[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54473-54476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21441]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Justice Programs
[CDC-2013-0020; NIOSH-269]
Request for Information: Collection and Use of Nonfatal Workplace
Violence Information from the National Crime Victimization Survey
AGENCY: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
ACTION: Request for public comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Bureau of Justice
Statistics (BJS) of the Office of Justice Programs, Department of
Justice (DOJ), are collaborating to request public comments to inform
BJS's approach in collecting and reporting data related to nonfatal
workplace violence in the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).
NIOSH and BJS request input on these issues. The instructions for
submitting comments can be found at www.regulations.gov. Written
comments submitted to the Docket will be used to inform BJS with the
planning and collection of workplace violence data in the NCVS. Dates:
Public Comment Period: Comments must be received by November 27, 2013
to be considered by BJS and NIOSH. Addresses: Written comments: You may
submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft Laboratories,
MS-C34, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH 45226.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the
agency name and docket number [CDC-2013-0020; NIOSH-269]. All relevant
comments, including any personal information provided, will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov.
All information received in response to this notice will be
available for public examination and copying at the NIOSH Docket
Office, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.
I. Background
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
is the federal agency responsible for conducting research to prevent
workplace injuries and illnesses. Workplace violence is a common threat
to worker safety and health, and NIOSH has a long history of conducting
research on the prevalence, risk factors for, and prevention of work-
related violence.
The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau
of Justice Statistics collects data on rape, sexual assault, robbery,
aggravated assault, and simple assault against persons age 12 or older
through the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The NCVS
gathers data from a continuous, nationally representative sample of
approximately 86,000 households comprising nearly 156,000 persons age
12 or older in the United States, reported and not reported to the
police. The NCVS provides information about victims (e.g. age, gender,
race, Hispanic origin, marital status, income, and educational level),
offenders (e.g. gender, race, approximate age, and victim/offender
relationship), and the nature of the crime (time and place of
occurrence, use of weapons, nature of injury, and economic
consequences).
NCVS respondents who report that they were a victim of a violent
crime (rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, or simple
assault) while working or on duty are included in NCVS special reports
on workplace violence. BJS published special reports on workplace
violence in 1994, 1998 (covering 1992-96), 2001 (covering 1993-99),
2011 (covering 1993-2009) and 2013 (focused on government workers,
1994-2011). These reports are available on the BJS Web site as part of
their violence in the workplace series at http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=56
All of the workplace violence special reports used the same
classification system to determine work-relatedness of the incidents.
To qualify as workplace violence the incident must have:
[[Page 54474]]
Involved someone 16 years of age or older,
Had the activity variable coded as ``working'',
Involved a violent crime,
Involved a person who had a job or worked at a business
the week preceding the survey or during the 6 months preceding the
survey, and
The event must have occurred within the United States.
Additionally, workplace violence to teachers commuting to and from
work were included to make the data comparable to estimates presented
in the Department of Education/BJS report, ``Indicators of School Crime
and Safety.'' The NCVS is a nationally representative household survey
so it excludes persons who are homeless, persons living in military
barracks or stationed outside of the U.S., and those persons living in
institutionalized group quarters, such as prisons, mental health
facilities, and certain hospitals and assisted-living facilities. In
2002, NIOSH and BJS conducted The Workplace Risk Supplement to the
NCVS, which was administered to employed respondents who were 16 years
or older in all households selected for the NCVS during the 6-month
reference period from January through June 2002. This supplement used
the same classification system described for the special reports.
II. Purpose of Request for Comments
NIOSH and BJS are collaborating to improve and enhance the
collection of nonfatal workplace violence data through the NCVS. This
is part of a larger BJS effort to re-design and increase the utility of
nonfatal violence data collected through the NCVS.
NIOSH and BJS are seeking input on: (1) Methods to identify work-
related violence using the existing variable structure within the NCVS,
and (2) other suggested enhancements to improve the ability of the NCVS
to describe the prevalence, patterns, and trends in workplace violence.
Responses to this request for information will be considered by BJS in:
(1) The re-design of the NCVS, (2) an on-line NVCS reporting tool, and
(3) future BJS workplace violence reports. NIOSH and BJS also
anticipate utilizing this information in a jointly issued technical
report on methodological issues with identifying and reporting on
nonfatal workplace violence through the NCVS.
III. Identifying Workplace Violence in the NCVS
NIOSH defines workplace violence as ``violent acts, including
physical assaults and threats of assault, directed toward persons at
work or on duty.'' The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) defines workplace violence as any act or threat of physical
violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive
behavior that occurs at the work site. These are broad definitions and
most data collection systems will not capture all incidents of
workplace violence. For example, data on workplace violence collected
through the NIOSH/Consumer Product Safety Commission, National
Electronic Injury Surveillance System- Work Supplement (NEISS-Work),
which is collected from a nationally representative sample of hospital
emergency departments, is more likely to capture workplace violence
that results in physical injuries than other forms that do not result
in injury such as threats, harassment and intimidation, http://www2a.cdc.gov/risqs/wrtechinfo.htm.
Additionally, the NIOSH and OSHA definitions are restricted to
incidents that occur at work and do not encompass violence that may
have a work-association but not have occurred at work, such as violence
associated with commuting to and from a workplace. BJS and NIOSH plan
to address these issues and the implications for assessing trends in
workplace violence using the NCVS and other data sources in the
anticipated jointly-issued technical report on workplace violence
methodological issues in the NCVS.
Determining work-relatedness of the violent incidents recorded by
the NCVS is not straightforward. Many factors influence the decision to
include the case as a workplace violence incident. The work-related
variables that are currently collected in the NCVS appear below. Any
combination of these variables is possible. Immediately below the
variable list are alternatives for variable combinations that are
currently being used or considered in determining work-relatedness in
the NCVS. There are advantages and disadvantages to different methods,
including the ability to assess trends using historical data and being
more inclusive or exclusive in identifying work associations.
Input is requested regarding the best combination of variables to
determine work-relatedness of the violent incident. In particular, what
would be your first and second choices for a combination of variables
to identify work-related violence and why?
NCVS crime incident report instrument: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245#Questionnaires
IV. Currently Collected Variables in the NCVS That May Be Considered to
Establish Work-relatedness
Household-level Variables
1. Does anyone in this household operate a business from this
address?
2. Is there a sign on the premises or some other indication to the
general public that a business is operated from this address?
Person-level Variables
3. Did you have a job or work at a business last week?
4. Did you have a job or work at a business during the last 6
months?
5. Did that (job/work) last 2 consecutive weeks or more?
6. Which of the following best describes your job?
Medical Profession
Physician
Nurse
Technician
Other
Mental Health Services Field
Professional (Social worker/Psychiatrist)
Custodial care
Other
Teaching Profession
Preschool
Elementary
Junior high or middle school
High school
College or university
Technical or Industrial School
Special education facility
Other
Law Enforcement Security Field
Law enforcement officer
Correctional officer
Security guard
Other
Retail Sales
Convenience or liquor store clerk
Gas station attendant
Bartender
Other
Transportation Field
Bus driver
Taxi cab driver
Other
Something Else
7. Is your job with a private company, federal government, state,
county, or local government, or yourself?
8. While working at your job, do you work mostly in city, suburb,
or rural area or combination of these?
9. Are you employed by a college or university?
[[Page 54475]]
Incident-Level Variables
10. Was the victim injured? How (Type of injury)?
11. What were you doing when this incident (happened/started)?
Working or on duty
On the way to or from work
On the way to or from school
On the way to or from other place
Shopping, errands
Attending school
Leisure activity away from home
Sleeping
Other activities at home
Other
12. Were you employed at the time of the incident?
13. What was the type of work performed at the time of the
incident?
14. Is this business incorporated?
15. What was the business type?
16. What was the type of industry at the time of the incident?
17. Collapsed industry code.
18. Collapsed occupation code.
19. While working at this job, did you work mostly in a city,
suburb, rural area, or combination of any of these?
20. Did this incident happen at your work site?
21. Did you usually work days or nights?
22. Is this your current job?
23. Did you lose time from work because of the injuries you
suffered in this incident?
24. How many days did you lose because of injuries?
25. Did you lose any pay that was not covered by unemployment
insurance, sick leave or some other source?
26. About how much pay did you lose?
27. Did you lose any (other) time from work because of this
incident for such things as cooperating with a police investigation,
testifying in court, or repairing or replacing damaged or stolen
property?
28. How much time did you lose altogether because of cooperating
with a police investigation, testifying in court, or repairing or
replacing damaged or stolen property?
29. During these days, did you lose any pay that was not covered by
unemployment insurance, paid leave, or some other source?
30. About how much pay did you lose?
31. Were there any (other) household members 16 years or older who
lost time from work because of this incident?
32. How much time did they lose altogether?
Alternatives for determining work-relatedness
Variable alternatives currently used or under consideration and some
advantages and disadvantages are:
Alternative I: Current Coding Scheme Used by the BJS:
Age 16 (victims age 16 or older),
Had a job or worked at a business last week or during the
last 6 months,
Excludes outside of U.S.
Activity at time of incident--working,
Violent crime
Advantages--can be used to generate rates of workplace violence by
occupation and other aspects, facilitates trend analyses with earlier
data, relatively consistent with NIOSH and OSHA definitions of
workplace violence (with exception of non-robbery threats of violence,
harassment and intimidation which are not included in the NCVS
definition of a violent crime and the inclusion of commuting injuries
for teachers)
Disadvantages--calculations of rates of workplace violence by
occupation may not be as accurate because job at the time of incident
may be different from current job. The percentage of workplace violence
that occurred in which the job at the time of the incident was
different from the job at the time of the NCVS interview increased from
44% in 2007 to about 56% in 2011.
Alternative II
Age 16 or older,
Had a job or worked at a business last week or during the
last 6 months,
Job at time of incident was the same as job mentioned at
beginning of NCVS interview,
Excludes outside of U.S.,
Activity at time of incident-working,
Violent crime.
Advantages--relatively consistent with NIOSH and OSHA definitions
of workplace violence, allows for a more accurate calculation of rates
of workplace violence by occupation than what is done currently
(everyone has the same job for the numerator and denominator).
Disadvantages--persons that experienced workplace violence at a
time where their job does not match their job at the NCVS interview are
excluded. As mentioned above, the percentage of workplace violence in
which the job at the time of the incident was different from the job at
the time of the NCVS interview has increased in recent years from 44%
in 2007 to about 56% in 2011. These cases would be excluded from
estimates of workplace violence by using Alternative II.
Alternative III
Age 16 or older,
Excludes outside of U.S.,
Activity at time of incident-working,
Violent crime
Advantages--relatively consistent with NIOSH and OSHA definitions.
Disadvantages--calculations of rates of workplace violence by
occupation may not be as accurate because job at the time of incident
may be different from current job.
Alternative IV
Age 16 or older,
Had a job or worked at a business last week or during the
last 6 months,
Excludes outside of U.S.,
Activity at time of incident-working or on the way to/from
work,
Violent crime
Advantages--includes violence committed on the way to and from work
as well as while working.
Disadvantages--calculations of rates of workplace violence by
occupation may not be as accurate because job at the time of incident
may be different from current job. Inconsistent with NIOSH and OSHA
definitions of workplace violence which exclude violence during the
commute to or from work.
Alternative V
Age 16 or older,
Excludes outside of U.S.,
Activity at time of incident- working,
Employed at the time of the incident,
Violent crime.
Advantages--know for certain the victim was employed at the time of
the incident, relatively consistent with NIOSH and OSHA definitions.
Disadvantages--calculations of rates of workplace violence by
occupation may not be as accurate because job at the time of incident
may be different from current job.
Alternative VI
Age 16 or older,
Excludes outside of U.S.,
incident happened at your worksite,
violent crime.
Advantages--know for certain where the crime took place.
Disadvantages--excludes workplace violence that occurs while a
person is on duty away from the worksite and thus inconsistent with
NIOSH and OSHA definitions of workplace violence.
V. The second item for which we are requesting input is any other
suggested enhancements to improve the ability of the NCVS to report on
workplace violence. Two enhancements that are currently being explored
by BJS and
[[Page 54476]]
NIOSH are: (1) The ability to report NCVS data by a workplace violence
typology used by NIOSH and public health researchers (Type I--Criminal
Intent, Type II--Customer/client, Type III--Worker-on-Worker, and Type
IV Intimate Partner Violence [detail available at http://www.public-health.uiowa.edu/iprc/resources/workplace-violence-report.pdf]), and
(2) revisions to the categories of occupations that are used in
reports. One of the factors that will need to be considered with
respect to occupation categories is the NCVS sample size and the
ability to reliably report on specific occupations.
In a recent review of the NCVS data collection instrument, there
were a number of potential limitations that were identified. These
include, but are not limited to:
1. The victim-offender relationship variable is first conditioned
on whether the victim knows the perpetrator or not. This complicates
the use of such relationships as ``customer/client or patient.'' A
worker who was assaulted by a customer who was also a stranger would be
skipped out of the victim-offender relationship variable. Only
customers that were considered casual acquaintances or well known to
the victim would be filtered into the specific relationship coding. So
it is possible that many offenders who were customers or clients end up
in the stranger coding.
2. Currently, NCVS collects limited occupation types (see section
IV, 6). These categories are primarily considered high-risk
occupations for certain victimization types. The categories do not
reflect changes in the workforce since 1990. Input is requested
regarding potential enhancements to the collection and reporting of
nonfatal workplace violence in the NCVS. In particular, do you think it
would be useful for BJS to include the public health typology of
workplace violence in future workplace violence reports and in the on-
line NCVS reporting tool? Do you have suggestions for reporting on
specific occupation or occupation groups and/or methods to address
limitations regarding the NCVS sample size? Do you have suggestions for
addressing the potential limitations identified in the survey, such as
issues with the relationship variable?
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Daniel Hartley, 1095 Willowdale
Road, Morgantown, West Virginia 26505, telephone (304) 285-5812. Email:
[email protected].
Dated: August 20, 2013.
John Howard,
Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Dated: August 26, 2013.
William Sabol,
Acting Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
[FR Doc. 2013-21441 Filed 9-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P