Reference no: EM133160011

MURDER SUICIDE AT BC GOVERNMENT OFFICE

Gunshots close by. You have to pass the source of the shots to get out of the building so, instead, you run to the washroom, lock yourself in, and call emergency services. You wait anxiously, not knowing what has happened. Four hours later, RCMP officers knock on the door and tell you it is safe to come out. You learn three are dead - the union steward, the office manager, and his director. This could have been your experience if you had been an employee of the Kamloops office of BC's Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection on October 15, 2002.

The Kamloops Incident

On the previous day's Thanksgiving holiday, Dick Anderson, the Regional Pollution Protection Manager, drove to Penticton so he could have an early morning meeting next day with staff there and still make the three-hour journey back to Kamloops for an afternoon meeting. Anderson had the unenviable task of announcing that layoffs meant their jobs would be ending in several months. He was not happy about having to deliver the message, but he was optimistic about the meeting planned for later, anticipating that the discussion with the regional director would address increasing resources and possibly save one of the Penticton jobs after all. Anderson drove back to his Kamloops office to meet with Jim McCracken at 2:00. The meeting was a brief 5 minutes. Anderson was handed two letters: one in which McCracken recommended to the Deputy Minister that Anderson's employment be terminated, the other from the Deputy Minister saying Anderson had the chance to respond to the termination recommendation. Anderson was relieved of his duties as of that moment. He walked out of the building, commenting to staff that he had been fired because he could not "get along with people". Fifteen minutes later he returned to the building and entered the office where McCracken was meeting with Rick Mardon, the union steward. He fired two shots, killing McCracken and Mardon. The office employees scrambled to find refuge, several being injured in the panicked evacuation. Anderson went to his office and fired one more shot, killing himself.

Why was it a surprise?

Anderson had no idea of the impending dismissal. The shock and humiliation were likely a major trigger for his violent response. A forensic psychiatrist who spoke at the coroner's inquest said that in his experience the biggest trigger for interpersonal violence is disrespect or perceived disrespect. It is not the discipline that causes the problem but how the process was handled. Anderson thought he was doing a good job and then was suddenly told he was not. How is it possible that a senior manager can be completely unaware that he is in danger of losing his job because of issues with his performance?

Background

Anderson had been hired in 1989 and had several performance appraisals over the next few years which noted that he was hardworking and loyal but his communication style could benefit from greater tact and diplomacy. Anderson accepted these early appraisals and took them as an opportunity to improve. His last formal performance appraisal, in 1995, noted that Anderson had taken steps to reduce stress and manage his emotions when dealing with staff but that the situation should be monitored. Between 1995 and 2002 there is no documentation about Anderson's performance - no performance appraisals, no formal complaints. Does that mean his performance improved? No. At the coroner's inquest coworkers and staff testified that through most of his career with the Ministry his management of people was an issue. His main problems were an inability to delegate, micromanagement, "extreme negativity and assumption of the worst case scenario, lack of anger and stress control and a tendency to bully staff into compliance."^l The former regional director noted that he had anticipated complaints from staff because of Anderson's managerial style so when he received them he did not formally document them because he thought they were not credible. Apparently there were several verbal coaching sessions but no record of date and content. At the time of the crisis in 2002 Anderson was having difficulty finding people who would work for him and morale in his office was low. He accepted McCracken's suggestion to hire an outside facilitator to do a stress/change workshop for his staff. Anderson was not aware that the facilitator was reporting to his senior manager and had concluded that Anderson was the problem, recommending Anderson's immediate removal. Days later, the termination occurred. Ironically, although McCracken had arranged for security personnel to attend an event occurring the day after Anderson's termination in case he disrupted it, McCracken did not think to take similar precautions for the termination itself.

Recommendations from investigators

Could the violence have been avoided if things had been handled differently? Could           similar events be prevented in future? This was the focus of investigations by several groups. Investigation reports by the Workman's Compensation Board, a Coroner's Jury and a Joint Union Management Workplace Committee yielded recommendations to the Ministry, many around issues of performance management:

• Ensure that people have positive, effective leadership skills when hired into supervisory roles, and that they understand the use of constructive and progressive discipline.
• All employees should receive annual performance reviews and performance plans.
• Performance reviews for managers should be 360 degrees (input by coworkers, subordinates and the employee's supervisor) and include a review of staff interaction and management styles.
• New supervisors should review all staff appraisals.

1 Verdict at Coroner's Inquest, page 2 of 8, in Appendix B of BC Public Service Agency Response to Recommendations Concerning the Murder Suicide Incident on October 15, 2002 in the Government Office at Kamloops https://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs/363776/kamloops report.pdf(accessed December 5, 2010).

e The performance review process within the Ministry should be reviewed for effectiveness

As a result, BC took a number of steps, adding units on violence prevention and trust to its leadership training program, modifying its hiring practices, ensuring performance appraisals are held regularly, requiring supervisors to provide feedback on employee interactions with staff and supervisors, and developing a 360-degree assessment program.

The irony is that, instead of killing the others and himself, if Anderson had charged the

Ministry with wrongful dismissal, he would likely have won. There is no evidence that Anderson had ever been disciplined or warned of any misconduct, and his personnel file showed no concerns with his leadership abilities. Unaware of the issues, how could he have changed his behavior?