U.S.

Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Special Report
JULY 2022 NCJ 250748; NIOSH 2022-124

Indicators of Workplace
Violence, 2019
Number of workplace homicides, by state, 2019

Number of workplace homicides

3 or less Not reported, or
4–6 data do not meet
7–14 publication criteria
15 or higher

U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Justice Statistics

U.S. Department of Labor

Bureau of Labor Statistics

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

July 2022
NCJ 250748
NIOSH 2022-124
Indicators of Workplace
Violence, 2019
July 2022

Erika Harrell
Bureau of Justice Statistics

Lynn Langton
Formerly of Bureau of Justice Statistics

Jeremy Petosa
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Stephen M. Pegula
Mark Zak
Formerly of Bureau of Labor Statistics

Susan Derk
Dan Hartley
Audrey Reichard
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NCJ 250748
NIOSH 2022-124
U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Department of Labor U.S. Department of Health and
Merrick Garland Martin J. Walsh Human Services
Attorney General Secretary Xavier Becerra
Secretary
Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Labor Statistics
Amy L. Solomon William W. Beach Centers for Disease Control
Principal Deputy Assistant Commissioner and Prevention
Attorney General Rochelle Walensky
Director
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Doris J. James National Institute for Occupational
Acting Director Safety and Health
John Howard
Director

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principal federal agency responsible
for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime, and the
operation of criminal and civil justice systems at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, analyzes, and
disseminates reliable statistics on crime and justice systems in the United States, supports improvements to state
and local criminal justice information systems, and participates with national and international organizations to
develop and recommend national standards for justice statistics.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor is the principal federal agency responsible for
measuring labor market activity, working conditions, price changes, and productivity in the economy. Its mission is
to collect, analyze, and disseminate essential economic information to support public and private decision-making.
As an independent statistical agency, BLS serves its diverse user communities by providing products and services
that are objective, timely, accurate, and relevant.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) is the federal institute focused on studying worker safety and health and empowering employers
and workers to create safe and healthy workplaces. NIOSH has the mandate to assure “every man and woman in
the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources.” NIOSH employs scientists
from a diverse set of fields, including epidemiology, medicine, nursing, industrial hygiene, safety, psychology,
chemistry, statistics, economics, and many branches of engineering.

Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent
the official position of BLS.

July 2022

Mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations does not imply endorsement by the
U.S. Government.

Suggested citation

Harrell, E., Langton, L., Petosa, J., Pegula, S., Zak, M., Derk, S., Hartley, D., and Reichard, A. (2022). Indicators of
Workplace Violence, 2019 (NCJ 250748; NIOSH 2022-124). Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Office of Safety, Health, and Working Conditions, U.S.
Department of Labor; and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC.

To download, view, and print the report as a PDF file, go to https://bjs.ojp.gov or https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/
docs/2022-124.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 4

 Executive summary „ the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, sponsored
by BLS
Acts of violence in the workplace can disrupt nearly „ the Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses -
all aspects of society. They can result in physical, Case and Demographics, conducted by BLS.
psychological, and financial costs to victims. They can
also drive down employee productivity and morale Due to different data sources, estimates in this report
and increase turnover. Organizations can also endure could not always be presented consistently or are
financial costs due to lawsuits and increased employee not always comparable. See Methodology for more
medical insurance rates. Coworkers, witnesses, information about the datasets analyzed in this report.
victims’ families, and the community can be negatively
This report provides indicators of the current problem
impacted. Researchers must establish reliable
of workplace violence in the United States:
indicators of the nature and level of the problem across
the nation because of the potential consequences „ trends in workplace homicide
of violence in the workplace. Once established,
the indicators must be updated and monitored „ characteristics of workplace homicides victims
regularly. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) in the „ characteristics of workplace homicides
U.S. Department of Justice produced this publication
jointly with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in the „ trends in nonfatal workplace violence
U.S. Department of Labor and the National Institute „ characteristics of victims of nonfatal workplace
for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the violence
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
„ characteristics of nonfatal workplace violence
This report presents recent data on fatal and nonfatal „ police notification of nonfatal workplace violence
workplace violence. It defines workplace homicide
as fatal violence against persons at work or on duty „ characteristics of offenders in nonfatal workplace
or fatal violence that was work-related. Nonfatal violence
workplace violence is defined as violent acts (including „ weapons in nonfatal workplace violence
physical assaults and threats of assault) directed toward
persons at work or on duty, or nonfatal violence that „ nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim
was work-related (such as an attack on a coworker injuries
away from work over a work-related issue). This „ nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence treated
includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated in emergency departments
assault, and simple assault.
„ nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence resulting
This report uses data from five federal data collections. in days away from work
Indicators are based on information from— „ socio-emotional problems resulting from nonfatal
„ the National Crime Victimization Survey, sponsored workplace violence.
by BJS Caution must be taken when comparing across
„ the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System indicators. Indicators may use single or aggregated
- Occupational Supplement, sponsored by NIOSH years of data, and rates may be presented as per 1,000
and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission or per 10,000 workers. This report compares findings
across different population subgroups and over time
„ the National Vital Statistics System, sponsored by the when possible.
National Center for Health Statistics

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 5

 Key findings Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
treated in emergency departments (EDs), 2015–19
Workplace homicide, 1992–2019 „ An estimated 529,000 nonfatal injuries from
workplace violence were treated in hospital
„ A total of 17,865 workers were victims of workplace
emergency departments (EDs) during the 5-year
homicides from 1992 to 2019 (Indicator 1).
aggregate period of 2015–19 (Indicator 11).
„ Workplace homicides have fallen more than
„ The rate of ED-treated injuries from workplace
50% from a high of 1,080 in 1994 (Indicator 1).
violence was 7.1 per 10,000 full-time equivalent
(FTE) workers (Indicator 11).
Nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19
„ During 2015–19, workers in corrections occupations „ Beginning with workers ages 25 to 29, the rate
had the highest average annual rate of nonfatal of ED-treated injuries due to workplace violence
workplace violence of all the occupations examined decreased as worker age increased (Indicator 11).
(149.1 violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or „ Contusions and abrasions were the most common
older) (Indicator 5). injuries from nonfatal workplace violence treated
„ Strangers committed about half (47%) of nonfatal in EDs (33%) followed by sprains and strains (12%)
workplace violence (Indicator 5). and traumatic brain injuries (12%) (Indicator 11).

„ Female victims of nonfatal workplace violence were „ Physical assaults (including hitting, kicking, or
more likely than male victims to know the offender beating) accounted for approximately 83% of
(Indicator 5). nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence treated
in EDs and had the highest rate of all events related
„ On average, 1.3 million nonfatal violent crimes in to ED-treated workplace violence injuries at
the workplace occurred annually (Indicator 6). 5.9 cases per 10,000 FTEs (Indicator 11).
„ The average annual rate of nonfatal workplace
violence was 8.0 violent crimes per 1,000 workers Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
age 16 or older (Indicator 6). resulting in days away from work, 2019
„ Female workers (5.1 per 10,000) had higher rates
„ The offender was unarmed in the majority of
than male workers (2.3 per 10,000) of nonfatal
nonfatal workplace violence (78%) (Indicator 9).
injuries due to workplace violence resulting in days
„ The victim sustained an injury in 12% of nonfatal away from work (Indicator 12).
workplace violence victimizations (Indicator 10).
„ Female workers accounted for 65% of the
„ Fifteen percent of victims of nonfatal workplace 37,210 nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
violence reported severe emotional distress due to that resulted in days away from work and involved
the crime (Indicator 13). hitting, kicking, beating, or shoving (Indicator 12).
„ Male workers accounted for 82% of the 340 nonfatal
injuries due to workplace violence that resulted in
days away from work and involved an intentional
shooting (Indicator 12).

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 6

 Contents
Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������13

Indicator 1. Trends in workplace homicide������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������16

Indicator 2. Characteristics of workplace homicide victims������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������16

Indicator 3. Characteristics of workplace homicides������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������20

Indicator 4. Trends in nonfatal workplace violence ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������21

Indicator 5. Characteristics of victims of nonfatal workplace violence ��������������������������������������������������������������������22

Indicator 6. Characteristics of nonfatal workplace violence ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������25

Indicator 7. Police notification of nonfatal workplace violence����������������������������������������������������������������������������������26

Indicator 8. Characteristics of offenders in nonfatal workplace violence����������������������������������������������������������������29

Indicator 9. Weapons in nonfatal workplace violence����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������30

Indicator 10. Nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim injuries ��������������������������������������������������������������������31

Indicator 11. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence treated in emergency departments����������������������33

Indicator 12. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence resulting in days away from work��������������������������36

Indicator 13. Socio-emotional problems resulting from nonfatal workplace violence����������������������������������������42

Methodology ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������43

Appendix tables��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������51

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 7

 List of tables
TABLE 1.1 Nationally representative data sources used in this report

TABLE 2.1 Occupations of workplace homicide victims, 2015–2019

TABLE 2.2 Characteristics of workplace homicide victims, 2015–2019

TABLE 3.1 Cause of death in workplace homicides, 2015–2019

TABLE 3.2 Time of day of workplace homicides, 2015–2019

TABLE 3.3 Location of workplace homicides, 2015–2019

TABLE 5.1 Average annual victimization rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–19

TABLE 5.2 Average annual rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence and percent of workers, by
occupation group and employee type, 2015–19

TABLE 5.3 Average annual rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by victim characteristics, 2015–19
TABLE 5.4 Victim-offender relationship in nonfatal workplace violence, by sex of victim, 2015–19

TABLE 6.1 Rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime, 2015–19

TABLE 6.2 Season and time of day of nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19

TABLE 6.3 Percent of nonfatal workplace violence occurring in restricted areas, by occupation group,
2015–19

TABLE 7.1 Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by victim characteristics and type of crime,
2015–19

TABLE 7.2 Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by occupation group, 2015–19

TABLE 7.3 How police were notified of nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–2019

TABLE 7.4 Most important reasons for reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police, 2015–19

TABLE 7.5 Most important reasons for not reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police, 2015–19

TABLE 8.1 Nonfatal workplace violence, by offender characteristics and number of offenders, 2015–19

TABLE 9.1 Offender weapon possession during nonfatal workplace violence, by weapon type, 2015–19

TABLE 9.2 Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime, 2015–19

TABLE 9.3 Percent of nonfatal workplace violence involving an offender with a weapon, by occupation
group, 2015–19

TABLE 10.1 Injury type in nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19

TABLE 10.2 Injury and medical treatment for victims of nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19

TABLE 10.3 Percent of nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim injury, by occupation group,
2015–19

TABLE 11.1 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by victim
characteristics and disposition after treatment, 2015–19

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 8

 List of tables (continued)
TABLE 11.2 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by selected
diagnosis, 2015–19

TABLE 11.3 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by selected
diagnosis and injured part of body, 2015–19

TABLE 11.4 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by selected
diagnosis and victim’s sex, 2015–19

TABLE 11.5 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by selected
injury event, 2015–19

TABLE 12.1 Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away
from work resulting from workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–19

TABLE 12.2 Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away
from work resulting from workplace violence, by victim characteristics and length of service of victim,
2015–19

TABLE 12.3 Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting
from workplace violence, by victim-offender relationship and sex of victim, 2019

TABLE 12.4 Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting
from workplace violence, by event or exposure and sex of victim, 2019

TABLE 12.5 Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting
from workplace violence, by part of body, 2015–19

TABLE 12.6 Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting
from workplace violence, by nature of injury or illness, 2015–19

TABLE 13.1 Socio-emotional problems due to nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 9

 List of figures
FIGURE 1.1a Number of workplace homicides, 1992–2019

FIGURE 1.1b Number total homicides, 1992–2019

FIGURE 1.2 Percent of fatal occupational injuries that are workplace homicides, 1992–2019

FIGURE 4.1 Rate of nonfatal workplace violence and total nonfatal violent crime, based on 2-year rolling
averages, 1994–2019

FIGURE 4.2 Rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime, based on 2-year rolling averages,
1994–2019

FIGURE 7.1 Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

FIGURE 9.1 Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace violence, based on 2-year rolling
averages, 1994–2019

FIGURE 10.1 Nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim injury, based on 2-year rolling averages,
1994–2019

FIGURE 12.1 Incidence rate for occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting
from workplace violence in private industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury by other persons in private
industry (2011–19), per 10,000 FTEs, 1992–2019

FIGURE 12.2 Number of occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from
workplace violence in private industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury by other persons in private
industry (2011–19), 1992–2019

List of appendix tables

APPENDIX TABLE 1 Numbers for cover map: Number of workplace homicides, by state, 2019

APPENDIX TABLE 2 Numbers for figure 1.1: Number of workplace homicides and total homicides,
1992–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 3 Percentages for figure 1.2: Percent of fatal occupational injuries that are workplace
homicides, 1992–2019
APPENDIX TABLE 4 Rates and standard errors for figure 4.1: Rate of nonfatal workplace violence and total
nonfatal violent crime, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 5 Rates and standard errors for figure 4.2: Rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by type
of crime, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 6 Standard errors for table 5.1: Average annual victimization rate of nonfatal workplace
violence, by occupation, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 7 Standard errors for table 5.2: Average annual rate and percent of nonfatal workplace
violence and percent of workers, by occupation group and employee type, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 8 Standard errors for table 5.3: Average annual rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by
victim characteristics, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 9 Standard errors for table 5.4: Victim-offender relationship in nonfatal workplace
violence, by sex of victim, 2015–19

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 10

 List of appendix tables (continued)
APPENDIX TABLE 10 Standard errors for table 6.1: Rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence, by
type of crime, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 11 Standard errors for table 6.2: Season and time of day of nonfatal workplace
violence, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 12 Standard errors for table 6.3: Percent of nonfatal workplace violence occurring in
restricted areas, by occupation group, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 13 Percentages and standard errors for figure 7.1: Nonfatal workplace violence
reported to police, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 14 Standard errors for table 7.1: Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by
victim characteristics and type of crime, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 15 Standard errors for table 7.2: Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by
occupation group, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 16 Standard errors for table 7.3: How police were notified of nonfatal workplace
violence, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 17 Standard errors for table 7.4: Most important reasons for reporting nonfatal
workplace violence to police, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 18 Standard errors for table 7.5: Most important reasons for not reporting nonfatal
workplace violence to police, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 19 Standard errors for table 8.1: Nonfatal workplace violence, by offender
characteristics and number of offenders, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 20 Percentages and standard errors for figure 9.1: Offender weapon possession in
nonfatal workplace violence, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 21 Standard errors for table 9.1: Offender weapon possession during nonfatal
workplace violence, by weapon type, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 22 Standard errors for table 9.2: Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace
violence, by type of crime, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 23 Standard errors for table 9.3: Percent of nonfatal workplace violence involving an
offender with a weapon, by occupation group, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 24 Percentages and standard errors for figure 10.1: Nonfatal workplace violence
resulting in victim injury, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 25 Standard errors for table 10.1: Injury type in nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 26 Standard errors for table 10.2: Injury and medical treatment for victims of nonfatal
workplace violence, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 27 Standard errors for table 10.3: Percent of nonfatal workplace violence resulting in
victim injury, by occupation group, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 28 Rates and standard errors for figure 12.1: Incidence rate for occupational injuries
and illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence in private industry (1992–2010)
and intentional injury by other persons in private industry (2011–19), per 10,000 FTEs, 1992–2019

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 11

 List of appendix tables (continued)
APPENDIX TABLE 29 Numbers and standard errors for figure 12.2: Number of occupational injuries and
illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence in private industry (1992–2010) and
intentional injury by other persons in private industry (2011–19), 1992–2019

APPENDIX TABLE 30 Standard errors for table 12.1: Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational
injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–
19

APPENDIX TABLE 31 Standard errors for table 12.2: Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational
injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by victim
characteristics and length of service of victim, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 32 Standard errors for table 12.3: Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and
illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by victim-offender relationship and
sex of victim, 2019

APPENDIX TABLE 33 Standard errors for table 12.4: Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and
illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by event or exposure and sex of
victim, 2019

APPENDIX TABLE 34 Standard errors for table 12.5: Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and
illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by part of body, 2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 35 Standard errors for table 12.6: Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and
illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by nature of injury or illness,
2015–19

APPENDIX TABLE 36 Standard errors for table 13.1: Socio-emotional problems due to nonfatal workplace
violence, 2015–19

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 12

 Introduction This report contains data for 13 indicators:

Violence in the workplace can have wide-reaching „ Indicator 1. Trends in workplace homicide
effects in communities. Victims of workplace violence „ Indicator 2. Characteristics of workplace homicide
can suffer from lasting physical and psychological victims
problems and bear the financial burden of care after
„ Indicator 3. Characteristics of workplace homicides
experiencing a violent incident. Workplace violence
can also affect coworkers, witnesses, and victims’ „ Indicator 4. Trends in nonfatal workplace violence
families. For organizations, violent acts can lower
„ Indicator 5. Characteristics of victims of nonfatal
employee productivity and morale and increase
workplace violence
turnover. They can also increase financial burdens on
organizations in the form of workers’ compensation „ Indicator 6. Characteristics of nonfatal workplace
payments, medical expenses, lawsuits, and liability violence
costs. Law enforcement, researchers, policymakers, and „ Indicator 7. Police notification of nonfatal workplace
occupational safety specialists must understand the violence
extent, nature, and context of violence in the workplace
to effectively address this problem. This report uses „ Indicator 8. Characteristics of offenders in nonfatal
data from five federal statistical collections to provide workplace violence
indicators of the nature, extent, and patterns of fatal „ Indicator 9. Weapons in nonfatal workplace violence
and nonfatal violence in the workplace.
„ Indicator 10. Nonfatal workplace violence resulting
Purpose in victim injuries
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) in the U.S. „ Indicator 11. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace
Department of Justice, the Bureau of Labor Statistics violence treated in emergency departments
(BLS) in the U.S. Department of Labor, and the National „ Indicator 12. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) violence resulting in days away from work
in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
produced this report. It is not intended to be an „ Indicator 13. Socio-emotional problems resulting
exhaustive compilation of data on workplace violence, from nonfatal workplace violence.
nor does it attempt to explore reasons for violence in the
workplace. Rather, it provides a summary from an array
of data sources and makes data on national workplace
violence accessible.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 13

Data While researchers have made efforts to keep key
definitions consistent across indicators, differences
Indicators in this report are based on information in sampling procedures, populations, and question
drawn from a variety of statistical data collections. phrasing can affect the comparability of results.
The combination of data sources provides a broad Caution must also be taken when comparing across
perspective on workplace violence that could not be indicators. Indicators may use either single or
achieved through any single source of information. aggregated years of data, and rates may be presented
Caution must be taken when comparing data from per 1,000 or 10,000 workers. The following example
different sources (table 1.1). Each data source has shows the differences in two estimates taken from
an independent sample design, data collection different indicators:
method, and questionnaire design; or is the result of Based on National Crime Victimization Survey
a universe data collection, which includes a census (NCVS) data, about 1.3 million nonfatal violent
of all known entities in a specific universe (e.g., victimizations that happened while the victim was at
all workplace fatalities). Differences in sampling work or on duty occurred annually from 2015 to 2019
procedures, populations, and time periods can all (Indicator 6). Based on National Electronic Injury
affect the comparability of results. With the exception Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement
of homicide, report findings that use comparative (NEISS-Work) data, about 529,000 injuries from
language (e.g., higher, lower, increase, and decrease) workplace violence were treated in hospital EDs from
are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.1 2015 to 2019 (Indicator 11). While the information
Homicide data represent a complete enumeration from the 1.3 million estimate is the average annual
of homicides and therefore do not require statistical number for the 5 years from 2015 to 2019, the 529,000
significance testing when compared. Estimates estimate from NEISS-Work data is the total for those
displayed in the text, figures, and tables are rounded 5 years. Also, the 1.3 million estimate is the number
from original estimates, not from a series of rounding. of nonfatal violent victimizations that occurred while
1For Indicators 4 through 10 and Indicator 13, findings that the victim was at work or on duty, not the number of
are statistically significant at the 90% confidence level are also injuries, which is reflected in the 529,000 estimate.
represented by comparative language. Furthermore, the NCVS estimate includes nonfatal

TABLE 1.1
Nationally representative data sources used in this report
Data source Population Data collection method Years Indicator
Census of Fatal All workers fatally injured on the job. Data are collected Multiple source documents for 1992–2019 1,2,3
Occupational Injuries from each state, the District of Columbia, New York City, each case; an average case has
Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam. four unique source documents.
National Crime Persons age 12 or older living in households and non- In-person and telephone 1993–2019 4, 5, 6, 7,
Victimization Survey institutionalized group quarters. interviews. 8, 9, 10, 13
National Electronic Workers age 15 or older treated for work-related injuries in Emergency department record 2015–2019 11
Injury Surveillance emergency departments. abstraction.
System - Occupational
Supplement
National Vital Statistics U.S. population. Standard forms completed 1992–2019 1
System by vital registration systems
operating in jurisdictions
legally responsible for
registration of vital events.
Survey of Occupational Work-related injury or illness cases with at least one day Establishment survey 1992–2019 12
Injuries and Illnesses - away from work for all workers in private sector and state questionnaire (derived
Case and Demographics a
and local government. Excludes agricultural production from Occupational Safety
establishments with less than 11 employees; self-employed and Health Administration
persons; private households (North American Industry recordkeeping forms).
Classification System (NAICS) 814); U.S. Postal Service
(NAICS 491); and persons in the federal government. b
Data are collected from participating states, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam.
Note: See Methodology for discussion on potential overlap of data sources.
aNational state and local governmental data are available for the years 2008 forward.
bSee http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/soii/home.htm.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 14

workplace violence regardless of whether the victim EDs. For this report, persons age 15 or older are
was injured, while the NEISS-Work estimate includes included if the injury was work related and the result of
only injured persons who sought treatment in an ED. a violent act intentionally caused by another person.2
In NEISS-Work, an injury is considered work related if
The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) the patient was working for pay or other compensation,
compiles counts by cross-referencing multiple performing agricultural production activities, or
sources to identify, verify, and profile fatal worker volunteering with an organized group (e.g., a volunteer
injuries. Each fatal injury in the CFOI is supported fire department). NEISS-Work data are presented
by an average of four unique source documents. The for the years 2015 to 2019 in this report and include
CFOI aims to capture all workers, including resident demographics of the injured worker, types of injuries
military, federal government employees, self-employed experienced, and parts of the body that were injured.
persons, volunteers, and informally employed or ad
hoc workers, such as members of family businesses. The National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) collects
CFOI data are presented by the calendar year in which information on vital statistics for the entire U.S.
the included worker died from injuries that happened population, including births, deaths, marriages,
at work. Annual overall work-related homicide counts divorces, and fetal deaths. This intergovernmental
are presented from 1992 to 2019. Details of workplace system shares public health data. In this report,
homicides are presented by characteristics and information on total homicides for all persons was
circumstances for the 2015–19 period. obtained from NVSS data from 1992 to 2019.

The NCVS collects information on nonfatal criminal Respondents to the Survey of Occupational Injuries
victimization of noninstitutionalized persons, and Illnesses (SOII) provide information on the
regardless of whether an injury has occurred. This number of nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses
report includes NCVS data on rape or sexual assault, that meet the Occupational Safety and Health
robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault against Administration recordkeeping guidelines. Data
workers age 16 or older while they were at work or on in this report focus on cases where the worker
duty. The NCVS excludes volunteer work and work required at least 1 full day before returning to work.
around the house in estimates of employed persons. Respondents provide detailed information about the
The NCVS also excludes persons living in military case circumstances and worker characteristics of the
barracks and homeless persons. Trends using NCVS injured or ill worker. The SOII excludes establishments
data are presented in 2-year rolling averages for 1993 in agricultural production with fewer than 11
to 2019. Details about nonfatal workplace violence are employees, self-employed persons, private households,
presented by victim, offender, and crime characteristics and employees of the U.S. Postal Service and federal
for the 2015 to 2019 period. Years mentioned in regard government. This report includes injuries recorded
to NCVS data refer to the collection year (i.e., the year in the SOII resulting from a violent act intentionally
that the data were collected rather than the year that caused by another person. Annual overall work-
the incident occurred). related nonfatal injury counts are presented from
1992 to 2019. Details of nonfatal workplace injuries
The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System are presented by characteristics and circumstances for
- Occupational Supplement (NEISS-Work) captures 2015 to 2019.
nonfatal work-related injuries among civilian,
noninstitutionalized workers treated in participating 2The working definition of workplace violence injuries within
NEISS-Work captures injuries that occur when the worker
was intentionally injured by another person. It is assumed
that workplace incidents are unintentional unless the incident
description provides an indication of intent.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 15

 Indicator 1. Trends in workplace homicide Indicator 2. Characteristics of workplace
homicide victims
1a. Number of workplace homicides, 1992–2019
2a. Occupations of workplace homicide victims,
A total of 454 homicides took place in 2019 (figure
2015–19
1.1a). This marked a 58% decrease from a peak of
1,080 homicides recorded by the CFOI in 1994. This During 2015–19, 21% of victims in workplace
is compared to a 22% decrease in the number of total homicides worked in sales and related occupations
homicides from 1994 to 2019 (figure 1.1b). During (table 2.1). Protective-service occupations, notably
this period, all fatal occupational injuries also declined police officers and security guards, accounted for
by 20% (not shown in tables). From 2014 to 2019, 19% of workplace homicides. Persons in management
workplace homicides increased by 11%. In total, 17,865 occupations (e.g., owners or managers of restaurants
workers were killed in a workplace homicide from and hotels) accounted for 9% of workplace homicides.
1992 to 2019.3
Nearly 83% of workers killed during 2015–19 were
1b. Workplace homicides as a percentage of all in private industry (not shown in tables). Workers
fatal occupational injuries, 1992–2019 in the public sector accounted for 17% of workplace
homicides during that time (not shown in tables).
Workplace homicides accounted for 9% of all fatal
occupational injuries in 2019, compared to 16% in
1994, the year with the largest number of workplace
homicides recorded by the CFOI (figure 1.2). The
Fatal occupational injuries and
remainder of the analysis on workplace homicide workplace homicides
focuses on data from 2015 to 2019 to align with coding In the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, a fatal
structures used in the CFOI. (See Methodology.) occupational injury including workplace homicide is
3CFOI data from 2001 exclude fatal work injuries resulting from a workplace fatality that meets the following criteria:
the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. 1. It must have resulted from a traumatic injury.
2. The incident that led to the death must have
occurred in the United States, its territories, or its
territorial waters or airspace.
3. It must be related to work.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 16

FIGURE 1.1a
Number of workplace homicides, 1992–2019
Number of workplace homicides OIICS 2.01 implemented
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
1992 ’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19
Note: Data for all years are revised and final. The dashed line represents the first year in which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries used Occupational
Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01 when classifying Event or Exposure, Primary Source, Secondary Source, Nature, and Part of Body.
Though there are substantial differences between OIICS 2.01 and the original OIICS structure used from 1992 to 2010, workplace homicide data from
the two versions were determined to be comparable. See http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshoiics.htm and Methodology. Deaths due to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks are excluded from counts of workplace homicide. See appendix table 2 for numbers.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, 1992–2019.

FIGURE 1.1b
Number of total homicides, 1992–2019
Number of total homicides
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1992 ’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19
Note: Deaths due to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks are included in counts of total homicide. See appendix table 2 for numbers.
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System for number of deaths, 1992–2019.

FIGURE 1.2
Percent of fatal occupational injuries that are workplace homicides, 1992–2019
Percent OIICS 2.01 implemented
20

15

10

0
1992 ’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19
Note: Data for all years are revised and final. The dashed line represents the first year in which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries used Occupational
Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01 when classifying Event or Exposure, Primary Source, Secondary Source, Nature, and Part of Body.
Though there are substantial differences between OIICS 2.01 and the original OIICS structure used from 1992 to 2010, workplace homicide data from
the two versions were determined to be comparable. See http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshoiics.htm and Methodology. Deaths due to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks are excluded from estimates of workplace homicide. See appendix table 3 for percentages.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, 1992–2019.
INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 17
TABLE 2.1
Occupations of workplace homicide victims, 2015–2019
Occupation 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 417 500 458 453 454
Management 36 41 42 37 44
Top executives 3 / / 4 /
Operations specialties managers 6 3 6 4 4
Other 27 36 32 28 35
Business/financial operations 4 3 7 9 /
Computer/mathematical / / / / /
Architecture/engineering / / / / /
Engineers / / / / /
Life/physical/social science / / / / /
Community/social services 3 5 10 3 3
Legal / 2 3 4 /
Education/training/library 3 3 3 5 1
Arts/design/entertainment/sports/media 7 8 4 12 /
Entertainers/performers/sports/related workers / 5 2 6 /
Healthcare practitioners/technical 19 10 8 9 /
Health diagnosing/treating practitioners 4 3 7 5 /
Health technologists/technicians 4 5 / 4 /
Healthcare support 3 7 7 3 11
Protective service 68 106 85 88 81
Fire fighting/prevention workers 1 / / / /
Law enforcement workers 37 62 46 55 40
Othera 27 33 30 27 /
Food preparation/serving-related 23 26 29 40 22
Supervisors/food preparation/serving workers 8 9 12 10 5
Building/grounds cleaning/maintenance 5 11 8 7 13
Building cleaning/pest control workers 4 6 7 / 7
Grounds maintenance workers 1 / / 4 /
Personal care/service 17 13 13 12 20
Sales/related 96 121 94 89 81
Supervisors/sales workers 42 52 46 37 30
Retail sales workers 50 63 45 46 45
Sales representatives/services / / / / /
Office/administrative support 18 15 16 14 25
Material recording/scheduling/dispatching/distributing workers 9 5 3 8 /
Farming/fishing/forestry 9 4 5 8 4
Agricultural workers 8 4 4 7 /
Construction/extraction 12 19 24 25 19
Supervisors of construction/extraction workers 4 / 6 5 /
Construction trades workers 8 19 17 15 16
Installation/maintenance/repair 12 30 23 22 18
Vehicle and mobile equipment mechanics/installers/repairers 6 15 10 12 7
Other installation/maintenance/repair 4 8 9 5 7
Production 10 15 13 8 14
Supervisors of production workers / 6 3 1 /
Metal workers/plastic workers 3 / 1 / 3
Transportation/material moving 62 59 64 52 73
Motor vehicle operators 51 49 49 35 54
Material moving workers 8 3 10 9 17
Militaryb 5 / / / 2
Note: Totals for major categories may include subcategories not shown separately. The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has published data
on fatal occupational injuries for the U.S. since 1992. During this time, the classification systems and definitions of many data elements have changed.
See the CFOI Definitions page (http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshcfdef.htm) for a more detailed description of each data element and their definitions.
Occupation data from 2011–2018 are based on the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system, 2010; 2019 occupation data are based on the
SOC System, 2018. CFOI fatal-injury counts exclude illness-related deaths unless precipitated by an injury event.
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
aIncludes animal control workers, private detectives and investigators, security guards and gaming surveillance officers, and miscellaneous protective
service workers.
bIncludes fatal injuries to persons identified as resident armed forces, regardless of individual occupation listed.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 18

2b. Characteristics of workplace homicide victims,
TABLE 2.2
2015–19 Characteristics of workplace homicide victims,
From 2015 to 2019, the majority of victims of 2015–2019
workplace homicide were male (82%, or 1,879) Characteristics 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 417 500 458 453 454
(table 2.2).4 Females accounted for 18% of all
Sex
workplace homicides from 2015 to 2019 (403), more Male 356 409 375 373 366
than the percentage of females in all fatal occupational Female 61 91 83 80 88
injuries (8%) (not shown in tables). Race/ethnicitya
White 179 241 220 215 197
During 2015–19, nearly half (46%, or 1,052) of Black 114 128 113 97 127
workplace homicide victims were white. White Hispanic or Latino 73 69 68 84 74
individuals made up 66% of all workplace fatalities Asian 41 52 44 42 /
(not shown in tables). Black individuals accounted for Native Hawaiian/
25% (579) of workplace homicides and experienced Other Pacific Islander / / 4 3 /
11% of all fatal occupational injuries (not shown in American Indian/
Alaska Native 3 4 4 3 /
tables). Hispanic individuals accounted for 16% (368) Two or more races / / / / /
of workplace homicides and 18% of fatal occupational Other 6 5 5 8 5
injuries from 2015 to 2019 (not shown in tables). Age
15 or younger / 1 2 / /
The majority of workplace homicide victims during 16–17 1 / 1 1 /
2015–19 were ages 25 to 54 (66%, or 1,502), and they 18–19 4 6 4 12 /
accounted for 56% (14,489) of all fatal work injuries 20–24 37 32 31 28 42
(not shown in tables). Workers ages 55 to 64 accounted 25–34 89 109 109 104 93
for 17% of workplace homicides (389) and 22% 35–44 89 114 95 98 107
(5,662) of all fatal work injuries (not shown in tables). 45–54 101 120 89 97 88
Approximately 23% of victims of workplace homicides 55–64 62 81 86 75 85
65 or older 34 36 41 38 /
from 2015 to 2019 were self-employed (532). Self-
Employee status
employed workers accounted for 21% (5420) of all Wage/salary workersb 297 384 356 351 362
fatal occupational injuries during that time (not shown Self-employedc 120 116 102 102 92
in tables). Note: Totals for major categories may include subcategories not
shown separately. The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has
4For more information on workplace homicides during 1997–2010, published data on fatal occupational injuries for the U.S. since 1992.
visit https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/work_hom.pdf. For 2011– During this time, the classification systems and definitions of many data
2018, see https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/work_homicide.xlsx. elements have changed. See the CFOI Definitions page (http://www.
bls.gov/iif/oshcfdef.htm) for a more detailed description of each data
For more information on fatal occupational injuries during 1992– element and their definitions. CFOI fatal-injury counts exclude illness-
2002, visit https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0186.pdf. For related deaths unless precipitated by an injury event.
2003–2018, see https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/all_worker.xlsx. /Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
aPersons identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. The race
categories shown exclude data for Hispanics and Latinos. Cases where
ethnicity is unknown are included in counts of non-Hispanic workers.
bMay include volunteers and workers receiving other types of
compensation. Cases where employment status is unknown are
included in the counts of wage and salary workers.
cIncludes self-employed workers, owners of unincorporated businesses
and farms, and paid and unpaid family workers, and may include some
owners of incorporated businesses or members of partnerships.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries,
2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 19

 Indicator 3. Characteristics of workplace TABLE 3.2
homicides Time of day of workplace homicides, 2015–2019
Time of day 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
3a. Cause of death in workplace homicides, 2015–19 Total 417 500 458 453 454
Time
During 2015–19, shootings made up 79% of workplace 12:00 midnight–3:59 a.m. 57 68 54 48 63
homicides (1,813) (table 3.1). Stabbing, cutting, 4:00 a.m.–7:59 a.m. 46 52 54 43 48
slashing, and piercing accounted for 9% of workplace 8:00 a.m.–11:59 a.m. 83 81 64 72 56
homicides (199); hitting, kicking, and beating accounted 12:00 noon–3:59 p.m. 51 87 79 89 82
for 7% (149); multiple violent acts accounted for 4:00 p.m.–7:59 p.m. 69 77 73 82 82
2% (34); and strangulation accounted for 1% (23). 8:00 p.m.–11:59 p.m. 77 92 82 87 96
Note: The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has published data
3b. Time of day of workplace homicides, 2015–19 on fatal occupational injuries for the U.S. since 1992. During this time,
the classification systems and definitions of many data elements have
changed. See the CFOI Definitions page (http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshcfdef.
The distribution of workplace homicides by time of day htm) for a more detailed description of each data element and their
(table 3.2) may also be of interest. During 2015–19, definitions. CFOI fatal-injury counts exclude illness-related deaths unless
precipitated by an injury event. Details may not sum to totals because time
about 19% of workplace homicides occurred between of incident is not available for all homicides.
8:00 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. (434). During the same Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries,
period, 49% of workplace homicides occurred between 2015–2019.
8:00 a.m. and 7:59 p.m. (1127), and 23% happened
between midnight and 7:59 a.m. (533).
TABLE 3.3
3c. Location of workplace homicides, 2015–19 Location of workplace homicides, 2015–2019
Location 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Over 41% of workplace homicides occurred in a public Total 417 500 458 453 454
building during 2015–19 (936) (table 3.3). Private Private residence 48 63 48 66 53
residences were the location for 12% of workplace Residential construction site 5 8 3 10 /
homicides (278). Workplace homicides also took place Farm 9 6 4 7 8
Industrial place/premise 29 42 41 31 35
in industrial places/premises (178), streets or highways
Construction site / 3 6 4 /
(353), and places for recreation or sport (28).
Factory/plant 6 12 11 1 12
Place for recreation/sport 3 8 9 3 5
Street/highway 69 80 76 58 70
TABLE 3.1 Interstate/freeway/expressway 2 5 5 3 5
Cause of death in workplace homicides, 2015–2019 Other state/U.S. highway / 4 5 3 /
Cause of death 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Local road/street 62 68 64 52 55
Total 417 500 458 453 454 Road construction* 2 3 / / /
Intentional shooting by Public building 188 193 181 194 180
other person 354 394 351 351 363 Convenience store 46 64 36 44 42
Stabbing/cutting/ Office building 34 11 19 18 32
slashing/piercing 28 38 47 44 42
Hitting/kicking/beating/shoving 20 35 30 36 28 Restaurant/café 29 35 38 36 /
Strangulation by other person 3 10 5 1 4 Residential institution 3 19 18 13 10
Bombing/arson / / 1 / / Note: Totals for major categories may include subcategories not
shown separately. The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has
Multiple violent acts by published data on fatal occupational injuries for the U.S. since 1992.
other person 6 6 8 7 7 During this time, the classification systems and definitions of many data
Note: Totals may include categories not shown separately. The Census elements have changed. See the CFOI Definitions page (http://www.
of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has published data on fatal bls.gov/iif/oshcfdef.htm) for a more detailed description of each data
occupational injuries for the U.S. since 1992. During this time, the element and their definitions. CFOI fatal-injury counts exclude illness-
classification systems and definitions of many data elements have related deaths unless precipitated by an injury event.
changed. See the CFOI Definitions page (http://www.bls.gov/iif/ /Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
oshcfdef.htm) for a more detailed description of each data element and *The road-construction location category was implemented in 1995.
their definitions. CFOI fatal-injury counts exclude illness-related deaths Includes road construction workers and vehicle occupants fatally
unless precipitated by an injury event. injured in work zones. Work zones include construction, maintenance,
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria. and utility work on a road, street, or highway.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries,
2015–2019. 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 20

 4b. Trends in the rate of violent crime excluding
Indicator 4. Trends in nonfatal workplace
simple assault and the rate of simple assault in
violence nonfatal workplace violence, 1994–2019
4a. Trends in the rate of nonfatal workplace
The increase in the rate of nonfatal workplace violence
violence, 1994–2019
from 2015 to 2019 was primarily due to the increase
In 2019, the rate of nonfatal workplace violence was in simple assault in the workplace. From 2015 to
9.2 violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or older, 2019, there was no significant change in the rate of
according to the NCVS (figure 4.1).5,6 This was a nonfatal workplace violence excluding simple assault
25% increase from 2015, when the rate was 7.4 per (figure 4.2). The rate of simple assault in the workplace
1,000. However, it was 70% lower than the 1994 increased by 34%, from 5.5 simple assaults per 1,000
rate of 31.0 violent crimes per 1,000 workers. Total workers age 16 or older in 2015 to 7.4 per 1,000 in 2019.
nonfatal violent crime followed a similar pattern. For each year from 1994 to 2019, the rate of simple
Rates increased by 14% from 2015 (19.3 nonfatal assault in the workplace was at least 2.5 times the rate
violent crimes per 1,000 persons age 12 or older) to of nonfatal violent crime excluding simple assault in
2019 (22.1 per 1,000) but declined by 72% from 1994 the workplace.
(79.9 per 1,000 persons) to 2019.

5The years mentioned in this indicator refer to 2-year rolling

FIGURE 4.2
Rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime,
averages centered on the most recent year. For example, estimates
reported for 2019 represent the average estimates for 2018 and based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
2019. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate Rate per 1,000 workers age 16 or older
comparisons over time. 30
6Unlike other indicators in this report, Indicators 4 through 10
and 13 include workers in both private and public industry. These 25
indicators are based on NCVS data. 20
15
FIGURE 4.1 Simple assault
10
Rate of nonfatal workplace violence and total nonfatal
violent crime, based on 2-year rolling averages, 5 Violent crime, excluding simple assault*
1994–2019 0
1994 ’96 ’98 2000 ’02 ’04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ’14 ’16 ’18 ’19
Rate per 1,000
100 Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other years
80 and are excluded from the figure. See appendix table 5 for rates and
standard errors.
60 *Includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault, and
Total nonfatal violent crime excludes simple assault.
40 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.
20 Nonfatal workplace violence
0
1994 ’96 ’98 2000 ’02 ’04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ’14 ’16 ’18 ’19
Note: Rates of total nonfatal violent crime are per 1,000 persons age 12
or older. Rates of nonfatal workplace violence are per 1,000 workers age
16 or older. Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on
the most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and
1994). Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to
other years and are excluded from the figure. See appendix table 4 for
rates and standard errors.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 21

 Indicator 5. Characteristics of victims of TABLE 5.1
nonfatal workplace violence Average annual victimization rate of nonfatal
workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–19
5a. Rates of nonfatal workplace violence, by Rate per 1,000 workers
victim occupation, 2015–19 Occupation age 16 or older
Total 8.0
During 2015–19, workers in corrections occupations Medical 15.1
had the highest average annual rate of nonfatal Physician 13.2 †
workplace violence of the occupations examined (149.1 Nurse 26.3 †
violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or older) Technician 15.9 †
(table 5.1). Security guards (95.0 per 1,000) and law Other 8.4 †
Mental health 45.2
enforcement officers (82.9 per 1,000) had the next
Professional (social worker/psychiatrist) 46.1 †
highest rates. Custodial care 8.4 !
Other 51.7 †
Teaching 11.9
Preschool/elementary 10.6 †
Junior high/high school 9.5 †
College/technical school 9.2 †
Special education facility 25.7 !
Other 22.0 †
Law enforcement/security 77.5
Law enforcement officer 82.9 †
Corrections* 149.1
Security guard 95.0 †
Other 29.6 †
Retail sales 10.7
Convenience/liquor store clerk 8.4 †
Gas station attendant 59.4 †
Bartender 70.9 †
Other 8.9 †
Transportation 12.7
Bus driver 15.9 †
Taxi cab driver 45.4 †
Other 10.6 †
Othera 3.8
Note: Occupation categories are those used since the 1992 redesign of
the NCVS. See Methodology. See appendix table 6 for standard errors.
*Comparison group.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the 95% confidence level.
! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases,
or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
aIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer
and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and
social science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media;
food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning
and maintenance; personal care and service; office and administrative
support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction;
installation, maintenance, and repair; production; and other
occupations. See Methodology.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 22

5b. Rates of nonfatal workplace violence among retail sales, and transportation occupations, there was
government and private-sector workers, by no statistically significant difference in the rates of
occupation group, 2015–19 nonfatal workplace violence between government and
private-sector workers. The 9% of government workers
During 2015–19, the average annual rate of nonfatal who were in law enforcement and security occupations
workplace violence against government7 workers experienced 35% of the nonfatal workplace violence
(18.9 violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or older) against all government workers. Law enforcement
was more than three times that against private-sector and security workers made up 1% of all private-sector
workers (6.1 per 1,000) (table 5.2). Government law workers, and they experienced 7% of the nonfatal
enforcement and security workers (74.7 per 1,000) had workplace violence against private-sector workers.
a higher rate of nonfatal workplace violence than other
government workers, with the exception of those in Among government workers, retail sales workers made
mental health occupations (77.1 per 1,000). Among up less than 1% of the workforce and experienced
private-sector workers, those in law enforcement and less than 1% of the nonfatal workplace violence. In
security occupations had the highest rate of nonfatal the private sector, retail workers experienced 17% of
workplace violence (70.9 per 1,000) of all occupation the nonfatal workplace violence, nearly double the
groups measured, including mental health occupations percentage of the private-sector workforce in that
(31.4 per 1,000). occupation group (9%). Government workers in
medical occupations experienced 18% of the nonfatal
In the medical, mental health, and teaching workplace violence against government workers and
occupations, government workers had higher rates accounted for 8% of government workers. In the
of nonfatal workplace violence than workers in the private sector, medical workers experienced 17% of the
private sector. In the law enforcement and security, nonfatal workplace violence and represented 10% of
7Includes federal, state, county, and local government employees. the workers.

TABLE 5.2
Average annual rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence and percent of workers, by occupation group and
employee type, 2015–19
Government Private sector
Rate per 1,000 Percent of nonfatal Rate per 1,000 Percent of nonfatal
workers age 16 workplace violence Percent of workers age 16 workplace violence Percent of
Occupation group or older against workers all workers or older against workers all workers
Total 18.9 100% 100% 6.1 100% 100%
Medical 44.7 † 18 † 8† 10.8 † 17 † 10 †
Mental health 77.1 9† 2† 31.4 † 5† 1†
Teaching 15.5 † 25 † 30 † 2.2 † 1† 2†
Law enforcement/security* 74.7 35 9 70.9 7 1
Retail salesa 7.1 ! <1 ! <1 † 10.7 † 17 † 9†
Transportation 8.5 † 1† 3† 13.3 † 7 3†
Otherb 4.8 † 12 † 48 † 3.8 † 46 † 74 †
Note: Occupation groups are those used since the 1992 redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey. See Methodology. See appendix table 7
for standard errors.
*Comparison group.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the 95% confidence level.
! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
aGovernmental retail sales occupations include cashiers who sell government-issued licenses.
bIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and social
science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media; food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance;
personal care and service; office and administrative support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction; installation, maintenance, and
repair; production; and other occupations. See Methodology.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 23

5c. Characteristics of nonfatal workplace violence 5d. Victim-offender relationship in nonfatal
victims, 2015–19 workplace violence, 2015–19
During 2015–19, there was no statistically significant Strangers committed about half of all nonfatal
difference between the rates of workplace violence for workplace violence during 2015–19 (47%) (table 5.4).
male (7.7 violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or Male victims were less likely to know the offender
older) and female (8.3 per 1,000) workers (table 5.3). than female victims, with strangers committing a
The rate of nonfatal workplace violence against white higher percentage of nonfatal workplace violence
workers (9.3 per 1,000) was higher than that for again males (55%) than females (39%). Nonfatal
Black (5.3 per 1,000); Hispanic (4.6 per 1,000); and workplace violence committed by someone who had a
Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander work relationship with the victim accounted for 25%
(7.0 per 1,000) workers. There was no statistically of nonfatal workplace violence. Work relationships
significant difference between the rates of nonfatal included customers, clients, current or former
workplace violence against white workers and supervisors, employees, and coworkers. Victimizations
against American Indian or Alaska Native workers in which the victim had a work relationship with the
(8.2 per 1,000). Workers ages 20 to 24 (10.6 per 1,000) offender accounted for a higher percentage of nonfatal
experienced a higher rate of nonfatal workplace workplace violence against females (29%) than males
violence than workers in all other age groups, except (21%).
those ages 25 to 34 (9.9 per 1,000).

TABLE 5.3 TABLE 5.4

Average annual rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by Victim-offender relationship in nonfatal workplace
victim characteristics, 2015–19 violence, by sex of victim, 2015–19
Rate per 1,000 workers Victim-offender relationship Total Male* Female
Victim characteristic age 16 or older Total 100% 100% 100%
Total 8.0 Intimate partnera 2% <1% ! 3% †
Sex Other relative 1% 1% ! 1% !
Male* 7.7 Well-known/casual acquaintance 13% 6% 20% †
Female 8.3 Work 25% 21% 29% †
Race/Hispanic origin Customer/client 7 5 8‡
Whitea* 9.3 Patient 7 3 11 †
Blacka 5.3 † Supervisora 3 4 2†
Hispanic/Latino 4.6 † Employeea 1 1 1
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islandera,b 7.0 † Coworkera 7 7 7
American Indian/Alaska Nativea 8.2 Stranger 47% 55% 39% †
Two or more racesa 20.1 † Unknown 13% 18% 7% †
Age
Average annual number
16–19 6.4 † of victimizations 1,264,240 654,690 609,540
20–24* 10.6 Note: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding. See appendix
25–34 9.9 table 9 for standard errors.
35–49 8.3 ‡ *Comparison group.
50–64 6.1 † †Difference with comparison group is significant at the 95% confidence level.
65 or older 3.6 † ‡Difference with comparison group is significant at the 90% confidence level.
! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases,
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240 or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
Note: See appendix table 8 for standard errors. aIncludes current or former.
*Comparison group. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the 95% confidence level. 2015–19.
‡Difference with comparison group is significant at the 90% confidence level.
aExcludes persons of Hispanic origin (e.g., “white” refers to non-Hispanic
white persons and “Black” refers to non-Hispanic Black persons).
bEstimates of nonfatal workplace violence are not shown separately due
to small sample sizes.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 24

 6b. Seasonality and time of day of nonfatal
Indicator 6. Characteristics of nonfatal
workplace violence, 2015–19
workplace violence
During 2015–19, there was no significant difference
6a. Types of crime experienced in nonfatal
between the portion of nonfatal workplace violence
workplace violence, 2015–19
that occurred in the winter (24%) and the percentage
An annual average of 1.3 million nonfatal violent that occurred during the other three seasons
crimes occurred in the workplace during 2015–19 (table 6.2). The greatest proportion of nonfatal
(table 6.1). Such crimes included about 53,000 rapes workplace violence (39%) occurred in the afternoon,
or sexual assaults, 46,000 robberies, 186,000 aggravated after 12 noon to 6 p.m. Violence that occurred in the
assaults, and 979,000 simple assaults per year. The morning between 6 a.m. and 12 noon accounted for
average annual rate of nonfatal workplace violence was 22% of nonfatal workplace violence.
8.0 violent crimes per 1,000 workers age 16 or older
during 2015–19. The average annual rate of simple TABLE 6.2
assault in the workplace (6.2 per 1,000) was more Season and time of day of nonfatal workplace violence,
than three times the rate of violent crime, excluding 2015–19
simple assault, in the workplace (1.8 per 1,000). During Season and time of day Percent
2015–19, simple assault accounted for 77% of nonfatal Total 100%
workplace violence. Violent crime, excluding simple Season
assault, made up 23% of nonfatal workplace violence. Winter* 24%
Aggravated assaults accounted for 15% of nonfatal Spring 25
workplace violence, while rapes or sexual assaults and Summer 24
robberies represented 4% each. Fall 27
Time of day
Morning (after 6:00 a.m.–noon) 22% †
TABLE 6.1 Afternoon (after noon–6 p.m.)* 39
Rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence, by Evening (after 6 p.m.–midnight) 18 †
type of crime, 2015–19 Night (after midnight–6 a.m.) 9†
Rate per 1,000 Unknowna 13 †
Average workers age 16 Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Type of crime annual number or older Percent
Note: Winter victimizations occurred in December, January, and
Total 1,264,240 8.0 100% February; spring victimizations in March, April, and May; summer
Violent crime, victimizations in June, July, and August; and fall victimizations in
excluding simple September, October, and November. Details may not sum to totals due
assault 285,280 † 1.8 † 23% † to rounding. See appendix table 11 for standard errors.
Rape/sexual assault 53,490 † 0.3 † 4† *Comparison group.
Robbery 45,840 † 0.3 † 4† †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
Aggravated assault 185,950 † 1.2 † 15 † 95% confidence level.
aIncludes did not know time of day, did not know time of night, and did
Simple assault* 978,960 6.2 77% not know whether the crime happened during the day or night.
Note: See appendix table 10 for standard errors. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
*Comparison group. 2015–19.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the
95% confidence level.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 25

6c. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence
Indicator 7. Police notification of nonfatal
occurring in restricted areas, by type of
occupation, 2015–19
workplace violence
7a. Trends in the percentage of nonfatal
During 2015–19, about half (49%) of nonfatal
workplace violence reported to police, 1994–2019
workplace violence occurred in restricted areas,
or places that limited access to certain persons or The percentage of nonfatal workplace violence reported
prohibited anyone from access (table 6.3). Workers in to police was 41% in 2019 (figure 7.1).8,9 This was an
teaching occupations (82%) had a higher percentage increase from the percentage for 2015 (28%) but was
of workplace violence occurring in restricted areas similar to the 1994 percentage (40%).
than all other occupation groups, except mental health
workers (75%). The percentage of nonfatal workplace 8This indicator includes police reporting by the victim and others,
violence that occurred in restricted areas ranged from including someone official (such as a guard, apartment manager,
or school official), and excludes victims who worked in law
12% of nonfatal workplace violence against workers in enforcement and security occupations.
retail sales to 82% of the nonfatal workplace violence 9The years mentioned in this section refer to 2-year rolling
against workers in teaching occupations. averages centered on the most recent year. For example, estimates
reported for 2019 represent the average estimates for 2018 and
2019. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate
comparisons over time.
TABLE 6.3
Percent of nonfatal workplace violence occurring in
restricted areas, by occupation group, 2015–19 FIGURE 7.1
Occupation group Percent Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, based
Total 49% on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
Medical 58 †
Percent
Mental health 75
50
Teaching* 82
Law enforcement/security 52 † 40
Retail sales 12 †
Transportation 18 † 30
Othera 45 † 20
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Note: Restricted areas are places that limit access to certain people or 10
prohibit anyone from access. Occupation groups are those used since
the 1992 redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey. See 0
Methodology. See appendix table 12 for standard errors. 1994 ’96 ’98 2000 ’02 ’04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ’14 ’16 ’18 ’19
*Comparison group. Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
95% confidence level. Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security occupations.
aIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer Includes police reporting by the victims and others, including someone
and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and official. Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to
social science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media; other years and are excluded from the figure. See appendix table 13 for
food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning percentages and standard errors.
and maintenance; personal care and service; office and administrative Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction; 1994–2019.
installation, maintenance, and repair; production; and other
occupations. See Methodology.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 26

7b. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence significant difference between the percentages for
reported to police, by victim demographic white and Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific
characteristics and type of crime, 2015–19 Islander (40%) workers. Nonfatal workplace violence
against workers ages 35 to 49 (42%) was more likely to
During 2015–19, about 39% of all nonfatal workplace be reported to police than that against workers ages 16
violence was reported to police (table 7.1). About to 19 (21%) or age 65 or older (27%) and as likely to
36% of nonfatal workplace violence against male be reported as that against victims in other age groups.
workers was reported to police, compared to 41% of Simple assaults in the workplace (34%) were less
that against female workers. Nonfatal workplace likely to be reported to police than robberies (64%) or
violence against white workers (34%) was less likely to aggravated assaults (58%).
be reported to police than that against Black workers
(59%), Hispanic or Latino workers (52%), or workers 7c. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence
of two or more races (55%). There was no statistically reported to police, by occupation group, 2015–19

During 2015–19, about 46% of nonfatal workplace

TABLE 7.1 violence against workers in retail sales occupations
Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by was reported to police (table 7.2). This was higher
victim characteristics and type of crime, 2015–19 than the percentage for those in medical occupations
Victim characteristic and type of crime Percent (37%) and similar to percentages found for other
Total 39% occupation groups.
Sex
Male* 36%
Female 41 TABLE 7.2
Race/Hispanic origin Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, by
Whitea* 34% occupation group, 2015–19
Blacka 59 † Occupation group Percent
Hispanic/Latino 52 † Total 39%
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islandera,b 40 Medical 37 ‡
American Indian/Alaska Nativea 61 ! Mental health 37
Two or more racesa 55 † Teaching 42
Age Retail sales* 46
16–19 21% † Transportation 37
20–24 38 Othera 38
25–34 38 Note: Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security
35–49* 42 occupations. Includes police reporting by the victim and others,
50–64 42 including someone official. Occupation groups are those used since
65 or older 27 ‡ the 1992 redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey. See
Methodology. See appendix table 15 for standard errors.
Type of crime *Comparison group.
Violent crime, excluding simple assault 56% † ‡Difference with comparison group is significant at the
Rape/sexual assault 41 90% confidence level.
Robbery 64 † aIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer
Aggravated assault 58 † and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and
social science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media;
Simple assault* 34 food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning
Note: Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security and maintenance; personal care and service; office and administrative
occupations. Includes police reporting by the victims and others, support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction;
including someone official. See appendix table 14 for standard errors. installation, maintenance, and repair; production; and other
*Comparison group. occupations. See Methodology.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
95% confidence level. 2015–19.
‡Difference with comparison group is significant at the
90% confidence level.
! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases,
or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
aExcludes persons of Hispanic origin (e.g., “white” refers to non-Hispanic
white persons and “Black” refers to non-Hispanic Black persons).
bEstimates of workplace violence are not shown separately due to small
sample sizes.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 27

7d. How police were notified of nonfatal 7e. Victims’ most important reasons for reporting
workplace violence, 2015–19 nonfatal workplace violence to police, 2015–19

Of the nonfatal workplace violence reported to police During 2015–19, the most important reasons for
during 2015–19, about 55% was reported by the reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police were to
victim (table 7.3).10 About 1 in 5 (19%) victimizations get help with the incident (17%), because it was a crime
of nonfatal workplace violence reported to police (14%), and to get the offender (15%) (including to
was reported by someone official, including guards, prevent further crimes against the respondent by this
apartment managers, and school officials. offender, to stop this offender from committing other
crimes against anyone, to punish the offender, and to
10The NCVS does not ask about reporting crime to an employer. catch or find the offender) (table 7.4).

TABLE 7.3 TABLE 7.4

How police were notified of nonfatal workplace Most important reasons for reporting nonfatal
violence, 2015–19 workplace violence to police, 2015–19
How police were notified Percent Most important reason for reporting Percent
Total 100% Total 100%
Victim* 55 Crime reported by victim 55%
Someone official other than policea 19 † To get help with this incidenta* 17
Someone else 10 † Because it was a crime 14
Police at scene 13 † To get offenderb 15
Otherb 3† To let police knowc 3†
Note: Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security To recover lossd 1!
occupations. See appendix table 16 for standard errors. Othere 6†
*Comparison group. Crime not reported by victimf 45%
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the Note: Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security
95% confidence level. occupations. Reasons for reporting to police were asked only if the
aIncludes guard, apartment manager, and school official.
victim reported the crime to police. Details may not sum to totals due to
bIncludes victimizations in which the offender was a police officer, rounding. See appendix table 17 for standard errors.
the respondent did not know how the police were notified, another *Comparison group.
household member notified police, and police were notified through †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
some other way. 95% confidence level.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, ! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases,
2015–19. or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
aIncludes to stop or prevent this incident from happening and needed
help after incident due to injury.
bIncludes to prevent further crimes against respondent by this offender,
to stop this offender from committing other crimes against anyone, to
punish offender, and to catch or find offender.
cIncludes to improve police surveillance and duty to let police know
about crime.
dIncludes to recover property and to collect insurance.
eIncludes no one reason was more important and other reasons.
fIncludes other household members, someone official other than police,
police were at the scene, offender was a police officer, and someone
else notifying the police.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 28

7f. Victims’ most important reasons for not
Indicator 8. Characteristics of offenders in
reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police,
2015–19
nonfatal workplace violence
During 2015–19, according to victims, male offenders
During 2015–19, the most important reason for not
committed the majority of workplace violence (64%)
reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police was
(table 8.1). White offenders committed 36% of nonfatal
that the incident was reported to another official,
workplace violence, compared to 21% committed
including guards, apartment managers, and school
by Black offenders and 15% by Hispanic or Latino
officials (39%) (table 7.5). Victims who did report
offenders. Offenders age 30 or older committed 43% of
nonfatal workplace violence to police because they did
nonfatal workplace violence, and 82% of offenders were
not think the incident was important accounted for
acting alone, according to victims.
15% of victims.

TABLE 8.1
TABLE 7.5
Nonfatal workplace violence, by offender
Most important reasons for not reporting nonfatal
characteristics and number of offenders, 2015–19
workplace violence to police, 2015–19
Offender characteristic and number of offenders Percent
Most important reason for not reporting Percent
Total 100%
Total 100%
Sex
Reported to another officiala* 39
Male* 64%
Not important enough to respondentb 15 †
Female 20 †
Police would not helpc 9†
Both 4†
Personal matter 6†
Unknown 13 †
Otherd 26 †
Race/Hispanic origin
Unknowne 4†
Whitea* 36%
Note: Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security
occupations. Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. See appendix Blacka 21 †
table 18 for standard errors. Hispanic/Latino 15 †
*Comparison group. Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islandera 1†
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the American Indian/Alaska Nativea <1 †
95% confidence level. Multiple racesa,b 4†
aIncludes guard, apartment manager, and school official.
bIncludes minor/unsuccessful crime, child offender, and not clear Unknown 22 †
incident was a crime or harm was intended. Age
cIncludes police would not think it was important enough, police would 17 or younger 13% †
be ineffective, and police would be biased. 18–20 4†
dIncludes did not want to get offender in trouble with law, advised not 21–29 17 †
to report crime to police, afraid of reprisal, too inconvenient, no one 30 or older* 43
reason more important, could not identify offender, lack of proof, and
other reasons. Mixed age group 5†
eDid not know why crime was not reported. Unknown 18 †
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, Number of offenders
2015–19. Single offender* 82%
Multiple offenders 9†
Unknown 9†
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Note: Based on victim perceptions of the offenders. Details may not sum
to totals due to rounding. See appendix table 19 for standard errors.
*Comparison group.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at
95% confidence level.
aExcludes persons of Hispanic origin (e.g., “white” refers to non-Hispanic
white persons and “Black” refers to non-Hispanic Black persons).
bIncludes groups of persons of different races and individuals who are
of two or more races.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 29

 9c. Offender weapon possession in nonfatal
Indicator 9. Weapons in nonfatal
workplace violence, by type of crime, 2015–19
workplace violence
During 2015–19, an estimated 71% of nonfatal violent
9a. Trends in offender weapon possession in
crime in the workplace excluding simple assault
nonfatal workplace violence, 1994–2019
involved an offender with a weapon (table 9.2). The
In 2019, the offender possessed a weapon in 14% of majority of aggravated assaults in the workplace
nonfatal workplace violence, which was a decrease involved an offender with a weapon (97%), compared
from 15% in 2018 (figure 9.1).11 It was also a decrease to 38% of robberies.
from the 1994 percentage (18%).

9b. Type of offender weapon possession in TABLE 9.1

Offender weapon possession during nonfatal
nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19
workplace violence, by weapon type, 2015–19
Offenders had weapons in 16% of nonfatal workplace Weapon type Percent
violence during 2015–19 (table 9.1). They had firearms Total 100%
in 5%, knives in 6%, and other weapons in 4% of No weapon* 78%
Weapon 16% †
nonfatal workplace violence during that period.
Firearm 5†
11The years mentioned in this section refer to 2-year rolling Knife 6†
averages centered on the most recent year. For example, estimates Other 4†
reported for 2019 represent the average estimates for 2018 and Unknown weapon type 1†
2019. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate Unknown whether offender had weapon 6% †
comparisons over time.
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Note: Weapon includes a handgun, another type of gun, a knife, another
sharp object, a blunt object, or other objects. See appendix table 21 for
FIGURE 9.1 standard errors.
Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace *Comparison group.
violence, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019 †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
95% confidence level.
Percent Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
100 2015–19.
80 No weapon
60 TABLE 9.2
Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace
40 violence, by type of crime, 2015–19
Weapon Unknown
20 Type of crime Percent
Total 16%
0 Violent crime, excluding simple assault 71%
1994 ’96 ’98 2000 ’02 ’04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ’14 ’16 ’18 ’19 Rape/sexual assault 8!
Note: Weapon includes a handgun, another type of gun, a knife, another Robbery 38 †
sharp object, a blunt object, or other objects. Estimates are based on Aggravated assault* 97
2-year rolling averages centered on the most recent year (e.g., a 1994
estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994). Estimates that include 2006 Simple assaulta <1%
data should not be compared to other years and are excluded from the Note: See appendix table 22 for standard errors.
figure. See appendix table 20 for standard errors. *Comparison group comparing to each crime type except total violent
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, crime and violent crime, excluding simple assault.
1994–2019. †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
95% confidence level.
! Interpret with caution. Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases,
or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.
aAn attack or attempted attack without a weapon that results in no injury,
minor injury (e.g., bruises, black eyes, cuts, scratches, and swelling), or an
undetermined injury requiring fewer than 2 days of hospitalization.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 30

9d. Occupations of victims of nonfatal workplace
Indicator 10. Nonfatal workplace violence
violence involving a weapon, 2015–19
resulting in victim injuries
Armed offenders were present in about 24% of nonfatal
10a. Trends in the percentage of nonfatal
workplace violence against workers in retail sales
workplace violence resulting in victim injury,
occupations during 2015-19 (table 9.3). This was
1994–2019
higher than the percentages for nonfatal workplace
violence against workers in medical (12%), teaching In 2019, about 12% of nonfatal workplace violence
(13%), and law enforcement and security (15%) resulted in victim injury (figure 10.1).12,13 This
occupations. There was no statistically significant percentage was similar to other percentages generated
difference in the percentage of nonfatal workplace for other years from 1994 to 2018.
violence involving an armed offender against workers
in retail sales occupations and the percentage against 12This indicator is based on NCVS data, which defines victim
workers in mental health (18%) and transportation injury as a measure of whether bodily hurt or damage was
sustained by a victim as a result of criminal victimization. Victim
(24%) occupations. injury is not determined by the receipt of medical treatment.
13The years mentioned in this section refer to 2-year rolling
averages centered on the most recent year. For example, estimates
TABLE 9.3 reported for 2019 represent the average estimates for 2018 and
Percent of nonfatal workplace violence involving an 2019. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate
offender with a weapon, by occupation group, 2015–19 comparisons over time.
Occupation group Percent
Total 16%
FIGURE 10.1
Medical 12 †
Mental health 18
Nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim injury,
Teaching 13 †
based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
Law enforcement/security 15 † Percent
Retail sales* 24 20
Transportation 24
Othera 16 † 15
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Note: Occupation groups are those used since the 1992 redesign of the 10
National Crime Victimization Survey. See Methodology. See appendix
table 23 for standard errors. 5
*Comparison group.
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the
95% confidence level. 0
aIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer 1994 ’96 ’98 2000 ’02 ’04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ’14 ’16 ’18 ’19
and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
social science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media; most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and
food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning 1994). The National Crime Victimization Survey defines victim injury as a
and maintenance; personal care and service; office and administrative measure of whether bodily hurt or damage was sustained by the victim
support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction; as a result of criminal victimization. Victim injury is not determined
installation, maintenance, and repair; production; and other by the receipt of medical treatment. Estimates that include 2006 data
occupations. See Methodology. should not be compared to other years and are excluded from the
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, figure. See appendix table 24 for percentages and standard errors.
2015–19. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 31

10b. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence violence against medical workers was about as likely
resulting in victim injury, by type of injury, 2015–19 as that against those in teaching occupations (21%) to
cause injury to the victim.
During 2015–19, about 12% of percent of nonfatal
workplace violence led to victim injury (table 10.1).
TABLE 10.2
Serious injuries (including gunshot and knife wounds, Injury and medical treatment for victims of nonfatal
internal injuries, unconsciousness, broken bones, and workplace violence, 2015–19
rape without other serious injuries) occurred in 2% Injury/treatment Percent
of nonfatal workplace violence, while minor injuries Total 100%
(including bruises, cuts, and other minor injuries) were Not injured* 88%
present in 10% of nonfatal workplace violence. Injured 12% †
Not treated 6†
10c. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence Treated 7†
resulting in victim injury, by whether the victim Unknown <1 !
received treatment, 2015–19 Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Note: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding. The National Crime
During 2015–19, about 7% of nonfatal workplace Victimization Survey defines victim injury as a measure of whether
violence involved a victim who sought medical bodily hurt or damage was sustained by a victim as a result of criminal
victimization. Victim injury is not determined by the receipt of medical
treatment due to injuries sustained in the incident treatment. Medical treatment includes self-treatment and treatment
(table 10.2). This includes self-treatment and treatment rendered by trained professionals, paraprofessionals, or nonprofessionals.
rendered by trained professionals, paraprofessionals, See appendix table 26 for standard errors.
*Comparison group.
or nonprofessionals. An estimated 6% of nonfatal †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
workplace violence involved injured victims who did 95% confidence level.
not seek medical treatment for injuries sustained. ! Interpret with caution. Based on 10 or fewer sample cases or coefficient
of variation is greater than 50%.
10d. Percentage of nonfatal workplace violence Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.
resulting in victim injury, by victim occupation,
2015–19
TABLE 10.3
Nearly a quarter (23%) of nonfatal workplace violence Percent of nonfatal workplace violence resulting in
against workers in medical occupations resulted victim injury, by occupation group, 2015–19
in victim injury during 2015–19 (table 10.3). This Occupation group Percent
was higher than percentages against workers in law Total 12%
enforcement and security (12%), retail sales (7%), and Medical* 23
transportation (8%) occupations. Nonfatal workplace Mental health 9!
Teaching 21
Law enforcement/security 12 †
TABLE 10.1 Retail sales 7†
Injury type in nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19 Transportation 8†
Injury type Percent Othera 8†
Total 100% Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
Not injured* 88% Note: Occupation groups are those used since the 1992 redesign of the
Injured 12% † National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The NCVS defines victim injury
Seriousa 2† as a measure of whether bodily hurt or damage was sustained by a victim
as a result of criminal victimization. Victim injury is not determined by the
Minorb 10 † receipt of medical treatment. See appendix table 27 for standard errors.
Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240 *Comparison group.
Note: The National Crime Victimization Survey defines victim injury as a †Difference with comparison group is significant at the
measure of whether bodily hurt or damage was sustained by a victim as 95% confidence level.
a result of criminal victimization. Victim injury is not determined by the ! Interpret with caution. Based on 10 or fewer sample cases or coefficient
receipt of medical treatment. See appendix table 25 for standard errors. of variation is greater than 50%.
*Comparison group. aIncludes management; business and financial operations; computer
†Difference with comparison group is significant at the and mathematical; architecture and engineering; life, physical, and
95% confidence level. social science; legal; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media;
aIncludes gunshot and knife wounds, internal injuries, unconsciousness, food preparation and serving-related; building and grounds cleaning
and maintenance; personal care and service; office and administrative
broken bones, rape without other injuries, and other serious injuries. support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and extraction;
bIncludes bruises, cuts, and other minor injuries.
installation, maintenance, and repair; production; and other occupations.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, See Methodology.
2015–19. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.
INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 32
 for 42%. Workers ages 25 to 29 accounted for the
Indicator 11. Nonfatal injuries due to highest number of workplace violence injuries treated
workplace violence treated in emergency in EDs (19%, 99,000) and had the highest rate at 11.4
departments ED-treated injuries per 10,000 FTEs, followed by
11a. Nonfatal ED-treated injuries due to workers ages 20 to 24 (10.5 per 10,000) and workers
workplace violence, by worker and injury ages 30 to 34 (9.4 per 10,000). The intentional injury
characteristics, 2015–19 rate decreased as worker age increased, beginning
with workers ages 25 to 29. The majority (98%) of
An estimated 529,000 nonfatal injuries from workplace workers treated in EDs for intentional14 injuries were
violence were treated in hospital EDs during the 5-year subsequently released without hospitalization.
aggregate period from 2015 to 2019 (table 11.1). 14In this indicator, injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map
Overall, the rate of injuries was 7.1 per 10,000 FTEs. to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event
Males accounted for 58% of nonfatal workplace or Exposure category of 111 Intentional injury by other person.
violence injuries treated in EDs, and females accounted

TABLE 11.1
Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by victim characteristics and
disposition after treatment, 2015–19
Victim characteristic and Per 10,000
disposition after treatment National estimate Confidence interval full-time equivalents Confidence interval Percent
Total 529,000 ±162,000 7.1 ±2.1 100%
Sex
Male 306,000 ±109,000 7.2 ±2.5 58%
Female 223,000 ±60,000 6.8 ±1.8 42
Age
15–19 8,000 ±2,000 5.4 ±1.4 2%
20–24 64,000 ±17,000 10.5 ±2.7 12
25–29 99,000 ±29,000 11.4 ±3.2 19
30–34 81,000 ±28,000 9.4 ±3.2 15
35–39 63,000 ±25,000 7.6 ±2.9 12
40–44 55,000 ±19,000 6.9 ±2.3 10
45–49 50,000 ±14,000 6.0 ±1.7 9
50–54 43,000 ±18,000 5.2 ±2.1 8
55–59 34,000 ±12,000 4.4 ±1.5 6
60–64 19,000 ±6,000 3.6 ±1.1 4
65 or older 12,000 ±3,000 3.1 ±1.0 2
Disposition after treatment
Discharged 517,000 ±159,000 6.9 ±2.1 98%
Hospitalized 12,000 ±4,000 0.2 ±0.05 2
Note: Injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event or Exposure category
of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or to some estimates not meeting minimum reporting
requirements.
Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement, 2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 33

11b. Nonfatal ED-treated injuries due to workplace
TABLE 11.3
violence, by selected diagnosis, 2015–19 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries
Contusions and abrasions were the most common due to workplace violence, by selected diagnosis and
injured part of body, 2015–19
ED-treated injuries from nonfatal workplace violence
Selected diagnosis and injured National Confidence
(33%), with a rate of 2.4 per 10,000 FTEs (table 11.2). part of the body estimate interval Percent
Strains and sprains accounted for 12% of intentional Contusion/abrasion 177,000 ±61,000 100%
injuries, with a rate of 0.9 per 10,000. While traumatic Head/facea 69,000 ±28,000 39
brain injuries (TBIs) accounted for about 5% of all Upper extremityb 63,000 ±23,000 35
workplace injuries (not shown in tables) treated in Trunk/neck 30,000 ±10,000 17
EDs from 2015–19, they accounted for 12% of injuries Lower extremityc 14,000 ±5,000 8
from workplace violence. Lacerations represented Strain/sprain 65,000 ±24,000 100%
7% and fractures made up 5% of nonfatal ED-treated Upper extremityb 32,000 ±12,000 49
Trunk/neck 21,000 ±8,000 32
workplace violence injuries.
Lower extremityc 12,000 ±5,000 18
11c. Nonfatal ED-treated injuries due to Laceration 35,000 ±13,000 100%
Head/facea 24,000 ±9,000 68
workplace violence, by selected diagnosis and
Upper extremityb 9,000 ±4,000 26
part of body, 2015–19
Fracture 27,000 ±7,000 100%
Most intentional contusions and abrasions were Head/facea 13,000 ±4,000 46
Upper extremityb 10,000 ±3,000 36
sustained to the head and face (39%) or an upper
Trunk/neck 3,000 ±1,000 10
extremity (35%) (table 11.3). Sprains and strains Lower extremityc 2,000 ±1,000 8
commonly affected an upper extremity (49%) or the Note: Injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map to the
trunk or neck (32%). Lacerations to the head and Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event or Exposure
face accounted for 68% of ED-treated lacerations due category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum
to totals due to rounding or to some estimates not meeting minimum
to workplace violence, and lacerations to an upper reporting requirements.
extremity accounted for 26%. Fractures were also most aIncludes eyes/nose/mouth/ears.
bIncludes shoulder/arm/elbow/wrist/hand/fingers.
frequently sustained to the head and face (46%) or an cIncludes leg/knee/ankle/foot/toes.
upper extremity (36%).
Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National
Electronic Injury Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement, 2015–19.

TABLE 11.2
Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries due to workplace violence, by selected diagnosis, 2015–19
Rate
Per 10,000
Selected diagnosis National estimate Confidence interval full-time equivalents Confidence interval Percent
Total 529,000 ±162,000 7.1 ±2.1 100%
Contusion/abrasion 177,000 ±61,000 2.4 ±0.8 33
Strain/sprain 65,000 ±24,000 0.9 ±0.3 12
Traumatic brain injury 64,000 ±18,000 0.9 ±0.2 12
Laceration 35,000 ±13,000 0.5 ±0.2 7
Fracture 27,000 ±7,000 0.4 ±0.1 5
Puncture 9,000 ±5,000 0.1 ±0.1 2
Internal injurya 4,000 ±2,000 0.1 ±0.02 1
Dislocation 3,000 ±1,000 0.04 ±0.02 1
Other/not statedb 145,000 ±55,000 1.9 ±0.7 27
Note: Injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event or Exposure category of 111
Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or to some estimates not meeting minimum reporting requirements.
aIncludes internal organ injury and hematoma.
bIncludes amputations, anoxia, avulsions, burns, conjunctivitis, crushing injuries, dental injuries, dermatitis, electric shock, injuries from foreign
bodies, hematomas, hemorrhages, nerve damage, poisoning, and all other and not stated injuries.
Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement, 2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 34

11d. Nonfatal ED-treated injuries due to workplace
TABLE 11.4
violence, by diagnosis and sex, 2015–19 Nonfatal emergency department-treated injuries
Males accounted for 53% to 55% of the three most due to workplace violence, by selected diagnosis and
victim’s sex, 2015–19
common diagnoses for both sexes: contusions and
Selected diagnosis and National Confidence
abrasions, sprains and strains, and TBIs (table 11.4). victim’s sex estimate interval Percent
Male workers were more likely than female workers Contusion/abrasion 177,000 ±61,000 100%
to be diagnosed with lacerations or fractures (79% for Male 98,000 ±40,000 55
male workers, compared to 21% for female workers, for Female 79,000 ±24,000 45
each diagnosis) as a result of workplace violence. Fracture 27,000 ±7,000 100%
Male 22,000 ±6,000 79
11e. Nonfatal ED-treated injuries due to Female 6,000 ±2,000 21
workplace violence, by event of injury incident, Laceration 35,000 ±13,000 100%
2015–19 Male 27,000 ±11,000 79
Female 7,000 ±2,000 21
Physical assaults (including hitting, kicking, beating, Strain/sprain 65,000 ±24,000 100%
slapping, pushing, choking, grabbing, and other Male 34,000 ±16,000 53
physical contact with the intent of causing injury or Female 31,000 ±9,000 47
harm) accounted for 83% of nonfatal injuries due to Traumatic brain injury 64,000 ±18,000 100%
workplace violence treated in EDs and occurred at a Male 33,000 ±11,000 53
Female 30,000 ±9,000 47
rate of 5.9 per 10,000 FTEs (table 11.5). Unspecified
Note: Injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map to the
and unclassified intentional injuries accounted for Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event or Exposure
13% of intentional injuries. Shooting, stabbing, cutting, category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum
to totals due to rounding or to some estimates not meeting minimum
and slashing accounted for another 3%. Strangulation reporting requirements.
and rape or sexual assault each accounted for less Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National
than 1%. Electronic Injury Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement, 2015–19.

TABLE 11.5
Nonfatal emergency department-treated workplace violence injuries due to workplace violence, by selected injury
event, 2015–19
Rate
Per 10,000
Selected injury event National estimate Confidence interval full-time equivalents Confidence interval Percent
Total 529,000 ±162,000 7.1 ±2.1 100%
Physical assaultsa 439,000 ±136,000 5.9 ±1.8 83
Shooting/stabbing/
cutting/slashing 14,000 ±6,000 0.2 ±0.1 3
Strangulation 3,000 ±1,000 0.03 ±0.01 <1
Rape/sexual assault 2,000 ±1,000 0.02 ±0.01 <1
Intentional injury, unspecifiedb 69,000 ±22,000 0.9 ±0.3 13
Note: Injuries due to nonfatal workplace violence map to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, Event or Exposure category of 111
Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or to some estimates not meeting minimum reporting requirements.
aIncludes hitting, kicking, beating, slapping, pushing, choking, grabbing, or other physical contact with the intent of causing injury or harm.
bIncludes intentional injury, unspecified, or not elsewhere classified.
Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System - Occupational Supplement, 2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 35

 12c. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
Indicator 12. Nonfatal injuries due to resulting in days away from work, by victim
workplace violence resulting in days away occupation, 2015–2019
from work
In 2019, workers in the following major occupation
12a. Trends in the rate of nonfatal injuries due to groups (in private industry and government) had
workplace violence in private industry resulting the highest rates of injury from workplace violence
in days away from work, 1992–2019 resulting in 1 day or more of missed work: protective
In 1992, the incidence rate of occupational injuries service (24.4 cases per 10,000 FTEs); healthcare
and illnesses with days away from work resulting support (21.4 per 10,000 FTEs); education, training,
from assaults by persons was 2.9 cases per 10,000 and library (11.8 per 10,000 FTEs); community and
full-time equivalent workers (FTEs) in private industry social service (10.4 per 10,000 FTEs); healthcare
(figure 12.1).15,16 In 2010, the rate of assaults resulting practitioners and technical (10.9 per 10,000 FTEs);
in days away from work was 2.0 cases per 10,000 FTEs and personal care and service (3.4 per 10,000 FTEs)
in private industry. The rate of workplace violence- (table 12.1).17
related injuries was 1.7 cases per 10,000 FTEs in 2015 In 2019, law enforcement workers had an incidence
and 2.0 per 10,000 FTEs in 2019. rate of nonfatal workplace violence requiring days
12b. Trends in the number of nonfatal injuries away from work (42.5 cases per 10,000 FTEs) that
due to workplace violence in private industry was more than 10 times the rate for all workers
resulting in days away from work, 1992–2019 combined (3.6 per 10,000 FTEs). Among all cases of
workplace violence resulting in days away from work
In 1992, 1993, 1995, and 1997, the number of in 2019 (41,560), about 1 in 4 cases occurred among
assaults in private industry that resulted in days nursing, psychiatric, and home-health-aide workers
away from work was significantly higher than 20,000 (10,080). From 2015 to 2019, the incidence rate for law
(figure 12.2).15 Each year from 2011 to 2013, fewer enforcement workers decreased from 57.3 to 42.5 cases
than 15,000 cases in private industry of intentional per 10,000 FTEs.
injury by other persons that resulted in days away 17Sections 12c through 12h will include information from all
from work were reported, but more than 20,000 cases ownerships, including those in the private sector and state and local
occurred during both 2018 and 2019. government.
15This section focuses on private industry and injuries that resulted
in 1 day or more away from work.
16In 1992, data first became available on case circumstances and
workers’ days away from work as a result of nonfatal occupational
injuries and illnesses.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 36

FIGURE 12.1
Incidence rate for occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence
in private industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury by other persons in private industry (2011–2019), per
10,000 FTEs, 1992–2019
Rate OIICS 2.01 implemented
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1992 ’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19
Note: From 1992 to 2010, occupational injuries and illnesses were classified under the original Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System
(OIICS). Beginning in 2011, injuries and illnesses were classified according to OIICS 2.01, which uses similar concepts as the original OIICS classification.
While some broad categories may be comparable, the coding structures and rules are sufficiently different that data classified under the two
classifications should be compared with caution or not at all. From 1992 to 2010, violence cases were classified as assaults by persons, with no
distinction between intentional and unintentional incidents. From 2011 onward, violence cases were classified as intentional injury by other person.
See Methodology. See appendix table 28 for rates and standard errors.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illness - Case and Demographics, 1992–2019.

FIGURE 12.2
Number of occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from workplace violence in
private industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury by other persons in private industry (2011–2019), 1992–2019
Number OIICS 2.01 implemented
25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0
1992 ’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19
Note: From 1992 to 2010, occupational injuries and illnesses were classified under the original Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System
(OIICS). Beginning in 2011, injuries and illnesses were classified according to OIICS 2.01, which uses similar concepts as the original OIICS classification.
While some broad categories may be comparable, the coding structures and rules are sufficiently different that data classified under the two
classifications should be compared with caution or not at all. From 1992 to 2010, violence cases were classified as assaults by persons, with no
distinction between intentional and unintentional incidents. From 2011 onward, violence cases were classified as intentional injury by other person.
See Methodology. See appendix table 29 for numbers and standard errors.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 1992–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 37

TABLE 12.1
Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from
workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–2019
Rate* Number
Occupation 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.6 34,750 35,740 36,450 40,050 41,560
Management 1.0 1.1 1.9 1.6 1.7 680 770 1,300 1,330 1,360
Business/financial operations 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 180 70 90 150 120
Life/physical/social science 0.4 1.1 0.2 1.7 0.5 40 90 20 170 50
Community/social service 14.7 17.7 15.1 11.4 10.4 2,310 2,830 2,470 2,230 1,830
Counselors/social workers/other community/
social-service specialists 15.3 18.3 15.7 11.8 10.7 2,310 2,820 2,470 2,230 1,820
Education/training/library 8.4 7.6 8.4 8.6 11.8 5,290 4,810 5,360 6,410 7,740
Preschool/primary/secondary/special-education/
school teachers 5.8 5.3 6.9 5.9 8.3 1,960 1,790 2,330 2,310 2,850
Other teachers/instructors / / 5.4 7.1 2.8 420 220 380 680 200
Other / / 24.1 27.2 37.2 2,900 2,790 2,600 3,410 4,680
Arts/design/entertainment/sports/media 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 60 30 30 40 20
Healthcare practitioners/technical 7.3 8.4 8.0 8.8 10.9 4,670 5,510 5,400 6,790 7,300
Health diagnosing/treating practitioners 6.0 6.8 6.5 7.3 8.8 2,400 2,830 2,740 3,530 3,820
Health technologists/technicians 9.8 11.3 10.8 11.4 14.9 2,240 2,640 2,600 3,120 3,370
Other 2.4 3.1 4.4 9.6 / 30 40 60 140 110
Healthcare support 20.6 19.3 22.2 17.7 21.4 6,220 5,850 6,880 6,200 10,370
Nursing/psychiatric/home-health aides 33.0 31.7 35.1 29.3 / 5,900 5,650 6,310 5,870 10,080
Protective service 30.9 33.3 26.8 25.9 24.4 8,450 9,060 7,400 8,230 7,000
Supervisors of protective-service workers 30.6 24.2 30.7 14.7 14.9 1,090 840 830 850 750
Law enforcement workers 57.3 66.4 46.6 49.1 42.5 6,140 7,090 4,980 5,950 4,590
Other 14.5 12.5 14.9 14.3 17.2 1,550 1,350 1,620 1,780 1,960
Food preparation/serving-related 1.3 0.5 0.4 / 0.5 1,070 450 320 430 400
Building/grounds cleaning/maintenance 0.5 0.7 1.4 0.7 1.0 160 230 480 270 350
Personal care/service 10.6 9.8 9.1 / 3.4 3,110 2,960 3,200 4,170 760
Supervisors of personal care/service workers 1.4 2.5 1.6 14.7 2.3 20 50 30 380 50
Entertainment attendants/related workers / 0.9 0.6 4.0 0.7 / 30 20 150 20
Other 17.2 15.6 13.6 13.3 / 3,080 2,880 3,110 3,630 680
Sales/related 0.5 0.7 0.9 / 0.8 560 780 1,000 610 850
Office/administrative support 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6 670 580 550 770 830
Farming/fishing/forestry / / 0.4 / / / / 40 40 /
Construction/extraction 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 40 330 90 130 110
Installation/maintenance/repair 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.2 0.3 90 100 450 120 150
Production 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 90 130 60 220 80
Transportation/material moving / 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.1 970 1,040 1,270 1,720 2,160
Note: The category for workplace violence maps to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure category
of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Major and selected minor occupations for 2010–2018 maps to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC),
2010. Occupation data for 2019 are based on the SOC System, 2018. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or data exclusion of nonclassifiable
responses. All ownerships include private sector and state and local government. See appendix table 30 for standard errors.
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
*The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses per 10,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) workers and were calculated as (N/EH) ×
20,000,000, where N= number of injuries and illnesses, EH = total hours worked by all employees during the calendar year, and 20,000,000 = base for
10,000 FTEs (working 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year).
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 38

12d. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence of workplace violence resulting in injury causing days
resulting in days away from work, by victim away from work (13,840). Workers with less than
demographic characteristics and length of service 3 months of service accounted for 8% (3,240).
with employer, 2015–2019
In each year from 2015 to 2019, females (5.1 cases
In 2019, workers ages 25 to 34 sustained injuries that per 10,000 FTEs in 2019) had higher rates than males
resulted in days away from work in 29% of cases of (2.3 per 10,000 in 2019) of nonfatal workplace violence
nonfatal violence (11,980) (table 12.2). Another 23% resulting in injury and days away from work. In
of cases were reported for workers ages 35 to 44 (9,390) 2019, females sustained about 64% of injuries due to
and 19% for workers ages 45 to 54 (7,710). Workers workplace violence resulting in days away from work.
ages 20 to 24 (4.4 cases per 10,000 FTEs) and 25 to 34
(4.4 per 10,000 FTEs) had similar incidence rates. Race or ethnicity was not reported for 50% of
workplace violence cases. For this reason, data on race
In 2019, workers with more than 5 years of service or ethnicity for workplace violence resulting in days
with an employer were involved in 33% of incidents away from work are not presented in this analysis.

TABLE 12.2
Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from work resulting from
workplace violence, by victim characteristics and length of service of victim, 2015–2019
Ratea Number
Victim characteristic and length of service 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.6 34,750 35,740 36,450 40,050 41,560
Sex
Male 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.3 14,280 14,210 14,100 14,530 15,050
Female 4.2 4.4 4.5 5.0 5.1 20,390 21,450 22,180 25,330 26,380
Age
16–19 1.7 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.9 380 450 410 420 480
20–24 2.9 3.2 3.8 3.8 4.4 2,760 3,050 3,690 3,680 4,240
25–34 3.9 4.3 3.7 4.0 4.4 9,890 11,030 9,790 10,720 11,980
35–44 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.4 3.7 8,070 8,120 8,890 8,470 9,390
45–54 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.2 7,880 7,390 7,460 8,980 7,710
55–64 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.1 4,380 4,120 4,760 5,310 6,090
65 and over 1.8 1.7 1.9 3.4 2.0 900 830 990 1,860 1,210
Length of serviceb
Less than 3 months / / / / / 1,840 2,420 2,200 2,840 3,240
3–11 months / / / / / 4,910 6,050 6,780 6,610 7,500
1–5 years / / / / / 11,970 12,870 13,410 15,600 15,870
More than 5 years / / / / / 15,380 13,800 13,640 14,390 13,840
Note: The category for workplace violence maps to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure category
of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or data exclusion of nonclassifiable responses. All ownerships
include private sector and state and local government. See appendix table 31 for standard errors.
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
aThe incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses per 10,000 full–time equivalent (FTE) workers and were calculated as (N/EH) ×
20,000,000, where N = number of injuries and illnesses, EH = total hours worked by all employees during the calendar year, and 20,000,000 = base for
10,000 FTEs (working 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year).
bIncidence rates are not calculated because data for employment and hours worked are not available.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 39

12e. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence Among male victims of nonfatal workplace violence
resulting in days away from work, by victim- resulting in injury and missed work, a person
offender relationship and sex of victim, 2019 unknown to the victim (such as a robber or inmate)
committed 31% of the incidents (4,600). More males
In 2019, the offender was a patient of the victim in (860) than females (330) were victims of nonfatal
44% of cases of nonfatal workplace violence injuries violence committed by a coworker or work associate
involving missed work (18,090) (table 12.3). The that resulted in an injury and missing time from work.
victim was female in 70% of these incidents (12,670).
Females also accounted for the majority of victims 12f. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
when the offender was a student (87%) or other client resulting in days away from work, by event or
or customer (58%). exposure and sex of victim, 2019

In 2019, an estimated 90% (37,210) of cases of nonfatal

TABLE 12.3 workplace violence involving injury and missed work
Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses resulted from hitting, kicking, beating, or shoving
with days away from work resulting from workplace (table 12.4). Females were victims in 65% of these
violence, by victim-offender relationship and sex of cases (24,030). Intentional shootings made up 1%
victim, 2019
of cases (340). In 82% of these shootings, the victim
Victim-offender relationshipa Total Male Female
was male (280). Males were victims in 76% (320)
Total 41,560 15,050 26,380
Person, other than injured/ill worker,
of stabbing, cutting, slashing, or piercing cases, and
unspecified 680 510 110 females were victims in 92% (790) of threat and verbal
Coworker/work associate 1,230 860 330 assault cases.
Coworkerb 930 630 300
Former coworker 190 150 /
Work associatec 30 20 20 TABLE 12.4
Coworker/work associate, NECd 40 30 / Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses
Student 9,460 1,210 8,260 with days away from work resulting from workplace
Patient 18,090 5,400 12,670 violence, by event or exposure and sex of victim, 2019
Other client/customer 4,330 1,830 2,490 Event or Exposure Total Male Female
Assailant/suspect/inmate 7,050 4,600 2,440 Total 41,560 15,050 26,380
Robber 810 190 620 Intentional shooting by other person 340 280 60
Inmate/detainee in custody 3,600 2,650 940 Stabbing/cutting/slashing/piercing 420 320 100
Suspect not yet apprehended 1,110 820 290 Hitting/kicking/beating/shoving 37,210 13,150 24,030
Assailant/suspect, NEC 670 260 410 Strangulation by other person 200 70 130
Person, other than injured/ill worker, NEC 460 400 60 Rape/sexual assault 20 / 20
Note: The category workplace violence maps to the Occupational Threat/verbal assault 860 70 790
Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure Multiple violent acts by other person 110 60 40
category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Source of injury
also maps to OIICS 2.01. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding Intentional injury by other person, not
or data exclusion of nonclassifiable responses. All ownerships include elsewhere classified 2,200 1,000 1,150
private sector and state and local government. See appendix table 32 Intentional injury by other person,
for standard errors. NEC denotes not elsewhere classified. unspecified 190 80 50
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria. Note: The category for workplace violence maps to the Occupational
aRelative or domestic partner, and acquaintance, did not have any data Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure
that met publication criteria. category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Details may not sum
bPersons who know or directly work with the injured or ill worker or to totals due to rounding or data exclusion of nonclassifiable responses.
have done so in the past. All ownerships include private sector and state and local government.
cIndividuals who may work (or have previously worked), e.g., for the See appendix table 33 for standard errors.
same establishment, in the same building, or as a contractor for the /Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
same organization. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
dIncludes business competitors. Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2019.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 40

12g. Nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence 12h. Nature of injury in nonfatal workplace violence
resulting in days away from work, by parts of resulting in days away from work, 2015–2019
body affected, 2015–2019
In 2019, nonfatal workplace violence resulting in days
In 2019, head injuries accounted for 34% of intentional away from work resulted in soreness or pain in 26%
injuries from nonfatal workplace violence resulting in (10,700) of cases and sprains, strains, or tears in 16%
days away from work (13,920) (table 12.5). Another (6,760) of cases (table 12.6). Bruises and contusions
18% were to multiple body parts (7,350). accounted for 19% (7,750) of cases.

TABLE 12.5 TABLE 12.6

Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses
with days away from work resulting from workplace with days away from work resulting from workplace
violence, by part of body, 2015–2019 violence, by nature of injury or illness, 2015–2019
Part of body 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Nature of injury or illness 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 34,750 35,740 36,450 40,050 41,560 Total 34,750 35,740 36,450 40,050 41,560
Head 9,610 10,120 10,270 13,150 13,920 Fractures 2,230 2,050 1,610 1,830 2,060
Eye 1,280 850 1,130 1,610 1,220 Sprains/strains/tears 6,630 7,360 6,400 5,960 6,760
Neck 1,030 1,260 1,290 1,310 1,460 Cuts/lacerations/
Trunk 3,960 4,230 4,440 4,470 4,870 punctures 2,290 2,270 2,460 2,440 3,100
Back 1,500 1,890 2,100 1,730 1,950 Cuts/lacerations 1,410 1,140 930 1,240 1,060
Upper extremities 8,470 8,090 8,210 7,990 9,200 Punctures (except
gunshot wounds) 880 1,130 1,530 1,190 2,030
Shoulder 1,710 1,500 1,580 1,520 1,800
Bruises/contusions 7,100 7,520 7,370 8,620 7,750
Arm 1,920 1,750 2,050 1,580 2,220
Chemical burns/corrosions / / / 20 /
Wrist 1,050 960 970 1,000 1,460
Heat (thermal) burns 20 20 / / 30
Hand 2,500 2,710 2,780 2,780 2,300
Multiple traumatic injuries 2,470 1,650 2,050 3,090 2,840
Lower extremities 3,280 2,910 2,650 3,230 3,160
With sprains/other 1,320 730 990 1,610 1,960
Knee 1,550 1,330 1,460 1,790 1,670
With fractures/other 140 80 140 280 90
Ankle 340 330 310 280 350
Soreness/pain 7,790 7,850 8,980 10,420 10,700
Foot 300 270 220 250 230
Tendonitis / / 20 80 /
Toe/toenail 20 30 30 50 30
Other 6,200 7,010 7,550 7,590 8,340
Body systems* 750 730 820 960 1,230
Note: The category for workplace violence maps to the Occupational
Multiple 7,440 8,240 8,340 8,460 7,350 Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure
All other 210 160 430 470 360 category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Nature of injury or
Note: The category for workplace violence maps to the Occupational illness also maps to OIICS 2.01. Details may not sum to totals due to
Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) 2.01, Event or Exposure rounding or data exclusion of nonclassifiable responses. All ownerships
category of 111 Intentional injury by other person. Part of body also include private sector and state and local government. See appendix
maps to OIICS 2.01. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding or table 35 for standard errors.
data exclusion of non-classifiable responses. All ownerships include /Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
private sector and state and local government. See appendix table 34 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
for standard errors. Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.
*Includes body systems (such as circulatory system, gastrointestinal
system, nervous system, and respiratory system) when their functions
have been affected without specific injury to any other part of the body.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 41

 Indicator 13. Socio-emotional problems TABLE 13.1
resulting from nonfatal workplace violence Socio-emotional problems due to nonfatal workplace
violence, 2015–19
During 2015–19, the majority of victims of nonfatal Socio-emotional problem Percent
workplace violence reported mild (35%) or no (26%) Total 100%
emotional distress due to the crime (table 13.1).18 Emotional distress
Moderate emotional distress was experienced by None 26% †
24% of victims, while 15% reported severe emotional Mild* 35
distress. Victims were more likely to report problems Moderate 24 †
with work and school (20%) than problems with family Severe 15 †
Work/school problemsa** 20%
and friends (10%) as a result of the crime.
Family/friend relationship problemsb 10% †
18This indicator excludes missing data on socio-emotional Average annual number of victimizations 1,264,240
problems, which accounted for 16% of victimizations. Note: Excludes missing data, which accounted for 16% of victimizations
of nonfatal workplace violence. See Socio-emotional Impact of Violent
Crime (NCJ 247076, BJS, September 2014) for information on the effect
of missing data on socio-emotional problems. See appendix table 36 for
standard errors.
*Comparison group comparing mild emotional distress to other levels
of emotional distress.
**Comparison group comparing work/school problems to family/friend
relationship problems.
†Difference from comparison group is significant at the
95% confidence level.
aIncludes victims reporting significant problems with work or school,
such as trouble with a boss, a coworker, or peers.
bIncludes victims reporting significant problems with family members
or friends, including getting into more arguments or fights than before
the crime, not feeling able to trust them as much, or not feeling as close
to them as before the crime.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 42

 Methodology separately from New York state), the Virgin Islands,
Guam, and Puerto Rico. CFOI data can be accessed
The indicators in this report are based on information at https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshcfoi1.htm. Data for
drawn from national surveys of persons and specific states and U.S. territories can be found at
workplaces and data collections from federal https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshstate.htm.
departments, agencies, and organizations. These
organizations include the Bureau of Justice Statistics To compile counts that are as complete as possible, the
(BJS), the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and the census uses multiple sources to identify, verify, and
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health profile fatal worker injuries. Information about each
(NIOSH). Each data source has an independent sample fatal workplace injury—occupation and other worker
design, data collection method, and questionnaire characteristics, equipment involved, and circumstances
design, or the source is the result of a universe data of the event—is obtained by cross-referencing the
collection. Universe data collections include censuses source records, such as death certificates, workers'
of all known entities in a specific universe (e.g., all compensation reports, and Federal and State agency
workplace fatalities). administrative reports. To ensure that fatal injuries are
work-related, cases are substantiated with two or more
While the nonfatal data sources are not mutually independent source documents, or a source document
exclusive, caution must be taken when comparing and a follow-up questionnaire. Utilizing a diverse set
data from different sources. Differences in sampling of source documents ensures that all facets of the fatal
procedures, populations, and time periods can affect injury are captured as accurately as possible, such as
the comparability of results. With the exception demographic information of the worker, specifics of
of workplace homicide, findings described in this the incident, and the employment status of the worker.
report with comparative language (e.g., higher, lower,
increase, and decrease) are statistically significant at the Data quality and limitations
95% confidence level.19 Estimates displayed in the text, The CFOI aims to capture all workers, including
figures, and tables are rounded from original estimates, resident military, federal government employees,
not from a series of rounding. self-employed persons, volunteers, and informally
Five data sources were used to compile indicators of employed or ad hoc workers, such as members of
workplace violence in the United States: family businesses. Counts and rates are presented by
the calendar year in which the included workers died
„ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) from injuries incurred at work.
„ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) The CFOI has used different classification systems
„ National Electronic Injury Surveillance System - during its history. From 1992 to 2002, the CFOI used
Occupational Supplement (NEISS-Work) the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system to
define industry. Beginning with 2003, the CFOI began
„ National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) using the North American Industry Classification
„ Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case System (NAICS) to define industry. Due to the
and Demographics (SOII-CD). substantial differences between the NAICS and SIC
systems, results by industry in 2003 constituted a break
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in series. Comparisons should not be made between
Data collection industry data for 2003 onward and previous years. For
more information on the SIC, visit https://www.osha.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Census of gov/pls/imis/sic_manual.html.
Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) produces
comprehensive, accurate, and timely counts of fatal For CFOI, NAICS 2012 was used to define industry for
workplace injuries. CFOI is a Federal-State cooperative reference years 2014 to 2018. NAICS 2017 was used to
program that collects and reports data for 50 states, define industry starting with the 2019 reference year.
the District of Columbia, New York City (reported There was no series break between NAICS 2012 and
NAICS 2017 for CFOI. For more information on the
19For Indicators 4 through 10 and 13, findings that are statistically use of NAICS in CFOI, please visit https://www.bls.
significant at the 90% confidence level are also represented by gov/opub/hom/cfoi/concepts.htm#north-american-
comparative language.
industry-classification-system-naics.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 43

From 1992 to 2002, CFOI used the U.S. Census National Crime Victimization Survey
Bureau occupational classification system to define
occupations. Beginning with the 2003 reference year, Data collection
the Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities program within The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime
BLS that oversees CFOI began using the Standard Victimization Survey (NCVS) is an annual data
Occupational Classification (SOC) system to define collection carried out by the U.S. Census Bureau. The
occupations. Due to the substantial differences NCVS is a self-report survey that is administered
between the SOC and U.S. Census Bureau systems, annually from January 1 to December 31. Annual
results by occupation in 2003 constituted a break in NCVS estimates are based on the number and
series. Comparisons should not be made between characteristics of crimes that respondents experienced
occupation data for 2003 onward and previous years. during the prior 6 months, excluding the month in
For more information on the U.S. Census Bureau, visit which they were interviewed. Therefore, the 2019
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/ survey covers crimes experienced from July 1, 2018 to
working-papers/2003/demo/techpaper2000.pdf. November 30, 2019, with March 15, 2019 as the middle
Beginning with the 2019 reference year, CFOI began of the reference period. Crimes are classified by the
using the 2018 SOC system for coding occupations. year of the survey and not by the year of the crime.
The SOC 2010 system was used for reference years The NCVS is administered to persons age 12 or
2011 through 2018. Before 2011, the 2000 SOC for older from a nationally representative sample of
occupations was used. Comparisons of estimates U.S. households. It collects information on nonfatal
using SOC 2018 to previous years under prior SOC personal crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery,
coding structures should be made with caution. For aggravated assault, simple assault, and personal larceny
more information on the use of SOC in CFOI, please (purse snatching and pocket picking)) and household
visit https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/cfoi/concepts. property crimes (burglary or trespassing, motor vehicle
htm#standard-occupational-classification-soc. theft, and other types of theft).
Reference year 2011 was the first year in which the CFOI The survey collects information on threatened,
used the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification attempted, and completed crimes. It collects data
System (OIICS), version 2.01, when classifying event both on crimes reported and not reported to police.
or exposure, primary source, secondary source, nature, Unless specified otherwise, NCVS estimates in this
and part of body were added as new categories. Due report include threatened, attempted, and completed
to substantial differences between the OIICS 2.01 crimes. In addition to providing annual level and
and the original OIICS structure, which was used change estimates on criminal victimization, the NCVS
from 1992 to 2010, data for these case characteristics is the primary source of information on the nature of
from 2011 onward should not be compared to prior criminal victimization incidents.
years. For more information on the OIICS 2.01, visit
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshoiics.htm. Survey respondents provide information about
themselves (including age, sex, race, Hispanic origin,
CFOI is widely regarded as the leading source for data marital status, educational level, occupation, and
on fatal injuries in the workplace. In 1994 and 1995, income) and whether they experienced a victimization.
several groups of safety experts, including the National For each victimization incident, respondents report
Safety Council and the National Center for Health information about the offender (including age,
Statistics, endorsed CFOI as the official count of work- sex, race, Hispanic origin, and victim-offender
related fatalities. For detailed information on the CFOI relationship), characteristics of the crime (including
methodology in BLS’s Handbook of Methods, visit time and place of occurrence, use of weapons, nature
https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/cfoi/home.htm. CFOI of injury, and economic consequences), whether the
data do not require statistical significance testing and crime was reported to police, reasons the crime was or
are assumed to be accurate. was not reported, and experiences with the criminal
For more information about CFOI, contact the Bureau justice system.
of Labor Statistics’ Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities Household information, including household-level
(IIF) program by email (iifstaff@bls.gov) or by phone demographics (e.g., income) and property
(202-691-6170). victimizations committed against the household (e.g.,
burglary or trespassing), is typically collected from

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 44

the reference person. The reference person is any NCVS data files include person, household,
responsible adult member of the household who is not victimization, and incident weights. Person weights
likely to permanently leave the household. Because provide an estimate of the population represented
an owner or renter of the sampled housing unit is by each person in the sample. Household weights
normally the most responsible and knowledgeable provide an estimate of the household population
household member, this person is generally designated represented by each household in the sample. After
as the reference person and household respondent. proper adjustment, both person and household weights
However, a household respondent does not have to are also typically used to form the denominator in
be one of the household members who owns or rents calculations of crime rates.
the unit.
For personal crimes, the incident weight is derived
In the NCVS, a household is defined as a group of by dividing the person weight of a victim by the total
persons who all reside at a sampled address. Persons number of persons victimized during an incident,
are considered household members when the sampled as reported by the respondent. For property crimes
address is their primary place of residence at the time measured at the household level, the incident weight
of the interview and when they have no usual place and the household weight are the same, because the
of residence elsewhere. Once selected, households victim of a property crime is considered to be the
remain in the sample for 3.5 years, and eligible persons household as a whole. The incident weight is most
in these households are interviewed every 6 months, frequently used to calculate estimates of offenders’ and
either in person or over the phone, for a total of victims’ demographics.
seven interviews.
Victimization weights used in the analysis of NCVS
First interviews are typically conducted in person, with data in this report account for the number of persons
subsequent interviews conducted either in person or victimized during an incident and for high-frequency
by phone. New households rotate into the sample on an repeat-victimizations (i.e., series victimizations). Series
ongoing basis to replace outgoing households that have victimizations are similar in type to one another but
been in the sample for the full 3.5-year period. The occur with such frequency that a victim is unable
sample includes persons living in group quarters, such to recall each event or describe each event in detail.
as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group Survey procedures allow NCVS interviewers to identify
dwellings, and excludes persons living on military and classify these similar victimizations as series
bases or in institutional settings, such as correctional victimizations and to collect detailed information on
or hospital facilities. only the most recent incident in the series.

Data quality and limitations The weighting counts series victimizations as the actual
number of victimizations reported by the victim,
The 2019 NCVS data file includes 155,076 household up to a maximum of 10. Doing so produces more
interviews. Overall, 71% of eligible households reliable estimates of crime levels than counting such
completed interviews. Within participating victimizations only once, while the cap at 10 minimizes
households, interviews with 249,008 persons were the effect of extreme outliers on rates.
completed in 2019, representing an 83% response rate
among eligible persons from responding households. According to the 2019 data, series victimizations
accounted for 1.4% of all victimizations and 3.1% of all
Victimizations that occurred outside of the United violent victimizations. Additional information on the
States were excluded from the NCVS estimates used enumeration of series victimizations is detailed in the
in this report. In 2019, about 1% of the unweighted report Methods for Counting High-Frequency Repeat
victimizations occurred outside of the United States. Victimizations in the National Crime Victimization
NCVS data are weighted to produce annual estimates Survey (NCJ 237308, BJS, April 2012).
of victimization for persons age 12 or older living in Defining workplace violence and occupation
U.S. households. Because the NCVS relies on a sample categories in the NCVS
rather than a census of the entire U.S. population,
weights are designed to adjust to known population BJS defines nonfatal workplace violence as completed,
totals and to compensate for survey nonresponse and attempted, or threatened rape or sexual assault,
other aspects of the complex sample design. robbery, aggravated assault, or simple assault
experienced by employed persons age 16 or older who

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 45

were at work or on duty during the victimization. to create the revised 2016 NCVS data file. The result
NCVS respondents age 16 or older are asked if they was revised criminal victimization estimates that
had a job or worked at a business for 2 weeks or were nationally representative for 2016 and could be
more in the week prior to the interview or during the compared with prior and future years. See National
6 months prior to the interview. If they responded Crime Victimization Survey revised 2016 estimates text
“yes,” they are classified as being employed. Employed box (pp. 3–4) and Methodology (pp. 15–18) in Criminal
respondents are asked to select one occupation that Victimization, 2016: Revised (NCJ 252121, BJS,
best describes their job(s). Volunteer work and work October 2018) for more information.
around the house are excluded from information about
occupations. Standard error computations

The NCVS began using the occupation categories When national estimates are derived from a sample, as
displayed in Indicators 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10 of this report with the NCVS, caution must be used when comparing
after the 1992 instrument redesign. In 2001, the one estimate to another or when comparing estimates
employment questions were revised on the incident over time. Although one estimate may be larger than
form using the Industry and Occupation coding of the another, estimates based on a sample have some degree
1990 SIC/SOC coding system. However, the screening of sampling error. The sampling error of an estimate
questionnaire remained the same. In 2003, the depends on several factors, including the amount of
occupation categories on the incident form were revised variation in the responses and the size of the sample.
based on the 2000 SOC (https://www.bls.gov/soc/2000/ When the sampling error around an estimate is taken
home.htm).20 From 2011 to 2019, the 2010 SOC into account, estimates that appear different may not
(https://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/home.htm) was used to be statistically significant.
classify occupations on the NCVS incident form. One measure of the sampling error associated with
To generate rates of nonfatal workplace violence by an estimate is the standard error. The standard error
occupation, the occupation categories on the incident can vary from one estimate to the next. Generally,
form were collapsed into those used on the screening an estimate with a small standard error provides a
questionnaire. Population estimates were generated more reliable approximation of the true value than an
from the screening questionnaire, and nonfatal estimate with a larger standard error. Estimates with
violent victimizations that occurred in the workplace relatively large standard errors have with less precision
were generated using the collapsed categories from and reliability and should be interpreted with caution.
the incident form. To calculate a rate for a collapsed For complex sample designs, there are several methods
occupation category, the weighted number of nonfatal that can be used to generate standard errors around
violent victimizations that occurred in the workplace a point estimate (e.g., numbers, percentages, and
for that category was divided by its weighted population rates). These include direct variance estimation and
estimate and the result was multiplied by 1,000. generalized variance function (GVF) parameters. In
Revised 2016 NCVS data file this report, GVFs were used for variance estimation of
estimates based on NCVS data.
For 2016, BJS increased the NCVS sample size to
facilitate the ability to produce state-level victimization The U.S. Census Bureau produces GVF parameters
estimates for the 22 most populous states. At the for BJS, which account for aspects of the NCVS’s
same time, the sample was adjusted to reflect the U.S. complex sample design and represent the curve fitted
population counts in the 2010 decennial census. These to a selection of individual standard errors, using a
changes resulted in a historically large number of new specialized version of Balanced Repeated Replication
households and first-time interviews in the first half (BRR) based on Fay’s method.21
of 2016 and produced challenges in comparing 2016 GVFs express the variance as a function of the
results to prior data years. expected value of the survey estimate.22 The GVF
Working with the U.S. Census Bureau, BJS 21Fay, R. E. (1989). Theory and Application of Replicate Weighting
subsequently devised the methodology that was used for Variance Calculations. In Proceedings of the Survey Research
Methods Section, American Statistical Association, 212–217.
20This allowed for the classification of additional occupations on 22Wolter, K. M. (1984). An Investigation of Some Estimators of
the incident form. These additional occupations were classified in Variance for Systematic Sampling. Journal of the American Statistical
the “Other” occupation group in Indicators 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10. Association 79, 781–790.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 46

parameters are generated by fitting estimates and For this report, BJS also calculated a coefficient of
their relative variance to a regression model, using an variation (CV) for all estimates based on NCVS data,
iterative weighted least-squares procedure where the representing the ratio of the standard error to the
weight is the inverse of the square of the predicted estimate. CVs (not shown in tables) provide another
relative variance. For more information on GVFs, measure of reliability and a means for comparing the
see the most recent version of the National Crime precision of estimates across measures with differing
Victimization Survey, 2016: Technical Documentation levels or metrics.
(NCJ 251442, BJS, December 2017). GVF parameters
are available in the codebooks published with the For more information about NCVS, contact the Bureau
NCVS public use files through the National Archive of of Justice Statistics by email (askbjs@usdoj.gov) or by
Criminal Justice Data (www.icpsr.umich.edu/nacjd). phone (202-307-0765).

For estimates based on NCVS data, BJS conducted National Electronic Injury Surveillance System -
statistical tests to determine whether differences in Occupational Supplement
estimated numbers, percentages, and rates in this Data collection
report were statistically significant once sampling
error was taken into account. Using statistical analysis NEISS is administered by the Consumer Product
programs developed specifically for the NCVS, all Safety Commission (CPSC) and used to monitor
comparisons in the text based on NCVS data were injuries related to consumer products. NIOSH
tested for significance. The primary test procedure collaborates with CPSC to collect data through an
was the Student’s t-statistic, which tests the difference occupational supplement called NEISS-Work.23
between two sample estimates. Findings described in These data capture nonfatal work-related injuries
this report as increases or decreases passed a test at among civilian, noninstitutionalized workers treated
either the 0.05 level (95% confidence level) or 0.10 level in emergency departments (EDs). Because the data
(90% confidence level) of significance. Figures and are captured based on ED visits, it is possible that a
tables in this report should be referenced for testing on worker may be treated in the same ED on different
specific findings. dates for different injuries and captured in the data
multiple times. Therefore, these data produce estimates
Estimates and standard errors of the estimates based for the number of work-related injuries, not the
on NCVS data provided in this report may be used to number of injured workers. There is no requirement
generate a confidence interval around the estimate as a for consumer-product involvement for inclusion in
measure of the margin of error. The following example NEISS-Work data.
illustrates how standard errors may be used to generate
confidence intervals: NEISS-Work uses a clustered sample of visits from a
stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United
According to the NCVS, during the aggregate period States and its territories that have a minimum of
2015–19, about 23% of nonfatal workplace violence six beds and operate a 24-hour ED. Hospitals in the
was violent crime excluding simple assault. (See sample were selected from the approximately 5,300
table 6.1.) Using the GVFs, BJS determined that rural and urban U.S. hospitals, after stratification by
the estimated percentage had a standard error of total annual ED visits. The sample of hospitals that
1.4%. (See appendix table 10.) A confidence interval report occupational injuries is a two-thirds subset
around the estimate is generated by multiplying the of the hospital sample used by CPSC to capture
standard error by ±1.96 (the t-score of a normal, product-related injuries for NEISS. Nominally, 67
two-tailed distribution that excludes 2.5% at geographically distributed sample hospitals capture
either end of the distribution). Therefore, the 95% work-related injuries for NEISS-Work every day of
confidence interval around the 23% estimate from the year. Hospital abstractors identify work-related
2015–19 is 23% ± (1.4% × 1.96) or (19.9% to 25.2%). cases from admissions and billing information and
In other words, if BJS used the same sampling reviews of ED charts. NEISS-Work data capture the
method to select different samples and computed an demographics of the injured workers, types of injuries
interval estimate for each sample, it would expect
the true population parameter (percent of nonfatal 23NIOSH collects the occupational injury data through
workplace violence that was violence excluding collaboration with the CPSC. However, there are no implied or
expressed endorsements of the results presented herein by the
simple assault) to fall within the interval estimates CPSC.
95% of the time.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 47

experienced, and parts of the body that were injured. A within the group of 111 (“Intentional injury by other
brief narrative description of the injury incident is also person”). NEISS-Work also captures industry and
captured for each case. occupation information in a text field and efforts to
code industry data to a standardized numeric code are
Data quality and limitations underway. However, the years of data with complete
Each case is assigned a statistical weight based on the codes do not match the years analyzed in this report,
inverse probability of selection. National estimates so an industry-specific analysis was not included.
are obtained by summing weights for all cases or Rates using the NEISS-Work data were calculated
the selected set of cases. Statistical weights are by dividing the number of nonfatal occupational-
adjusted within a sample year to account for hospital related injury ED visits by the corresponding worker
mergers, closings, or withdrawals from NEISS-Work population estimate obtained from BLS’s Current
participation (resulting in fewer than 67 hospitals Population Survey (CPS). The CPS worker population
reporting information) and for incomplete reporting. estimates used were based on hours worked for all jobs.
Statistical weights also are adjusted based on the The quotient was multiplied by 10,000 to present rates
number of U.S. hospitals and their total number of ED per 10,000 full-time equivalent workers, with one FTE
visits as determined by a census of U.S. hospitals 1 year representing 2,000 hours worked per year.
prior to the data collection year. While summing the
weights allows for the calculation of national estimates, NEISS-Work is based on a sample of hospitals and
there are some instances where data may not provide does not count every injury treated in every hospital.
an accurate national representation. This is especially However, because this sample was statistically selected,
likely for data representing small populations or the potential sampling error can be calculated. Error
populations with limited geographical distribution. estimates are based on the 95% confidence interval and
To minimize this likelihood, only results that meet are expressed as a value that should be subtracted from
designated NEISS-Work reporting requirements are the estimate to get the lower bound of the confidence
presented. These requirements specify minimum interval and added to it to get the upper bound. For
thresholds for numbers of raw cases and weighted example, from 2015 to 2019, there were an estimated
estimates, and mandate that estimates must have a 529,000 ED-treated injuries due to workplace violence,
coefficient of variation that is less than 30%. with a 95% confidence interval of ±162,000 cases. (See
table 11.1.) In other words, the true value from this
Workers captured in NEISS-Work are not restricted data source is likely to be in the range of 368,000 to
by age, employer size, or type of employer or industry. 691,000 nonfatal injuries due to workplace violence
However, for this report, ED visits for persons age treated in EDs in the United States from 2015 to 2019.
15 or older were used to be more similar to the other
data sources used in this report. In NEISS-Work, an The 95% confidence interval is an approximation
injury is considered work-related if the patient was based on the classical formula for variance of a total
working for pay or other compensation, performing from a stratified sample. The confidence bounds are
agricultural production activities, or volunteering with approximations of the general magnitude of error
an organized group (e.g., a volunteer fire department). regarding estimates and are not precise values.
Excluded from NEISS-Work are injuries to active-
duty military and institutionalized persons, alcohol For more information about NEISS-Work, contact the
and drug screenings, and revisits to EDs for injuries National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
previously treated in an ED. Also excluded from by email (SMMarsh@cdc.gov).
NEISS-Work are injuries that were treated in other National Vital Statistics System
medical venues or treated by self or colleagues and
never seen in an ED. Data collection
Since 2012, NIOSH has assigned standardized event NVSS is the oldest and most successful example of
and source codes for injuries from BLS’s OIICS to intergovernmental data sharing in public health, and
every NEISS-Work case.24 Cases met the definition the shared relationships, standards, and procedures
of workplace violence and were included in this of NVSS form the mechanism by which the National
document if they were assigned an OIICS event code Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) collects and
24See Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012). Occupational injury and
disseminates the nation’s official vital statistics. These
illness classification manual. http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshoiics.htm.
data are provided through contracts between NCHS

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 48

and vital registration systems operated in the various injuries and illnesses that meet the Occupational Safety
jurisdictions legally responsible for the registration and Health Administration recordkeeping guidelines.
of vital events—births, deaths, marriages, divorces, For cases where the worker required at least 1 full
and fetal deaths. Vital statistics data are also available day before returning to work, respondents provide
online. In the United States, legal authority for the detailed information about the case circumstances and
registration of these events resides individually with characteristics of the injured or ill worker. The SOII
the 50 states, 2 cities (Washington, DC, and New York excludes all work-related fatalities as well as nonfatal
City), and 5 territories (Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, work injuries and illnesses to the self-employed, to
Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of workers on farms with 10 or fewer employees, to
the Northern Mariana Islands). These jurisdictions are private household workers, to volunteers, and to
responsible for maintaining registries of vital events federal government workers.
and for issuing copies of birth, marriage, divorce, and
death certificates. Two data series are produced by the SOII, generally
referred to as the SOII-Annual Summary (SOII-AS) and
Data quality and limitations the SOII-Case and Demographics (SOII-CD). The SOII-
AS reports summary information on industry-level data.
In this report, information on total homicides was The SOII-CD reports case-circumstance and worker-
obtained from the NVSS through the Centers for characteristic information for cases involving days away
Disease Control and Prevention’s Web-based Injury from work. SOII-CD data are a subset of the overall
Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) SOII data series. Detailed information on the SOII
(https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html), methodology can be found in the Handbook of Methods
which is an interactive, online database that provides at https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/soii/home.htm.
data on fatal and nonfatal injuries, violent deaths,
and costs of injuries from a variety of trusted sources, Data quality and limitations
including the NVSS. NVSS data do not require
statistical significance testing and are assumed to Case-circumstance data are coded according to the
be accurate. OIICS. There are two major versions of the OIICS.
The original version of the OIICS was used to code
For more information on the NVSS, contact the data from 1992 to 2010. From 2011 onward, the OIICS
National Center for Health Statistics by email 2.01 was used. The coding structures and rules are
(cdcinfo@cdc.gov) or by phone at (301-458-4000). sufficiently different that data classified under the two
classifications should be compared with caution or
Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - not at all. See http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshoiics.htm for
Case and Demographics additional information on the OIICS.
Data collection Beginning with the 2019 reference year, SOII began
The Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses using the 2018 SOC system for coding occupations.
(SOII) is administered by BLS under the Occupational The SOC 2010 system was used for reference years
Safety and Health Act of 1970. The SOII is a Federal- 2011 through 2018. The SOC 2000 system was used for
State cooperative program to estimate the number reference years 2003 through 2010. Comparisons of
and frequency of nonfatal work-related injuries and estimates using SOC 2018 to previous years under prior
illnesses by industry for the nation, participating states, SOC coding structures should be made with caution.
the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. SOII For more information on the use SOC in SOII, please
results are used by the safety and health community visit https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/soii/concepts.
when deciding how to allocate prevention resources htm#standard-occupational-classification-soc.
among several hundred diverse industries in which The SOII collection excludes establishments in
workers face risks of injury or illness. agricultural production with fewer than 11 employees.
Each year, approximately 200,000 employers report Self-employed persons, private households
for establishments in private industry and the public (NAICS 814), postal workers (NAICS 491), space
sector (state and local government). In-scope cases research and technology (NAICS 927), national
include work-related injuries or illnesses that require security and international affairs (NAICS 928), and
medical care beyond first aid. Respondents provide federal government workers are out of the SOII’s scope.
information on the number of nonfatal workplace The Federal Railroad Administration provides data for

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 49

employees in rail transportation for the SOII. Data for population value. Comparison statements made about
mining operators in coal, metal, and nonmetal mining any two or more SOII-CD estimates were tested for
are provided to BLS by the Mine Safety and Health statistical significance. That is, the upper and lower
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. bounds of the confidence interval were compared.

Estimates from the SOII-CD are based on a For example, in 2019, the total count for violence cases
scientifically selected probability sample rather than a in protective-service occupations was 7,000, with a
census of the entire population. Sampling methodology standard error of 182. (See table 12.1 and appendix
makes it possible to collect data from a sample. table 30.) Multiply the standard error by 1.96 for the
Inferences can be made regarding the characteristics confidence interval, which is ±356.72 cases. There is a
of the population from which the sample was selected. 95% probability that the true estimate will fall between
These sample-based estimates may differ from the 6,643 and 7,357 cases. The concept can also be used
results obtained from a census of the population. The for calculating confidence intervals for incidence rates.
variation in the sample estimates across all possible For example, for the same category, the incidence rate
samples that could have been drawn is measured by is 24.4 cases per 10,000 FTEs and the standard error
the standard error, which may be used to calculate a is 0.63. The confidence interval is 1.96 multiplied by
confidence interval around a sample estimate. 0.63 and results in an approximate confidence interval
of ±1.24. There is a 95% probability that the true
The 95-percent confidence interval is centered on the incidence rate falls between 23.2 and 25.6 cases per
sample estimate and includes all values within 1.96 10,000 FTEs.
times the estimate’s standard error. If several samples
were selected and used to estimate a population For more information about SOII, contact the Bureau
value (such as incidence rates of injury and illness), of Labor Statistics’ Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities
the 95-percent confidence interval would mean that (IIF) program by email (iifstaff@bls.gov) or by phone
one would be 95% certain that the range of these (202-691-6170).
sample-based estimates would include the true

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 50

APPENDIX TABLE 1 APPENDIX TABLE 2
Numbers for cover map: Number of workplace Numbers for figure 1.1: Number of workplace
homicides, by state, 2019 homicides and total homicides, 1992–2019
Number of Number of Year Total Workplace
workplace workplace 1992 25,144 1,044
State homicides State homicides
1993 25,653 1,074
Alabama 19 Montana /
1994 24,547 1,080
Alaska 2 Nebraska /
1995 22,552 1,036
Arizona 5 Nevada 3
1996 20,634 927
Arkansas 4 New Hampshire /
1997 19,491 860
California 50 New Jersey 6
1998 17,893 714
Colorado 3 New Mexico /
1999 16,889 651
Connecticut / New York 16
2000 16,765 677
Delaware 1 North Carolina 21
2001 20,308 643
District of Columbia 6 North Dakota 5
2002 17,638 609
Florida 27 Ohio 14
2003 17,732 632
Georgia 20 Oklahoma 5
2004 17,357 559
Hawaii 2 Oregon 3
2005 18,124 567
Idaho / Pennsylvania 7
2006 18,573 540
Illinois 21 Rhode Island /
2007 18,361 628
Indiana 9 South Carolina /
2008 17,826 526
Iowa 3 South Dakota /
2009 16,799 542
Kansas 4 Tennessee 9
2010 16,259 518
Kentucky 6 Texas 56
2011 16,238 468
Louisiana / Utah 4
2012 16,688 475
Maine / Vermont 1
2013 16,121 404
Maryland 10 Virginia /
2014 15,872 409
Massachusetts 2 Washington 15
2015 17,793 417
Michigan 12 West Virginia /
2016 19,362 500
Minnesota 2 Wisconsin 5
2017 19,510 458
Mississippi 7 Wyoming /
2018 18,830 453
Missouri 8
2019 19,141 454
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries,
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, 1992-2019; and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National
2019. Center Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System for numbers of
deaths, 1992-2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 51

APPENDIX TABLE 3 APPENDIX TABLE 4
Percentages for figure 1.2: Percent of fatal occupational Rates and standard errors for figure 4.1: Rate of
injuries that are workplace homicides, 1992–2019 nonfatal workplace violence and total nonfatal violent
Year Percent crime, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
1992 16.8% Nonfatal workplace violence Total nonfatal violent crime
1993 17.0 Rate per 1,000 Rate per 1,000
1994 16.3 workers age 16 Standard persons age 12 Standard
Year or older error or older error
1995 16.5
1994 31.0 † 1.59 79.9 † 2.23
1996 14.9
1995 28.5 † 1.29 75.3 † 1.88
1997 13.8
1996 26.4 † 1.30 67.7 † 1.85
1998 11.8
1997 23.8 † 1.35 62.9 † 2.03
1999 10.8
1998 21.1 † 1.50 57.6 † 2.38
2000 11.4
1999 17.6 † 1.26 50.6 † 2.08
2001 10.9
2000 15.0 † 1.15 42.3 † 1.81
2002 11.0
2001 12.4 † 0.95 35.0 † 1.49
2003 11.3
2002 9.7 0.89 32.3 † 1.64
2004 9.7
2003 10.2 0.94 32.1 † 1.60
2005 9.9
2004 10.1 0.85 29.9 † 1.31
2006 9.2
2005 9.8 0.78 28.1 † 1.21
2007 11.1
2006 -- -- -- --
2008 10.1
2007 -- -- -- --
2009 11.9
2008 7.9 0.70 26.3 † 1.19
2010 11.0
2009 6.6 † 0.72 23.8 1.20
2011 10.0
2010 6.6 † 0.71 20.8 1.09
2012 10.3
2011 7.3 † 0.70 20.9 1.10
2013 8.8
2012 8.2 0.65 24.4 ‡ 0.98
2014 8.5
2013 8.0 0.76 24.6 ‡ 1.18
2015 8.6
2014 7.9 0.68 21.6 1.00
2016 9.6
2015 7.4 † 0.65 19.3 † 0.88
2017 8.9
2016 7.1 † 0.61 19.1 † 0.82
2018 8.6
2017 7.8 0.56 20.1 ‡ 0.74
2019 8.5
2018 8.2 0.52 21.9 0.74
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries,
1992–2019. 2019* 9.2 0.67 22.1 0.91
Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
--Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other
years. See Criminal Victimization, 2007 (NCJ 224390, BJS, December
2008) for more information on changes to the 2006 National Crime
Victimization Survey.
*Comparison year.
†Difference with comparison year is significant at the 95% confidence level.
‡Difference with comparison year is significant at the 90% confidence level.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 52

APPENDIX TABLE 5 APPENDIX TABLE 6
Rates and standard errors for figure 4.2: Rate of Standard errors for table 5.1: Average annual
nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime, based victimization rate of nonfatal workplace violence, by
on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019 occupation, 2015–19
Violent crime, Rate per 1,000
excluding simple assaulta Simple assault workers age 16
Rate per 1,000 Rate per 1,000 Occupation or older
workers age 16 Standard workers age 16 Standard Total 0.40
Year or older error or older error Medical 1.33
1994 6.4 † 0.48 24.5 † 1.31 Physician 3.48
1995 6.1 † 0.46 22.5 † 1.12 Nurse 2.89
1996 6.5 † 0.48 19.9 † 1.07 Technician 2.92
1997 6.3 † 0.52 17.5 † 1.08 Other 1.21
1998 5.0 † 0.48 16.1 † 1.23 Mental health 5.71
1999 3.4 † 0.37 14.2 † 1.09 Professional (social worker/psychiatrist) 7.87
2000 3.1 † 0.35 11.9 † 0.98 Custodial care 6.54
2001 2.8 † 0.31 9.6 † 0.79 Other 8.49
2002 2.1 0.27 7.6 0.73 Teaching 1.34
2003 2.0 0.27 8.2 0.78 Preschool/elementary 1.80
2004 2.4 0.28 7.8 0.69 Junior high/high school 1.91
2005 2.5 ‡ 0.29 7.3 0.65 College/technical school 2.33
2006 -- -- -- -- Special education facility 9.07
2007 -- -- -- -- Other 4.29
2008 1.5 0.21 6.4 0.61 Law enforcement/security 6.30
2009 1.5 0.24 5.1 † 0.59 Law enforcement officer 9.99
2010 1.4 0.23 5.1 † 0.57 Corrections 19.12
2011 1.0 † 0.18 6.2 0.60 Security guard 12.48
2012 1.1 † 0.17 7.2 0.58 Other 5.69
2013 1.3 ‡ 0.19 6.8 0.66 Retail sales 1.13
2014 1.7 0.24 6.2 0.58 Convenience/liquor store clerk 2.92
2015 1.8 0.23 5.5 † 0.53 Gas station attendant 15.04
2016 1.8 0.24 5.3 † 0.50 Bartender 18.18
2017 1.9 0.20 5.9 † 0.47 Other 1.05
2018 1.8 0.22 6.4 0.42 Transportation 1.79
2019* 1.8 0.21 7.4 0.57 Bus driver 5.47
Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the Taxi cab driver 13.17
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
Other 1.71
--Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other
years. See Criminal Victimization, 2007 (NCJ 224390, BJS, December Other 0.28
2008) for more information on changes to the 2006 National Crime Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
Victimization Survey. 2015–19.
*Comparison year.
†Difference with comparison year is significant at the 95% confidence level.
‡Difference with comparison year is significant at the 90% confidence level.
aIncludes rape/sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault, and
excludes simple assault.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 53

APPENDIX TABLE 7
Standard errors for table 5.2: Average annual rate and percent of nonfatal workplace violence and percent of
workers, by occupation group and employee type, 2015–19
Government Private sector
Percent of nonfatal Percent of nonfatal
Rate per 1,000 workers workplace violence Rate per 1,000 workers workplace violence
Occupation group age 16 or older against workers age 16 or older against workers
Total 1.31 ~ 0.36 ~
Medical 5.55 2.0% 1.13 1.6%
Mental health 12.37 1.4 5.38 0.8
Teaching 1.76 2.3 0.86 0.3
Law enforcement/security 6.99 2.6 9.60 1.0
Retail sales 7.52 0.2 1.14 1.5
Transportation 3.29 0.5 1.95 1.0
Other 0.73 1.7 0.29 2.2
~Not applicable.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2015–19.

APPENDIX TABLE 8 APPENDIX TABLE 9

Standard errors for table 5.3: Average annual rate of Standard errors for table 5.4: Victim-offender
nonfatal workplace violence, by victim characteristics, relationship in nonfatal workplace violence, by sex of
2015–19 victim, 2015–19
Rate per 1,000 workers Victim-offender relationship Total Male Female
Victim characteristic age 16 or older Intimate partner 0.4% ~ 0.7%
Total 0.40 Other relative 0.2% 0.3% 0.3%
Sex Well-known/casual acquaintance 1.1% 1.0% 1.8%
Male 0.48 Work 1.6% 1.8% 2.2%
Female 0.53 Customer/client 0.8 0.9 1.2
Race/Hispanic origin Patient 0.8 0.7 1.4
White 0.51 Supervisor 0.5 0.8 0.6
Black 0.64 Employee 0.3 0.4 0.4
Hispanic/Latino 0.51 Coworker 0.8 1.1 1.1
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0.95 Stranger 1.9% 2.4% 2.4%
American Indian/Alaska Native 3.12 Unknown 1.1% 1.7% 1.1%
Two or more races 3.39
Average annual number
Age of victimizations 109,827 71,880 68,695
16–19 1.10 ~Not applicable.
20–24 1.05 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
25–34 0.75 2015–19.
35–49 0.60
50–64 0.52
65 or older 0.68 APPENDIX TABLE 10
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 Standard errors for table 6.1: Rate and percent of
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, nonfatal workplace violence, by type of crime, 2015–19
2015–19. Rate per 1,000
Average workers age 16
Type of crime annual number or older Percent
Total 109,827 0.40 ~
Violent crime, excluding
simple assault 39,245 0.14 1.4%
Rape/sexual assault 16,595 0.05 0.6
Robbery 12,989 0.04 0.5
Aggravated assault 29,831 0.10 1.1
Simple assault 93,107 0.34 1.7%
~Not applicable.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 54

APPENDIX TABLE 11 APPENDIX TABLE 13
Standard errors for table 6.2: Season and time of day of Percentages and standard errors for figure 7.1:
nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19 Nonfatal workplace violence reported to police, based
Season and time of day Percent on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
Season Year Percent Standard error
Winter 1.5% 1994 40% 2.2%
Spring 1.6 1995 38 1.9
Summer 1.5 1996 36 1.9
Fall 1.6 1997 33 † 2.1
Time of day 1998 32 † 2.7
Morning (after 6:00 a.m.–noon) 1.5% 1999 37 2.7
Afternoon (after noon–6 p.m.) 1.8 2000 38 3.0
Evening (after 6 p.m.–midnight) 1.3 2001 43 3.1
Night (after midnight–6 a.m.) 0.9 2002 42 3.6
Unknown 1.1 2003 40 3.5
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 2004 42 3.5
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2005 37 3.2
2015–19. 2006 -- --
2007 -- --
2008 38 3.4
APPENDIX TABLE 12 2009 26 † 3.9
Standard errors for table 6.3: Percent of nonfatal 2010 27 † 3.7
workplace violence occurring in restricted areas, by 2011 33 ‡ 3.5
occupation group, 2015–19 2012 34 ‡ 3.1
Occupation group Percent 2013 35 3.6
Total 1.9% 2014 29 † 3.0
Medical 3.6 2015 28 † 3.1
Mental health 5.0 2016 36 3.3
Teaching 3.7 2017 37 2.8
Law enforcement/security 3.6 2018 41 2.5
Retail sales 2.7 2019* 41 2.8
Transportation 4.6 Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
Other 2.8 Excludes victims working in law enforcement and security occupations.
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 Includes police reporting by the victims and others including
someone official.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19. --Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other
years. See Criminal Victimization, 2007 (NCJ 224390, BJS, December
2008) for more information on changes to the 2006 National Crime
Victimization Survey.
*Comparison year.
†Difference with comparison year is significant at the 95% confidence level.
‡Difference with comparison year is significant at the 90% confidence level.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 55

APPENDIX TABLE 14 APPENDIX TABLE 16
Standard errors for table 7.1: Nonfatal workplace Standard errors for table 7.3: How police were notified
violence reported to police, by victim characteristics of nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19
and type of crime, 2015–19 How police were notified Percent
Victim characteristic and type of crime Percent Victim 2.9%
Total 2.0% Someone official other than police 2.1
Sex Someone else 1.5
Male 2.6% Police at scene 1.8
Female 2.4 Other 0.8
Race/Hispanic origin Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
White 2.1% 2015–19.
Black 5.6
Hispanic/Latino 5.1
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 5.8 APPENDIX TABLE 17
American Indian/Alaska Native 18.0 Standard errors for table 7.4: Most important reasons
Two or more races 7.7 for reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police,
Age 2015–19
16–19 6.0% Most important reason for reporting Percent
20–24 4.5 Crime reported by victim 2.9%
25–34 3.1 To get help with this incident 2.0
35–49 3.0 Because it was a crime 1.9
50–64 3.7 To get offender 1.9
65 or older 7.6 To let police know 0.7
Type of crime To recover loss 0.4
Violent crime, excluding simple assault 3.2% Other 1.1
Rape/sexual assault 7.0 Crime not reported by victim 2.9%
Robbery 6.3 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
Aggravated assault 3.8 2015–19.
Simple assault 2.1
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19. APPENDIX TABLE 18
Standard errors for table 7.5: Most important reasons
for not reporting nonfatal workplace violence to police,
APPENDIX TABLE 15 2015–19
Standard errors for table 7.2: Nonfatal workplace Most important reason for not reporting Percent
violence reported to police, by occupation group, Reported to another official 2.4%
2015–19 Not important enough to respondent 1.6
Occupation group Percent Police would not help 1.2
Total 2.0% Personal matter 1.0
Medical 3.5 Other 2.1
Mental health 5.4 Unknown 0.8
Teaching 4.7 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
Retail sales 4.5 2015–19.
Transportation 5.9
Other 2.7
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 56

APPENDIX TABLE 19 APPENDIX TABLE 20
Standard errors for table 8.1: Nonfatal workplace Percentages and standard errors for figure 9.1:
violence, by offender characteristics and number of Offender weapon possession in nonfatal workplace
offenders, 2015–19 violence, based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
Offender characteristic and number of offenders Percent Weapon No weapon Unknown
Sex Standard Standard Standard
Male 1.9% Year Percent error Percent error Percent error
Female 1.4 1994 18% ‡ 1.4% 77% 1.7% 5% 0.7%
Both 0.6 1995 18 † 1.2 75 1.6 6 0.7
Unknown 1.1 1996 20 † 1.3 74 ‡ 1.7 6 0.7
Race/Hispanic origin 1997 22 † 1.6 69 † 2.0 9 1.0
White 1.8% 1998 21 † 1.9 68 † 2.5 11 † 1.4
Black 1.4 1999 16 1.7 75 2.4 8 1.2
Hispanic/Latino 1.2 2000 17 1.9 76 2.5 7 1.1
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0.3 2001 19 ‡ 2.0 75 2.6 6 1.0
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.2 2002 17 2.3 77 3.0 5 1.2
Multiple races 0.6 2003 16 2.1 79 2.9 5 1.1
Unknown 1.5 2004 20 † 2.3 76 2.8 5 1.0
Age 2005 22 † 2.3 75 2.7 4† 0.9
17 or younger 1.1% 2006 -- -- -- -- -- --
18–20 0.6 2007 -- -- -- -- -- --
21–29 1.3 2008 15 2.0 82 2.6 3† 0.9
30 or older 1.9 2009 13 2.5 85 3.1 2† 1.0
Mixed age group 0.6 2010 15 2.5 82 3.2 3† 0.9
Unknown 1.3 2011 12 1.9 79 2.9 8 1.5
Number of offenders 2012 11 1.6 81 2.5 8 1.4
Single offender 1.5% 2013 14 2.1 81 2.9 5 1.3
Multiple offenders 0.9 2014 17 2.1 78 2.7 5 1.1
Unknown 1.0 2015 16 2.2 81 2.7 3† 0.9
2016 18 2.3 80 2.7 2† 0.6
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827
2017 19 2.0 76 2.4 6 1.1
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19. 2018 15 ‡ 1.5 78 2.1 7 1.0
2019* 14 1.7 79 2.3 7 1.1
Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and 1994).
--Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other
years. See Criminal Victimization, 2007 (NCJ 224390, BJS, December
2008) for more information on changes to the 2006 National Crime
Victimization Survey.
*Comparison year.
†Difference with comparison year is significant at the 95% confidence level.
‡Difference with comparison year is significant at the 90% confidence level.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 57

APPENDIX TABLE 21 APPENDIX TABLE 24
Standard errors for table 9.1: Offender weapon Percentages and standard errors for figure 10.1:
possession during nonfatal workplace violence, by Nonfatal workplace violence resulting in victim injury,
weapon type, 2015–19 based on 2-year rolling averages, 1994–2019
Weapon type Percent Year Percent Standard error
No weapon 1.6% 1994 11% 1.1%
Weapon 1.3% 1995 11 0.9
Firearm 0.7 1996 12 1.0
Knife 0.8 1997 13 1.2
Other 0.6 1998 13 1.5
Unknown weapon type 0.2 1999 11 1.4
Unknown whether offender had weapon 0.7% 2000 11 1.5
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 2001 12 1.6
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2002 16 2.2
2015–19. 2003 13 1.9
2004 12 1.8
2005 14 1.9
APPENDIX TABLE 22 2006 -- --
Standard errors for table 9.2: Offender weapon 2007 -- --
possession in nonfatal workplace violence, by type of 2008 12 1.8
crime, 2015–19 2009 11 2.3
Type of crime Percent 2010 11 2.0
Total 1.3% 2011 10 1.7
Violent crime, excluding simple assault 2.8% 2012 14 1.9
Rape/sexual assault 3.4 2013 16 2.3
Robbery 6.1 2014 14 1.9
Aggravated assault 1.3 2015 17 2.2
Simple assault ~ 2016 14 2.0
~Not applicable. 2017 9 1.4
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2018 13 1.4
2015–19. 2019* 12 1.6
Note: Estimates are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the
most recent year (e.g., a 1994 estimate includes data for 1993 and
1994). The National Crime Victimization Survey defines victim injury as a
APPENDIX TABLE 23 measure of whether bodily hurt or damage was sustained by the victim
Standard errors for table 9.3: Percent of nonfatal as a result of criminal victimization. Victim injury is not determined by
workplace violence involving an offender with a the receipt of medical treatment.
weapon, by occupation group, 2015–19 --Estimates that include 2006 data should not be compared to other
years. See Criminal Victimization, 2007 (NCJ 224390, BJS, December
Occupation group Percent 2008) for more information on changes to the 2006 National Crime
Total 1.3% Victimization Survey.
Medical 2.1 *Comparison year.
Mental health 4.2 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
1994–2019.
Teaching 3.0
Law enforcement/security 2.4
Retail sales 3.7 APPENDIX TABLE 25
Transportation 5.1
Standard errors for table 10.1: Injury type in nonfatal
Other 1.9
workplace violence, 2015–19
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 Injury type Percent
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, Not injured 1.3%
2015–19.
Injured 1.1%
Serious 0.4
Minor 1.0
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 58

APPENDIX TABLE 26 APPENDIX TABLE 28
Standard errors for table 10.2: Injury and medical Rates and standard errors for figure 12.1: Incidence
treatment for victims of nonfatal workplace violence, rate for occupational injuries and illnesses with days
2015–19 away from work resulting from workplace violence in
Injury/treatment Percent private industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury
Not injured 1.3% by other persons in private industry (2011–2019), per
Injured 1.1% 10,000 FTEs, 1992–2019
Not treated 0.7 Year Rate Standard error
Treated 0.8 1992 2.9 0.04
Unknown <0.1 1993 2.7 0.03
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827 1994 2.5 0.04
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1995 2.8 0.04
2015–19. 1996 2.2 0.04
1997 2.5 0.05
1998 2.0 0.04
APPENDIX TABLE 27 1999 1.8 0.04
Standard errors for table 10.3: Percent of nonfatal 2000 2.0 0.04
workplace violence resulting in victim injury, by 2001 1.9 0.04
occupation group, 2015–19 2002 2.1 0.04
Occupation group Percent 2003 1.9 0.04
Total 1.1% 2004 2.0 0.04
Medical 2.9 2005 1.6 0.03
Mental health 3.0 2006 1.7 0.03
Teaching 3.8 2007 1.8 0.03
Law enforcement/security 2.2 2008 1.7 0.03
Retail sales 2.1 2009 1.7 0.03
Transportation 3.1 2010 2.0 0.03
Other 1.3 2011 1.3 0.02
2012 1.4 0.03
Average annual number of victimizations 109,827
2013 1.5 0.03
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
2015–19. 2014 1.7 0.03
2015 1.7 0.03
2016 1.7 0.03
2017 1.9 0.03
2018 2.1 0.03
2019 2.0 0.03
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 1992–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 59

APPENDIX TABLE 29
Numbers and standard errors for figure 12.2: Number
of occupational injuries and illnesses with days away
from work resulting from workplace violence in private
industry (1992–2010) and intentional injury by other
persons in private industry (2011–2019), 1992–2019
Year Number Standard error
1992 22,396 291
1993 21,254 255
1994 20,439 327
1995 22,956 367
1996 18,538 352
1997 21,329 405
1998 17,589 352
1999 16,644 333
2000 18,418 350
2001 17,214 361
2002 18,104 344
2003 16,560 331
2004 17,670 353
2005 14,560 306
2006 15,970 240
2007 16,840 269
2008 16,330 278
2009 15,450 278
2010 16,910 254
2011 11,690 222
2012 12,780 230
2013 13,800 248
2014 15,980 272
2015 16,160 275
2016 16,890 287
2017 18,400 294
2018 20,790 333
2019 20,870 334
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 1992–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 60

APPENDIX TABLE 30
Standard errors for table 12.1: Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with days
away from work resulting from workplace violence, by occupation, 2015–2019
Rate Number
Occupation 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 452 465 510 521 499
Management 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.09 0.10 53 56 73 74 78
Business/financial operations 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 27 17 19 24 23
Life/physical/social science 0.13 0.23 0.10 0.27 0.14 13 19 10 27 14
Community/social service 0.63 0.69 0.62 0.50 0.51 99 110 101 98 90
Counselors/social workers/other community/
social-service specialists 0.66 0.71 0.64 0.52 0.52 99 110 101 98 89
Education/training/library 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.30 153 144 155 167 194
Preschool/primary/secondary/special-education
school teachers 0.27 0.25 0.30 0.25 0.33 90 86 100 99 114
Other teachers/instructors / / 0.56 0.55 0.41 42 30 40 53 30
Other / / 0.96 0.98 1.15 110 109 104 123 145
Arts/design/entertainment/sports/media 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.09 16 12 11 13 9
Healthcare practitioners/technical 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.27 145 154 157 177 183
Health diagnosing/treating practitioners 0.25 0.27 0.25 0.26 0.30 101 110 107 124 130
Health technologists/technicians 0.42 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.54 96 106 104 115 121
Other 0.90 1.00 1.17 1.64 / 11 13 16 24 21
Healthcare support 0.56 0.52 0.58 0.48 0.47 168 158 179 167 228
Nursing/psychiatric/home-health aides 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.82 / 159 158 170 164 222
Protective service 0.71 0.73 0.67 0.62 0.63 194 199 185 198 182
Supervisors of protective-service workers 2.26 2.01 2.24 1.35 1.46 56 49 57 44 44
Law-enforcement workers 1.55 1.66 1.40 1.33 1.32 166 177 149 161 142
Other 0.75 0.69 0.76 0.70 0.81 81 74 83 87 92
Food preparation/serving-related 0.08 0.05 0.05 / 0.05 66 43 36 42 42
Building/grounds cleaning/maintenance 0.08 0.09 0.13 0.09 0.11 25 30 44 33 39
Personal care/service 0.39 0.37 0.34 / 0.26 115 112 118 133 57
Supervisors of personal care/service workers 0.57 0.72 0.54 1.53 0.69 8 14 10 40 15
Entertainment attendants/related workers / 0.33 0.27 0.66 0.29 / 11 9 25 8
Other 0.64 0.59 0.50 0.45 / 114 109 115 123 54
Sales/related 0.04 0.05 0.06 / 0.06 48 57 64 50 61
Office/administrative support 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 52 49 47 56 60
Farming/fishing/forestry / / 0.12 / / / / 12 13 /
Construction/extraction 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 13 37 19 23 22
Installation/maintenance/repair 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.05 20 20 43 22 25
Production 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 19 23 15 30 18
Transportation/material moving / 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 63 66 72 84 97
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 61

APPENDIX TABLE 31
Standard errors for table 12.2: Incidence rate and number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses with
days away from work resulting from workplace violence, by victim characteristics and length of service of victim,
2015–2019
Rate Number
Victim characteristic and length of service 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 452 465 510 521 499
Sex
Male 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 257 256 268 262 271
Female 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 326 322 355 380 396
Age
16–19 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.18 39 43 41 42 46
20–24 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.15 108 113 125 125 140
25–34 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.09 218 221 215 225 240
35–44 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 194 187 204 195 216
45–54 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.08 189 177 187 207 193
55–64 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 136 132 148 154 171
65 and over 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.16 0.12 61 59 64 89 73
Length of service
Less than 3 months / / / / / 88 102 97 111 120
3–11 months / / / / / 147 163 176 172 188
1–5 years / / / / / 239 245 268 281 286
More than 5 years / / / / / 277 248 273 273 263
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

APPENDIX TABLE 32 APPENDIX TABLE 33

Standard errors for table 12.3: Number of nonfatal Standard errors for table 12.4: Number of nonfatal
occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from
work resulting from workplace violence, by victim- work resulting from workplace violence, by event or
offender relationship and sex of victim, 2019 exposure and sex of victim, 2019
Victim-offender relationship Total Male Female Event or Exposure Total Male Female
Total 499 271 396 Total 499 271 396
Person, other than injured/ Intentional shooting by other person 38 35 16
ill worker, unspecified 54 47 22 Stabbing/cutting/slashing/piercing 42 37 21
Coworker/work associate 74 61 38 Hitting/kicking/beating/shoving 484 250 360
Coworker 64 52 36 Strangulation by other person 29 17 24
Former coworker 29 25 / Rape/sexual assault 9 / 9
Work associate 11 11 10 Threat/verbal assault 61 17 58
Coworker/work associate, NEC 13 11 / Multiple violent acts by other person 22 16 12
Student 208 73 198 Intentional injury by other person, not
Patient 308 157 253 elsewhere classified 99 66 71
Other client/customer 139 90 105 Intentional injury by other person,
Assailant/suspect/inmate 183 143 105 unspecified 29 19 15
Robber 59 29 52 /Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Inmate/detainee in custody 126 109 64 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2019.
Suspect not yet apprehended 70 60 36
Assailant/suspect, NEC 54 34 42
Person, other than injured/
ill worker, NEC 45 42 16
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 62

APPENDIX TABLE 34 APPENDIX TABLE 36
Standard errors for table 12.5: Number of nonfatal Standard errors for table 13.1: Socio-emotional
occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from problems due to nonfatal workplace violence, 2015–19
work resulting from workplace violence, by part of Socio-emotional problem Percent
body, 2015–2019 Emotional distress
Part of body 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 None 1.7%
Total 452 465 510 521 499 Mild 1.9
Head 211 213 226 250 264 Moderate 1.6
Eye 73 60 69 82 73 Severe 1.3
Neck 66 72 74 75 80 Work/school problems 1.5%
Trunk 131 135 142 139 151 Family/friend relationship problems 1.1%
Back 80 89 95 85 92 Average annual number of victimizations 109,827
Upper extremities 195 186 197 192 212 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey,
Shoulder 84 80 81 81 88 2015–19.
Arm 90 86 92 81 100
Wrist 66 62 63 65 80
Hand 103 106 108 108 101
Lower extremities 118 111 106 116 120
Knee 81 74 77 86 85
Ankle 37 37 35 34 39
Foot 35 33 30 32 32
Toe, toenail 10 10 12 15 11
Body systems 56 55 58 63 74
Multiple 186 190 200 195 184
All other 29 25 42 44 40
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

APPENDIX TABLE 35
Standard errors for table 12.6: Number of nonfatal
occupational injuries and illnesses with days away from
work resulting from workplace violence, by nature of
injury or illness, 2015–2019
Nature of injury or illness 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total 452 465 510 521 499
Fractures 96 92 82 88 95
Sprains/strains/tears 172 177 173 161 176
Cuts/lacerations/
punctures 98 98 103 102 118
Cuts/lacerations 76 68 62 72 68
Punctures (except
gunshot wounds) 60 68 80 70 95
Bruises/contusions 178 180 184 198 194
Chemical burns/corrosions / / / 10 /
Heat (thermal) burns 9 8 / / 12
Multiple traumatic injuries 101 83 92 114 114
With sprains/other 74 55 63 82 92
With fractures/other 24 18 24 34 20
Soreness/pain 187 188 207 219 225
Tendonitis / / 9 19 /
All other 167 175 189 182 200
/Not reported, or data do not meet publication criteria.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses - Case and Demographics, 2015–2019.

INDICATORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, 2019 | JULY 2022 63

The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice is the
principal federal agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal
victimization, criminal offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime,
and the operation of criminal and civil justice systems at the federal, state,
tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, analyzes, and disseminates reliable
statistics on crime and justice systems in the United States, supports
improvements to state and local criminal justice information systems, and
participates with national and international organizations to develop and
recommend national standards for justice statistics. Doris J. James is the
acting director.

This report was written by Erika Harrell, Lynn Langton, Stephen M.

Pegula, Mark Zak, Jeremy Petosa, Susan Derk, Dan Hartley, and Audrey
Reichard. Rachel Morgan, Grace Kena, and Jennifer Truman from BJS;
Nicole Dangermond, Samuel Kissinger, Julie Krautter, Samuel Myett, Mary
Zhulkie, Colin Emberland, Erin Huband, and Daniel Markelon from BLS;
and Suzanne Marsh from NIOSH verified the report.

Eric Hendrixson and David Fialkoff edited the report. Carrie Epps-Carey
produced the report.

July 2022, NCJ 250748; NIOSH 2022-124

Office of Justice Programs

Building Solutions • Supporting Communities • Advancing Justice
www�ojp�gov