Dear Readers: A few weeks ago I emailed, to my data base, and Tweeted a link to an outstanding video by the Department of Homeland Security about how ordinary people can do extraordinary things by using their instincts.  Among those that received the video link from me, was my colleague and friend, Larry Kaminer, President of The Personal Safety Group.

As a result, Larry wrote this blog, which so perfectly addresses the point that I wanted to share it with my readers.  It’s interesting, too, that Larry mentions Gavin de Becker.  Several years ago Mr. de Becker gave me permission to use elements of his work in some of my KidzWeyes, LLC programs.  Below is Larry’s post.    Stephanie

****

“Ordinary people can stop extraordinary events” – Department of Homeland Security

I was sent this link to a Department of Home Land Security video on the importance of awareness at retail outlets and shopping malls with regard to suspicious behavior. DHS has the very difficult job of keeping us safe and informed without alarming or scaring the public. This is especially true of their efforts to protect us from an act of terrorism here on American soil.

This 9 minute video is worth watching.

Upon viewing it you may very well say to yourself:

-All of this is common sense.

• Of course a suspicious package needs to be reported.
• It’s a no brainer that someone taking photos of surveillance cameras could be suspicious.
• Who doesn’t know that someone wearing a heavy overcoat indoors is also a red flag?
• I already know that an unattended vehicle parked for extended periods might be suspect?

-So why did you urge me to watch this video?

Well here is my answer to that reasonable question. The big take away I got from this video had nothing to do with common sense. It had to do with obeying our instincts.

Gavin de Becker in his book  The Gift of Fear, describes intuitions as “knowing without knowing why”. The best description of this natural defensive mechanism I have every heard.

All too often during our personal safety training classes we hear  stories from  victims of crime, whom upon reflecting on their ordeals went on to describe clear pre crime indictors and other elements that “just didn’t seem right” before the crime even occurred. Things that gave them a “bad feeling” but things they ignored. They also share with us the stories they told themselves to push aside their intuition in an attempt to justify not acting on their instincts.

Our societal  encoding  very often prompts us to deem our instincts or intuition as “silly” or “irrational”  Even with every red light going off in our heads that something is amiss, we are also hesitant to honor that “gut feeling” out of fear of embarrassing someone (or ourselves) or hurting someone else’s feelings. Or perhaps not wanting to be the one to “create a scene” in case it “turned out to be nothing”

We use a cliché in personal safety that I think should become our encoded credo. “There is no harm in a false alarm” Regardless of the situation you are in, you should always honor your instincts and override any little voice in your head telling you to do otherwise.

Mall security, the police, any agency, would much prefer you report suspicious behavior. This gives them the chance to evaluate. Let them be the ones to thank you for your vigilance and to let you know it turned out to be nothing.  And they will be grateful for your concern and diligence in reporting.

An alert yet relaxed and observant general public can be the extended network of eyes and ears for law enforcement.

Please watch this video with your family and especially your children if they are of age to be out and about and at the mall without you.

And remember, as DHS so succinctly states, “Ordinary people can stop extraordinary events”

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · instincts · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · prevention · relationships · risk · Safety · shopping · training · victim · violence

Over the weekend I had the chance to see the movie Julie and Julia with a friend of mine. We caught it at the discount theater. That’s how overdue I was to see this movie I’d wanted to see for so long. It’s really a great movie. And I was especially taken by Julie’s need to blog and how she got so caught up in doing it every day.

I admire that because as you can tell from my posts – I’m nowhere near able to do it every day. Mostly because of time – or lack of it. But also because I have the hardest time thinking of what to write. I’ve been like that since grade school. Struggling to find subject matter and blending it with my need for privacy. I do write on domestic abuse, and how I articulate that into consulting with managers and corporations to help them improve corporate culture. I also write about the dynamics of abuse, how we can help and the costs to all of us as a result.
So you think I could blog every day. Still can’t. The good news is that on January first I’m going to participate in a “Blogathon” with some other folks I know. We’re to write as often as we can, with no expectation of a certain frequency. So that’s good, because I’ll have support system. I’ll also be held accountable to read the other participants blogs as often as I can and to comment on them.
So here’s something you can do to help: you can suggest blog ideas. You know my area of expertise. Is there something you’d like to know about domestic abuse’s impact on business? Is there something about victims or offenders you like to comment on or ask? Let me know. Let’s have a discussion.

Post your questions in the comments section here, or email me at Stephanie@hressential.com. You can also visit my website and see if something on it inspires a question.
Here’s the requirement though: if you’re going to be offensive, insulting, use bad language, SPAM, or send gibberish (like a bunch of nonsensical characters) don’t write. Period. This is a forum for people who sincerely want a discussion. Agreed?

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · prevention · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

Excuse me? How could you not? I just don’t get that. I talk with executives frequently and when I get that response it frustrates me. I can understand budgetary restrictions so long as it applies to all programs considered. But to have the same old, same old – or programs that are Band-aids®, or the “flavor of the month” just to pacify that the workplace is still doing trainings makes no sense to me.
How can a workplace have “team building” or “motivation day” when many employees are going to go home to the same problems that make them unmotivated in the first place? Just because you take your department offsite to go bowling doesn’t make the abuse and violence stop at home.
The value of having a comprehensive, prevention based, company-wide domestic violence initiative is to address the very root of the problem; that something serious, painful and even dangerous that’s happening at home is going to cross over into the workplace. And no amount of bowling parties, customer service trainings or sales seminars is going to change that.
The value in management and human resources talking an active concern is that no workplace functions without the very employees that make up its core.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · courts · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · prevention · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

That was a statement made by another Human Resources consultant at a networking meeting I recently attended.  He wasn’t talking about domestic violence, but that idea really stuck with me.  How true is that? We would live in such a different world if we could just prevent abuse to begin with.

Certainly one way would be for people to be far more aware of abusive behaviors and the subtle signs when they first begin to present themselves, especially in the earliest months of a relationship.  I know a lot of people who can do that.  As soon as certain behaviors and personality types begin to reveal themselves in the person they’re dating they are out of there.  Relationship over.  You can almost predict what would’ve happened if they’d stayed – and so can they.

But let’s go back a little further.  How about preventing the possibility of an abusive personality to begin with?  Studies show that boys who grow up within supportive and loving families are less likely to grow up to be abusers.  They need to be validated and to feel worthy.  They need to be loved and not made to feel ashamed of themselves.  Don’t get me wrong.  Girls need this too.  It’s what makes them less likely to be abusers as well – or to become the victim of an abuser.

It’s not just about avoiding what’s modeled in the home and community, and not watching movies and T.V. shows which depict and condone abuse.  It’s what starts with parenting.  How kids feel about as a human beings has so much to do with whether they become an abuser later in life.  We can end the cycle of abuse, and one of the strongest ways is to start with the youngest members of our communities.  Prevention is way better than the cure.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · prevention · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

“It didn’t even occur to me to leave”. While this may sound completely absurd to people who have not lived in an abusive home, this comment is not uncommon for those who have, or still do.
Psychologist Martin Seligman called this behavioral unresponsiveness “learned helplessness”. Donald Dutton, PhD further explains that when people are conditioned by the punishment they receive when they try to leave or fight back, they learn to “swallow their feelings”. They feel shame, lose dignity and are forced to emotionally disassociate with their experience as a means of coping.
So the next time you wonder why someone is an abusive relationship appears to not even consider escape avoid passing judgment and try to understand that for them, it may seem unthinkable and the farthest thing from their mind. Living in the present may be the best they can do.

behavioral · bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · learned · legal · management · offender · psycologist · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

Last week I presented It Doesn’t Make Sense and It’s Costing Us Millions at a conference. True to every time I present, there we people who approached me to talk after wards, and one who I spoke to over the phone. It always touches me to have people talk about their personal issues as they relate to domestic violence, but I there were two people whose issues were especially profound. One had experienced extreme DV many years ago in an early marriage and still felt so much pain. That’s one thing I think those who are “outside” of domestic violence fail to appreciate. It’s not possible to end the relationship and simply stop feeling the emotional pain. The residual effects stay present for many, many years.
One of the other people who I spoke to had serious concerns for a grown child who was in a relationship that practically screamed “Danger!” What does a parent do in that situation? Can a parent so anything? The answer is “yes”, although much of it is indirect. There are many, many resources available. I shared with this parent quite a few, both over the phone and via email.
So as I prepare for my next several speaking engagements I will remember these people, and look forward to the many more I will meet over the coming weeks.
Today is also another painful anniversary in America’s history. There are many, many people who feel the pain of what this date represents. Keep them in your thoughts as well.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

Linda King of Fix the Hurt told me about a conversation she had with a corporate executive.  She had approached him about the affects of domestic violence on the organization as a whole.  This man’s response to her was “Yes, I realize that employees are affected and it affects productivity.  But, employees also over spend and that also affects productivity; and that’s a personal matter and we just don’t get involved”.

“What a shame”, she thought.  And so do I.  Ironically, this man was from a medical facility.  You’d hope that he was also seeing the affects of domestic violence on his patients.  In fact, forty-four percent of women murdered by their intimate partner had visited an emergency department within two years of the homicide, 93% of whom had at least one injury visit¹

Sometimes a person gets so far removed from what’s going on, right under their noses, they just can’t see it at all.  It’s not unlike the executive that I spoke to.  He was from an organization of 58,000 employees worldwide and stated, “We don’t have that in our organization.  I never hear about it.”   Wow.  That says far more about what he’s not hearing than the reality of what’s going on.  With 58,000 employees it’s statistically impossible not to be going on.  Even with 5,800.  Or 58, for that matter.

Heck, maybe he doesn’t believe that Steve Nash became the first NBA payer to shoot more than 50 percent from the floor, 90 percent from the line and 40 percent from 3-point range for three consecutive seasons² because he didn’t see every game either.

Businesses that implement domestic violence strategies are seeing successes every day.  I hear feedback from groups I work with on people who have come forward for help, or they know have self-referred to counseling after I’ve worked with them.  They have had noticeable changes in their organizational culture and decreased occurrences at the workplace and productivity is improved.   Employers can make a positive difference.

In the February 2009 Research Works report “Employee Personal Financial Stress and How Employers Can Help” the researchers found that employees want their employers to help.  When they received financial education they found it an effective way to learn to decrease spending and get out of debt. Seventy-four percent had reduced stress, 67percent had improved health and well-being, 39 percent had less work absenteeism, and 36 percent had improved work productivity.³

So yes, overspending is a personal matter; domestic violence is a personal matter.  You can be the employer, or even the co-worker, who removes the barrier and takes action. What’s it worth to your organization to get involved?  In the end – it’s invaluable.

1 Crandall et al. 2004, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control

2Boivin, Arizona Republic 8/20/09

3 Attridge, M. (2002, June). Adapted from Research Works

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

I was really fortunate to connect with Larry Kaminer and build a relationship of professional collaboration. Then Larry interviewed me for his blog talk radio program. The interview was a success and I’ve had enormously positive feedback from it.

My friend, Jackie Dishner, listened to the entire interview, and then it prompted her to email me with additional questions. After I wrote back my answers Jackie asked if she could post them on her blob.

She did a wonderful job and paid a real tribute to me which means a great deal to me. That kind of support is incredible and I’m really blessed to have people like Jackie and Larry that I can call “friend”.

I hope you’ll read Jackie’s blog. She shares a great message about herself.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

Readers:  please note this is an article from another source, copied here in its entirety. – SA

New law prohibits employers from enforcing rules that keep employees from properly storing a firearm

BY MONDAQ.COM

via NewsEdge Corporation

Updated: 08-10-2009 12:32 pm

Similar laws have been passed in other states including Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Utah. Below is a brief discussion of the requirements under Arizona’s law and suggestions for various parking lot arrangements. Although the law does not take effect until September 30, 2009, Arizona employers are advised to modify their policies about guns in the workplace and provide appropriate training in anticipation of the new law’s effective date.

How The New Law Applies To Arizona Employers: The new law prohibits property owners, tenants, and public or private employers or business entities from maintaining or enforcing any policy or rule that would forbid employees, as well as other individuals such as visitors and customers, from lawfully transporting or lawfully storing any firearm that:

is in the employee’s locked and privately owned vehicle or in a locked compartment on the employee’s privately owned motorcycle; and not visible from outside of the vehicle or motorcycle. The new law, however, is not without restrictions. Specifically, employers may prohibit an employee from carrying a firearm in their vehicle while parked on company property if any federal or state law prohibits the employee from possessing the firearm, or if complying with the law would result in the employer violating other federal or state laws or regulations. Further, the law does not apply if the parking lot, parking garage, or other area designated for parking vehicles or motorcycles is located on an owner- or tenant-occupied, single-family detached residence.

Moreover, employers may prohibit employees from carrying or storing firearms in any vehicles owned or leased by the employer when the employees are using the vehicle for their employment. Of course, an employee may transport or store a firearm in an employer owned or leased vehicle if the employer provides consent to do so or the employee is required to do so as part of the employee’s official duties. The law also does not apply if the employer is a current United States Department of Defense contractor and the parking lot is located in whole or in part on a United States military base or military installation.

An employer also may prohibit employees from leaving firearms in their vehicles parked in the primary parking lot if the employer provides alternative parking in a location reasonably close to the primary parking area and does not charge an extra fee for such parking. Similarly, some employers provide parking lots or parking garages secured by a fence or other physical barrier and limit access to the area by a guard or other security measure. In these situations, the employer may prohibit employees from storing their firearms in their vehicles or motorcycles in the secured parking areas if the employer provides employees with temporary and secure storage for their firearms while the vehicles are parked in the secure area. However, the employer must monitor the storage, make it readily accessible to employees when entering and leaving the premises, and provide for immediate retrieval of the firearm when the employees leave the premises.

What The New Law Does Not Address: “Guns-at-Work” laws in some other states are more detailed and impose greater restrictions on or provide greater rights to employers than Arizona’s law. For example, in Georgia, employers are specifically permitted to search their employees’ vehicles for firearms if there is a reasonable risk of an immediate threat to human life or safety or if the employee consents, based on probable cause that the employee is unlawfully possessing their employer’s property. On the other hand, in Florida, employers are not allowed to inquire about the presence of a firearm in a vehicle and are not permitted to search a private vehicle to determine whether it contains a firearm. Unlike the laws in Georgia and Florida, the new law in Arizona does not contain any restrictions on the ability of an employer to search an employee’s vehicle for firearms if the vehicle is located in the company’s parking lot. As a result, particularly when the employer has a policy notifying employees that the employer may search all personal property, including vehicles, employers in Arizona generally are free to search employees’ vehicles parked on company property, but the employer nonetheless should carefully evaluate whether a search is necessary and, if so, whether law enforcement should be contacted to perform the search.

Georgia’s law also states it does not apply to employees who are restricted from carrying or possessing a firearm on the employer’s premises due to a completed or pending disciplinary action, as may be appropriate for employees disciplined for fighting or engaging in other types of violent or threatening behavior. Arizona’s law does not similarly allow an employer to prohibit employees from keeping a firearm in their vehicle if the employee has engaged in violent behavior in the workplace. Because Arizona employers may not discipline an employee, regardless of the employee’s violent tendencies, for having a gun in his/her vehicle, terminating the employee for the workplace violence is the best course of action.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence

The wonderful thing about networking is meeting experts in industries that are under the same umbrella as your own, but the experts don’t do what you do. Great collaboration and a sense of community come from that.

I’ve had the opportunity to speak to Larry Kaminer of the Personal Safety Group on several occasions and enjoy learning from his expertise in corporate safety. Larry is a man whose personal history lends it’s self so well to entering the security field. I hope you’ll visit his web site because he has done tremendous work making organizations safer places to work.

Larry will be interviewing me on his blog talk radio program this Thursday 8/6 at 10:00 PST

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/letstalkpersonalsafety I hope you’ll tune in or check out the archived recording. We’re going to dig deep into domestic violence in the workplace; how much it really occurs, what can happen to organizations that are unprepared and how organizations, just like yours, will benefit from taking an active role in addressing the issue. Tune in for this thought-provoking discussion.

bottom line · business · Coaching · company · conflict · consulting · costs · domestic abuse · employees · employer · family · lawsuit · legal · management · offender · relationships · risk · Safety · training · victim · violence