# The Glass Protection in front of VAC offices



## maniac (27 Nov 2012)

Does anyone know the reason/history of this?  There is no other federal department in Canada that has this.  This appears as a barrier to protect the employee from veterans.  I hope that is not the answer, since you can get the same service at Service Canada and not have that glass barrier as your start point.


----------



## GAP (27 Nov 2012)

Probably someone's version of the good idea fairy.....


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Nov 2012)

maniac said:
			
		

> Does anyone know the reason/history of this?  There is no other federal department in Canada that has this.  This appears as a barrier to protect the employee from veterans.  I hope that is not the answer, since you can get the same service at Service Canada and not have that glass barrier as your start point.


It allows them to ignore you in person, the way they ignore you by mail and phone calls.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Nov 2012)

maniac said:
			
		

> .... There is no other federal department in Canada that has this ....


Not so - I work in a federal government regional office (not VAC) where there's a piece of glass in front of the receptionist, who deals with the public all the time, and I'm pretty sure other offices with the same department in other parts of the country have similar set-ups.


----------



## maniac (27 Nov 2012)

OK,  I suppose some Federal departments might be working with prisoners, mh issues and other reasons for security but Veteran Affairs Canada?  Is the presumption that we all have mh issues that have proven to be threatening to VAC employees?  I just think this is something from the old VAC days that is residual and needs to go.


----------



## Journeyman (27 Nov 2012)

It may be intended to protect veterans from VAC employees and _their_ mental health issues.   :nod:


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Nov 2012)

maniac said:
			
		

> OK,  I suppose some Federal departments might be working with prisoners, mh issues and other reasons for security but Veteran Affairs Canada?  Is the presumption that we all have mh issues that have proven to be threatening to VAC employees?  I just think this is something from the old VAC days that is residual and needs to go.


If I were asked to do a risk assessment, I'd have to say the risk to workers dealing with the public where said public (those with OR without mental health issues) could get p***ed off because of denied benefits would NOT be zero.  For example, I wonder how many provincial welfare offices have a similiar setup?



			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> It may be intended to protect veterans from VAC employees and _their_ mental health issues.   :nod:


Never thought of _that_....


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Nov 2012)

They did the same at Transport Canada's offices. None of the staff wanted it.


----------



## mariomike (27 Nov 2012)

From the Veterans Affairs Canada Occupational Health and Safety Audit ( 2004 ).

"2.6.2 Training on Dealing with Difficult Situations 
One of the potential dangers of working at Veterans Affairs Canada is that a disgruntled individual will threaten self-harm or harm to VAC staff.":
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/department/reports/deptaudrep/ohs_audit#difficult


----------



## Bluebulldog (27 Nov 2012)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> If I were asked to do a risk assessment, I'd have to say the risk to workers dealing with the public where said public (those with OR without mental health issues) could get p***ed off because of denied benefits would NOT be zero.  For example, I wonder how many provincial welfare offices have a similiar setup?
> Never thought of _that_....



Many social services office here in ON have the same setup for the very reason cited. All it takes is one very p*ssed off individual to reach across the counter, or get in an employee's face, and the employer has a duty to ensure the safety of their staff.

Sadly, this is the state of the nation, and is actually being done as a design consideration in many new build projects.


----------



## GK .Dundas (27 Nov 2012)

I have worked in the security field for a while now .And I can assure you that just about every building that has security measures in place have them for a very good reason .The sad fact is that there are some people who are both deeply disturbed and violent.
 In every major office building I have worked I have dealt with people who are addicted to drugs or and alcohol.Some have emotional issues or are mentally ill. Some have marital or parental issues . 
 I have seen 3" binders just filled with photos and warnings and restraining orders .
 Most of the buildings I have worked I suspect that most of the physical infrastructure (door,locks etc.)   might only delay someone who was truly determined . Reality is security is not cheap but most building management companies are. There are also been a few who weren't and I count myself privileged to have had a chance to work for them.
 Here in Winnipeg a few years back a guy drove his car into the lobby of The Workman's Compensation Board Building . It also if memory serves something similar has happened not once but at least twice on Parliament Hill.


----------



## Nemo888 (27 Nov 2012)

I have talked to some of the front line workers. They have admitted to me they are genuinely scared right now. Look at the US Postal Service. Disgruntled veteran is right up there with meth addicted  biker and exwife after she finds out you slept with her sister.


----------



## GK .Dundas (27 Nov 2012)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> I have talked to some of the front line workers. They have admitted to me they are genuinely scared right now. Look at the US Postal Service. Disgruntled veteran is right up there with meth addicted  biker and exwife after she finds out you slept with her sister.


 Hey I warned you about that  but you wouldn't listen!  
 Seriously though  you are right they are scared and the abuse they take is just incredible I have actually wondered how many of the VAC front line types will eventually be diagnosed with PTSD themselves.
I have worked  a couple of places where one of my duties was was standby during some client interviews where if need be I would have to physically intervene...........


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Nov 2012)

When I worked in CCG, the main threats and bomb threat's, complete with nasty notes, stuck to the walls with a knife and suspicious packages in the stairwells came from disgruntled employees. aimed at the compensation unit, which was not surprising at all. Their idea of a Christmas present was clawing back an overpayment on Dec 15th without notice. the safety glass will prevent the customer getting blood splatter when the employee loses it after hearing just one to many "transitional change messages".


----------



## Danjanou (27 Nov 2012)

Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> Many social services office here in ON have the same setup for the very reason cited.



Oh yeah and they really work to :sarcasm:

Sometimes the glass itself and the perception it brings is what sets off a potentially violent client/situation. It can also add to a false sense of security for the staff and restrict other courses of action such as hitting the panic button and/or gettign the hell outta Dodge. Then again what do I know. 8)


----------



## Bluebulldog (28 Nov 2012)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Oh yeah and they really work to :sarcasm:
> 
> Sometimes the glass itself and the perception it brings is what sets off a potentially violent client/situation. It can also add to a false sense of security for the staff and restrict other courses of action such as hitting the panic button and/or gettign the hell outta Dodge. Then again what do I know. 8)



I don't make design decisions, I simply build them. I'm in agreement. Rather than spending $1000s on barriers in the construction process, it is a far better approach to train staff to deal with difficult, and possible threats through non-violent means, and techniques to diffuse these. I also agree that barriers can be a catalyst to more agressive behaviour.

Unforunately the employer has a duty to see that staff are safe, and indeed FEEL safe. in the public sector if a segment identified that they often felt unsafe while deling with clients, then away we go with spending taxpayer dollars to build a fort..........


----------



## mariomike (28 Nov 2012)

Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> Rather than spending $1000s on barriers in the construction process, it is a far better approach to train staff to deal with difficult, and possible threats  through non-violent means, and techniques to diffuse these.



( Highlight mine. )

For most employees, if threatened, perhaps retreat ( if possible ) may also be a successful safety strategy.

( For some, S.O.P. prohibits delay of service unless weapons are involved, or there is continuing violence on scene. )



			
				Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> Unforunately the employer has a duty to see that staff are safe, and indeed FEEL safe.



Perhaps that is not such a bad thing.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (28 Nov 2012)

A far less sinister explanation would be that it is a precautionary measure against infectious diseases (from people coughing, hacking, sneezing, etc).


----------



## Danjanou (28 Nov 2012)

Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> I don't make design decisions, I simply build them. I'm in agreement. Rather than spending $1000s on barriers in the construction process, it is a far better approach to train staff to deal with difficult, and possible threats through non-violent means, and techniques to diffuse these. I also agree that barriers can be a catalyst to more agressive behaviour.
> 
> Unforunately the employer has a duty to see that staff are safe, and indeed FEEL safe. in the public sector if a segment identified that they often felt unsafe while deling with clients, then away we go with spending taxpayer dollars to build a fort..........



Seen.  Having done 23 years at the coal face I find they are often counterproductive. More time, effort and money spent  providing proper training such as CPI courses http://www.crisisprevention.com/Specialties/Nonviolent-Crisis-Intervention  would be more cost effective in the long term.  Of course working to eliminate the "threat" in the first place would be nice too. But that ain't going to happen in my lifetime, which is good because I need the paycheque.



			
				Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> A far less sinister explanation would be that it is a precautionary measure against infectious diseases (from people coughing, hacking, sneezing, etc).



Yes and no, although new staff are told that (along with the glass is bullet proof). The holes/openings to allow communication pass through documents etc kind of defeat this .  Mind our entire H1N! strategy was to issued every front line worker a small bottle of hand gel a week.  :


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Nov 2012)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Mind our entire H1N! strategy was to issued every front line worker a small bottle of hand gel a week.  :



Ours was written by a worker pretty much on his own time,.....................when our *cough* Deputy Superindentant*cough* saw me walking with a box of paper masks from stores she had the shift I/C come down and try and shit on me because "if his unit has them all the units will expect them". :tempertantrum:


----------



## mariomike (28 Nov 2012)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Mind our entire H1N! strategy was to issued every front line worker a small bottle of hand gel a week.  :





			
				Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Ours was written by a worker pretty much on his own time,.....................when our *cough* Deputy Superindentant*cough* saw me walking with a box of paper masks from stores she had the shift I/C come down and try and shit on me because "if his unit has them all the units will expect them". :tempertantrum:



During SARS1, 436 of Toronto's 850 paramedics were placed on a 10-day working quarantine. 

During SARS2, over 400 more ( for some, it was their second time ) were placed on another 10-day working quarantine.

That meant full isolation when we got home. Continuously wearing an N95 respirator. Even with the N95 on, you had to stay at least 3 metres away from your family.

As per the Collective Agreement, during the working quarantine we were paid double-time. 

SARS-like illnesses developed in 62 Toronto paramedics, and suspected or probable SARS requiring hospitalization developed in 4 others.


----------



## Bluebulldog (29 Nov 2012)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> A far less sinister explanation would be that it is a precautionary measure against infectious diseases (from people coughing, hacking, sneezing, etc).



I actually pictured someone working at a public counter under a buffet style sneeze guard.......


----------



## Bluebulldog (29 Nov 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Perhaps that is not such a bad thing.



Sorry Mike, I read my post and realize that it came off a bit wrong. Ensuring employee safety is indeed a responsibility, and a good thing.

Spending taxpayer dollars on knee jerk reactions, to concerns, or feelings, without proper anaysis is not. I have seen far too many of these done.

I'm with Danjanou on his post. CPI training for any front line staff should be the first strategy employed by any employer. Giving a member of staff the tools to resolve confict themselves often gives a level of competence and confidence, that no glass bubble will fix.


----------



## Danjanou (29 Nov 2012)

Yup bringing someone into what looks like a prison style environment and then expecting them to not act out is optimistic even by "holistic" social engineering standards. :

Had a case years ago they put a jail release in a high tech interview booth basically a small narrow room with two chairs and a desk with a Plexiglas shield down the centre dividing it into two parts.  Of course he was automatically directed to that room because he had been incarcerated and that saw the SOP. Person seeing him left him in there while they went to get some paper work or whatever and when they came back he was whigging out, banging the glass, screaming etc. Panic button pressed and security called to remove the guy. A review of his file would have shown he was claustrophobic and should never have been in there in the first place let alone left alone for even a couple of minutes. Common sense and some basic prep work are often not the hallmark of those who serve our most vulnerable members of society it seems.


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Nov 2012)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> *Common sense and some basic prep work* are often not the hallmark of those who serve our most vulnerable members of society it seems.


And for those who don't do the bit in yellow, you get the solutions that assume NOBODY does the bits in yellow.


----------



## the 48th regulator (29 Nov 2012)

I remember some of the shenanigans, and things I said to VAC as I fought the system over the years, that a Glass window was needed.  I have known of guys showing up with swords, knives guns, and even handcuffing themselves to chairs.

They are dealing with injured people, that have been trained to destroy the enemy, and if the members perceives VAC as the enemy....

I remember telling one gal, and this was just after the Oklahoma bombing, that VAC was lucky that I did not have a license to drive.  When she asked why, I told her "Have you not been watching the news lady??  That was a government building you know!"  Luckily, she didn't alert the authorities!

dileas

tess


----------



## Danjanou (29 Nov 2012)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I remember some of the shenanigans, and things I said to VAC as I fought the system over the years, that a Glass window was needed.  I have known of guys showing up with swords, knives guns, and even handcuffing themselves to chairs.
> 
> They are dealing with injured people, that have been trained to destroy the enemy, and if the members perceives VAC as the enemy....
> 
> ...



The highlighted part is important. A sheet of plexiglass ain't going to stop a bullet , a sword or even a fist. Ensuring the poor guy in front of you does not preceive you as *the enemy* may.


----------



## mariomike (29 Nov 2012)

This discussion reminds me of the counter service scene in a Michael Douglas movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eREiQhBDIk


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Nov 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> This discussion reminds me of the counter service scene in a Michael Douglas movie:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eREiQhBDIk


"Falling Down" - a risk manager's worst nightmare....


----------



## Words_Twice (30 Nov 2012)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I remember some of the shenanigans, and things I said to VAC as I fought the system over the years, that a Glass window was needed.  I have known of guys showing up with swords, knives guns, and even handcuffing themselves to chairs.
> 
> They are dealing with injured people, that have been trained to destroy the enemy, and if the members perceives VAC as the enemy....
> 
> ...



You are lucky you are not behind bars, that is a very serious threat to make.


----------



## Danjanou (30 Nov 2012)

Words_Twice said:
			
		

> You are lucky you are not behind bars, that is a very serious threat to make.



yes it is, however as Tess ain't posting from his cell, sounds like in this case the front line staffer through a combination of training, experience  and/or temprement saw it for what it was. Not a threat but someone who perceived themsleves to be in a desperate situation  and needed help and was venting. 

If I had to lay charges against evey client in the past 23 years who has threatened or verbally abused me I'd get no other work done.


----------



## blackberet17 (30 Nov 2012)

Actually, there have been incidents at VAC offices in the past, which brought about not only the glass protection, but also redesigns of hearing rooms and the doors to and from said rooms.

These incidents rarely make it out to the press. A quick Google search will not yield anything for a number of pages. We were only told about one incident recently, out West, through an internal memorandum.

There was an incident in Australia in 2006, which may have spurred changes in numerous districts. The Vietnam veteran walked into a DVA office in Melbourne, and shot himself in the foyer.

There have, of course, been bomb threats, clients who had made threats in the past towards VAC staff in general. Probably no more or less than say, someone making threats towards the Canada Revenue Agency.

There was a long stretch of time, after 9-11, where the Atrium to the HQ building in Charlottetown, which is open to the public, was actually closed to said public.


----------



## mariomike (30 Nov 2012)

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> Actually, there have been incidents at VAC offices in the past, which brought about not only the glass protection, but also redesigns of hearing rooms and the doors to and from said rooms.
> 
> These incidents rarely make it out to the press.



From the VAC Occupational Health and Safety Audit:

"Reporting a health and safety incident in VAC can be awkward and time-consuming, especially if there is no support staff available to help. Perhaps that is why health and safety officers from Charlottetown, doing a tour of selected field offices, learned from talking to employees that many "happenings", including near-misses are recorded only in memories, unless there is actual injury and the subsequent need to involve provincial workers compensation plans."


----------

