s going to be the questions employers are going to have to answer and ask themselves.

Karen Tynan: I totally agree. And I know the video you’re talking about, and I’ve heard from some California employers who say, “Wow, I want to show that video to everyone,” and then others who say, “Gee, having people cower and talk about running from a shooter is a bit much,” and they take a pass on it. So, I’m with you that you mirror back to the employer and have them ask the questions about whether it’s a fit, how it would work for their employees, and then assist them in making the decision.

Robert Rodriguez: Exactly. Well, thanks so much for listening to Robert and Karen. Look for Ogletree blog articles on Ogletree.com. Check out our Workplace Violence Prevention Practice Group page in our webinars. Stay safe out there.

Karen Tynan: Thanks, everybody.

Announcer: Thank you for joining us on the Ogletree Deakins podcast. You can subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts or through your favorite podcast service. Please consider rating and reviewing so that we may continue to provide the content that covers your needs. And remember, the information in this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be construed as legal advice.