ActioNet was founded in 1998 by president and CEO Ashley Chen. Key customers have included Qwest, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Labor. ActioNet provides information technology services such as custom software development, computer security assessment, network design, consulting, project management, systems integration and design, and training. Customers come from industries such as manufacturing, retail, transportation, telecommunications, financial services, and the public sector.89 ActioNet’s core values include instilling integrity in everything they do, innovating to enable their mission, making their customers and each other successful, achieving service delivery excellence, and partnering for success.
At ActioNet, we are committed to conducting our business with integrity, not only doing things right, but also doing the right things. We believe in transparency and accuracy with open and honest communication. Being fair and ethical are an integral part of how we do business and strengthens our relationships.90 Core values aside, in Yowan Yang v. ActioNet, Inc. (Case 2:14-cv-00792-ABPJW)
lawyers obtained a $2.4 million verdict plus $5 million in punitive damages on behalf of their client against ActioNet when it was determined that their client was the victim of workplace violence and wrongful termination. How is this possible given the firm’s core values and their belief in open and honest communications?
Yang began his employment with L-3 National Security Solutions, a federal contractor providing technical support to the Federal Aviation Administration in September 2008. In April 2010, ActioNet took over the contract and employed Yang. Yang’s employment history included consistent strong performance reviews and merit raises, including a raise just 2 months prior to his termination. ActioNet hired Cy Tymony in the same capacity as Yang.
Tymony was placed on the same team and in a cubicle 4 feet away.91 Yang said he and Tymony had several public incidents in the workplace, including some where Tymony was publicly upset because Yang had either stored cans of soda in the office freezer or was eating candy during a staff meeting, according to the complaint. Toward the end of the meeting, Tymony pounded his fist against a cubicle, told Yang that he had no respect for others and cursed several times, the later filed complaint said. On July 24, 2012, both Tymony and Yang met individually with supervisors to see who would be willing to move to another cubicle, according to the complaint. After Tymony left the meeting, he loudly complained that Yang was an “asshole” who chews ice. After Yang suggested that Tymony move his cubicle, Tymony grabbed him by the neck and threatened his life.92 Tymony continued screaming profanity-laced threats, including that he was going to kill Yang, and destroyed Yang’s workstation.
In response, ActioNet terminated the employment of Yang and Tymony, without performing an investigation. In spite of receiving an investigation report from federal investigators 2 days after the incident revealing that Yang was a “complete victim,” no corrective action was taken by ActioNet to investigate further, to communicate with Yang the findings of the investigation, or to rehire him. In fact, ActioNet ignored Yang’s pleas for an explanation as to why he was terminated as well as his request for reinstatement.
Mr. Yang then filed a civil legal complaint that said that rather than properly investigate the incident, ActioNet simply moved to quickly fire him and the other employee, causing him emotional harm and making it difficult for him to find a new job. “After being fired ‘for cause,’ Mr. Yang applied unsuccessfully for hundreds of jobs,” says DeSimone, his lawyer. “Mr. Yang lost his career, his apartment, his independence, his self-worth, and his self-esteem.”93 ActioNet argued in the case that it should not be held responsible because of any violent tendencies of Tymony, because he was fit to perform his job, because there is no evidence that the company tolerated Tymony’s conduct, and because Tymony was not acting in the “course and scope” of his job during the altercation.94 The jury compensated Mr. Yang and punished ActioNet for what it regarded as callous disregard of Mr. Yang’s rights. “The jury sent a loud and clear message via this case to companies that harassment, workplace violence and termination would not be tolerated. ActioNet never took responsibility for its wrongful conduct and the jury held them accountable.”95

 Questions

1. The ActioNet case was a civil case; how might it have become a federal case under OSHA’s charge?
2. How might ActioNet have not upheld their OSHA responsibilities?
3. The federal investigators revealed that Yang was a complete victim, that no corrective action was taken by ActioNet to investigate further and to communicate with Yang the findings of the investigation. If these were OSHA investigators, under what category of violation might ActioNet be subject to?
4. Stress might have been the cause of Tymony’s intolerable conduct.
Which cause(s) of stress might have accounted for his inexcusable behavior?
5. What are the causes of workplace violence, and how might it help us better understand this case?
6. What are the signs of potential violence, and were any exhibited in this case?
7. What trends or issues in workplace safety apply to this case?