1948 years ago in AD 63 an earthquake in southern Italy by the gulf of Naples seriously damaged the ancient city of Pompeii causing an undetermined number of deaths and spread out destruction, but the locals went to work rebuilding in the same spot until they were buried by the eruption of the Vesuvius volcano 16 years later in AD 79.
Galveston TX Hurricanes
Average Brushed or hit every 2.94 years Average Direct hit every 8.63 years
The Great Storm of 1900 - Sep 8th 1900 - Pop: 42,000 residents Category 4 @ 135 mph -Great loss of life between 6,000 and 12,000 individuals – officially 8,000
The 1915 Storm, August 17th, Category 4 @ 135 mph 42 people dead in the Galveston area
$60 - 1915 million dollars in damage
Ike Sep 13th 2008 - The third most destructive hurricane to ever make landfall in the United States Final landfall in Galveston Texas as a strong cat 2 with cat 5 equivalent storm surge winds extended 120 miles from the center.
Blamed for at least 195 deaths – 74 in Haiti and 112 in the USA 300 still missing. - Damages estimated at 24 billion (2008) US Dollars
Resulted in the largest evacuation in the state of Texas history and the largest search and rescue operation in US history
Chernobyl, An Experiment Gone Wrong
On Saturday, April 26th, 1986 at 1:23 am, one of the reactors at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded. Ironically, the experiment consisted in testing how the power plant would respond in the event of an accident. The operators at the plant wanted to bring down the power output of the reactor to 25%, but over-confidence, poor training and poor knowledge of how a reactor works caused them to overdo it, and they ended up bringing down the power output to 1%. When they then tried to bring it up to 25%, the reactor overheated and exploded causing the worst nuclear accident in history.
Emergency Management: Workplace Violence Prevention - Risk Mitigation or Cost Avoidance
Posted on Tuesday, February 07 @ 21:56:37 PST by editor
Workplace Violence Prevention - Risk Mitigation or Cost Avoidance
Though FEAR should not be the motivation in considering investments in Workplace Violence Prevention it often is. The reality is that such investments typically occur on the incident side of the equation where the investment is much more expensive, less customizable and hastily delivered. Decisions to invest in workplace safety and security measures and practices should be predicated on the notion of practicality and best practices and how relevant and appropriate to your workplace setting.
Such investments should be considered in preparation for an event but certainly as part of a proactive risk mitigation and not cost avoidance effort. Though best practices are recommended as a cost effective model in avoiding costly re-inventions, it should not interfere with the need to address the unique aspects of your workplace specific environments. The decision to invest in workplace safety and security is one that should be weighed against your unique organizational risk assessment and not a cookie-cutter reactionary response in the aftermath or to a news event. We are now seeing an increase in workplace shooting incidents involving multiple victims by a lone shooter. FEAR as the motivating emotional contagion results in hasty decisions with adverse outcomes. My question is WHY make any move without a thoughtful security assessment and/or consulting assessment?
Consider risk mitigation to help manage and reduce at risk situations by allowing you to apply appropriate measures to minimize risk before escalation. Providing for a safe and secure workplace in preventing workplace violence should consider a prepared response to possible situations or events. While it is virtually impossible to defend against every scenario, training should be directed at a particular problem, an anticipated need, change or improvement and not a reaction. The need for training should emanate from a known possibility that can generally can be identified through security surveys, security assessments and/or risk assessments. A universal example of a risk mitigation is training in response to the disgruntled person with a gun in the workplace. The response should be a trained one rather than a haphazard reaction to danger and fear alone.
Proper training that focuses on reducing and managing risks can help organizations better prepare to respond to unknown hazards or problems when they occur. Organizations should not be afraid of conducting annual or as frequently needed internal " workplace violence prevention security vulnerability assessments" as part of a risk management process.
Remember as seen in recent public events that those who engage in acts of violence reflect a microcosm of our societies and generally emanate as a result of a workplace event or circumstance. As such, these individuals; their issues and concerns are our employees. Investing in Workplace Violence Prevention is Risk Mitigation and is a litigiously sounder strategy to preventing, managing and reducing incidents than Cost Avoidance which equates to being a penny wise and a pound foolish on the wrong side of the ledger.
Felix P. Nater, CSC
Nater Associates, Ltd.
Security Management Consultants,
New York and North Carolina Offices