NCIER®
CONTACT US
  • Blog
  • The Secret Service Says Zero Tolerance Backfires
Articles November 02, 2026 • 4 min read

The Secret Service Says Zero Tolerance Backfires

Dispatcher turning toward a supervisor worried about coworker with his head in his hands
The U.S. Secret Service says zero-tolerance workplace violence policies are overly punitive, miss the warning signs and can keep people from reporting concerns. Here’s what that means for police, fire, EMS, 911 centers and school districts as employers, and what to change in your policy.

Zero tolerance sounds tough. The U.S. Secret Service has made the case that it backfires.

For years, organizations have held up a zero tolerance workplace violence policy as an assurance of safety for their employees.1 The Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) took that assurance apart in its 2026 report on preventing targeted workplace violence. NTAC found that "zero-tolerance policies have been shown, at times, to be overly punitive and inflexible to the unique circumstances and needs of individuals of concern."2 The policies miss the warning signs that show up before an attack.3 And they "can discourage some from reporting concerns."4

If your agency's personnel policy promises zero tolerance, this report is talking about you too. Police, fire, EMS, 911 centers, emergency management offices and school districts are employers first, and their own people deserve a policy that works.

Zero Tolerance Misses the Warning Signs

Most workplace attackers don't come out of nowhere. In NTAC's study of 51 workplace attackers, 40 "exhibited behaviors that elicited concern in others."5 Thirty-one made the people around them fear for someone's safety.6

The pattern holds for attackers who worked at the place they attacked. Of 22 employee attackers, 18 elicited concern from the people around them.7 Half of those 18 worried their own coworkers.8 Seventeen of the 22 made concerning communications,9 and nine of those included threats.10

NTAC's read on its own data is that "opportunities for intervention and prevention were often present."11

A zero-tolerance policy has nothing to say about any of that. It's written for the moment after someone crosses the line. Everything that comes before (the anger, the grievance, the strange text to a coworker) either becomes a firing offense or gets ignored. NTAC puts it plainly: zero-tolerance language "fails to account for early warning signs exemplified by concerning behaviors and communications prior to an incident occurring."3

Zero Tolerance Keeps People Quiet

Warning signs only help if somebody reports them. NTAC calls reporting one of "the most important actions an employee can take to prevent violence."12 It also says some employees already hesitate to report because they fear retaliation.13

Now put a zero-tolerance policy on top of that fear. A medic notices a partner going sideways, with angry texts and talk about getting even with a supervisor. If the medic believes any report means automatic termination, the medic has to decide whether to end a partner's career over a bad feeling. A lot of people in that seat will wait and see. That's the problem NTAC is pointing at when it says these policies "can discourage some from reporting concerns."4

Public safety work makes that pressure heavier. Firefighters eat, sleep and run calls together for 24 hours at a time. Dispatchers sit elbow to elbow through long shifts. Officers count on each other for backup on every call. Reporting a partner in that setting already feels like breaking trust, and a policy that turns every report into a termination case makes it feel like betrayal. So people keep it to themselves, and the one person who could've flagged the problem early says nothing.

NTAC wants the opposite. Employees need to "feel confident in reporting without fear of retaliation or punishment."14 Organizations "must train their workforce to recognize and report their concerns."15 A positive workplace climate can "enhance bystander reporting when concerns are identified."16

What Works Instead: Case Management

NTAC's answer is behavioral threat assessment and management, or BTAM. A multidisciplinary team identifies, assesses and manages people of concern.17 When an employee raises concern, the BTAM team works with the employer on a case management plan built around that person's factors of concern. That plan "may or may not involve punitive measures."18

That one phrase carries the whole argument. Zero tolerance picks the punishment before anyone knows the facts. A case management plan picks the response after the team does. NTAC tells employers to consider "whether using automatic punitive responses for employees of concern is the best approach for safety."19

BTAM "is not intended to be punitive in nature."20 It works by making expectations clear. Teams lead employees toward positive outcomes "by clearly communicating workplace expectations and what actions will be taken if those expectations are not met."21 Support and assistance can often address whatever is driving the concern.22

The plan gets written down and kept current. NTAC calls it "an adaptive, evolving process."23 The form records the interventions, the referral timelines, who's monitoring compliance and how each step turned out.24

Discipline Still Has a Place

None of this takes discipline off the table. NTAC wants disciplinary action used as "corrective measures to educate employees"25 and wants responses to infractions to be appropriate and proportionate.26 For workplace bullying it lists reprimand, administrative leave and termination as options.27 And it says flat out, "There are times when separating an employee is necessary."28

The difference is the order of operations. Discipline follows an assessment. It doesn't stand in for one.

Firing Someone Doesn't End the Threat

Zero tolerance points straight at termination, and a lot of policies treat termination as the finish line. NTAC's data says otherwise. Six of the 22 employee attackers were former employees, and five of those six had been fired.29 One started his attack the moment his termination meeting ended. Another went after a location where he'd been fired seven years earlier.30

NTAC's conclusion: "Terminating an employee does not eliminate the risk an employee poses."31 A separation can deepen an existing grievance and cut off the organization's ability to keep an eye on the person.32

So when you have to separate someone, do it safely.33 Tell security, IT, HR, management and legal ahead of time.34 Shut off server, file and facility access, and collect identification and credentials.35 Keep the meeting calm and don't blame or shame the employee.36

One case in the report shows what a missed step costs. A hospital never revoked a resigning physician's ID badge, and he used it to get into the hospital on the day of the attack.37

After a separation, NTAC suggests following up with the employee or the people close to them, watching online behavior and re-evaluating what support might help.38

Fix Your Zero Tolerance Workplace Violence Policy

Pull your agency's policy and read it line by line. Keep the consequences. Get rid of the automatic ones, and give concern a path to a team before anything happens.

One thing doesn't change. An emergency is still an emergency. NTAC says a report like a terminated employee brandishing a weapon on site doesn't belong with a BTAM team.39 That's a call to security, dispatch or law enforcement right now, and your policy should say so.

  1. Find every automatic punishment and decide whether it still makes sense case by case.19
  2. Write in a case management path that may or may not end in discipline.18
  3. Tell employees in writing that reporting a concern won't get them punished.14
  4. Give people more than one way to report,40 including an anonymous or confidential option.41
  5. Make discipline corrective and proportionate.26
  6. Build a separation checklist so nothing gets missed.42

Here's the question for every chief, director and superintendent. When one of your people sees something, does your policy make them more likely to speak up, or less? For zero tolerance, NTAC has already answered it.

Endnotes

  1. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-01 ↩
  2. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-02 ↩
  3. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-03 ↩
  4. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-04 ↩
  5. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 16). Claim p016-01 ↩
  6. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 16). Claim p016-02 ↩
  7. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-04 ↩
  8. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-05 ↩
  9. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-06 ↩
  10. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-07 ↩
  11. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 27). Claim p027-03 ↩
  12. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 50). Claim p050-01 ↩
  13. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 55). Claim p055-28 ↩
  14. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 55). Claim p055-04 ↩
  15. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 50). Claim p050-05 ↩
  16. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 86). Claim p086-02 ↩
  17. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 30). Claim p030-09 ↩
  18. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-06 ↩
  19. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 82). Claim p082-05 ↩
  20. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 88). Claim p088-09 ↩
  21. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 79). Claim p079-06 ↩
  22. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 79). Claim p079-09 ↩
  23. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 79). Claim p079-04 ↩
  24. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 79). Claim p079-03 ↩
  25. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 87). Claim p087-10 ↩
  26. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 87). Claim p087-11 ↩
  27. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 87). Claim p087-12 ↩
  28. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-14 ↩
  29. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-15 ↩
  30. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 19). Claim p019-16 ↩
  31. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 81). Claim p081-07 ↩
  32. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 81). Claim p081-08 ↩
  33. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-06 ↩
  34. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-07 ↩
  35. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-11 ↩
  36. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-08 ↩
  37. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 20). Claim p020-16 ↩
  38. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 81). Claim p081-03 ↩
  39. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 57). Claim p057-09 ↩
  40. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 55). Claim p055-01 ↩
  41. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 55). Claim p055-27 ↩
  42. U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. (2026). Preventing Targeted Workplace Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Guide to Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (p. 80). Claim p080-18 ↩

Frequently Asked Questions

No. NTAC's 2026 report says zero-tolerance policies have been shown, at times, to be overly punitive and inflexible. It says the language fails to account for early warning signs and that the policies can discourage some from reporting concerns. NTAC points employers to a case management plan built with a threat assessment team.
No. NTAC says there are times when separating an employee is necessary, and it wants responses to infractions to be appropriate and proportionate. Discipline should be corrective. The case management plan may or may not involve punitive measures, depending on the person and the facts.
No. Five of the six former employees among NTAC's 22 employee attackers had been terminated. One attacked as soon as his termination meeting ended, and another targeted a site where he'd been fired seven years earlier. NTAC says terminating an employee does not eliminate the risk an employee poses.

Written By

J
John Nichols
Lead Instructor
Kevin Nichols spent 30 years with the Pearland Police Department in Pearland, Texas. He began his ca...
W
William Godfrey
Lead Instructor
William "Bill" Godfrey is a retired Fire Chief, the founder and Chief Executive Officer of C3 Pathwa...

Topics

  • Active Shooter
  • Crisis Response
  • C3 Pathways
  • NCIER
  • Dispatch
  • 911
  • Hostile Event
  • ASHER
  • Behavioral Threat Assessment
  • BTAM
  • School Safety
  • Violence Prevention
  • School Principals
  • National Threat Assessment Center
  • NTAC
  • Law Enforcement
  • School Violent Event Incident Management
  • School-Public Safety Collaboration
  • Campus Emergency Preparedness
  • Emergency Manager
  • Emergency Management
  • Fire
  • EMS
  • Workplace Violence Prevention
  • Zero Tolerance
  • U.S. Secret Service
  • Reporting Concerns

From the Research Hub

Related Posts


Top

Find the Perfect Training Class For You

Learn More