Workers Compensation Issues
Navigating the Surge in Worker-on-Worker Assault Claims
Beth Young | April 10, 2026
Footnotes
1 "Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries Summary, 2024," Bureau of Labor Statistics,
February 19, 2026.
2 Donna Glenn, 2025 State of the Line
Report, National Council on Compensation Insurance, May 14, 2025.
The American workplace is currently undergoing a profound structural transformation. While the "Great Resignation" and the "Remote Revolution" dominated headlines in years past, a darker trend is quietly escalating within the walls of traditional jobsites: worker-on-worker assault.
Recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Council on Compensation Insurance reveals the urgency in the need for attention to this issue. In 2024, violent acts accounted for over 730 fatal work injuries, with no-fatal assaults trending upward in high-stress sectors like health care and retail. 1 In 2026, the workers compensation industry is grappling with rising indemnity claim severity, much of it driven by the complex medical and psychological fallout of workplace violence. 2
The Compensability Conflict
For insurance professionals, the primary challenge of an intra-office assault claim lies in the legal gray area of compensability. The key factors for compensability in assault cases are as follows.
Many states also adhere to the positional risk doctrine in which a workplace assault is compensable if an employee is attacked simply because the employee's job placed the employee in a particular spot at the time of the attack (even if there was not specific work-related motive).
Nonetheless, most states will strictly exclude injuries that are deemed to be "personal" or clashes stemming from relationships or events outside the workplace. Many states also apply the "initial aggressor" rule where the claim may be denied if the injured worker is deemed to be the initial aggressor in the assault. However, the success in application of these exclusions tends to be very fact-specific and firmly rooted in specific state case law.
By way of example, if two employees have a dispute over the use of company equipment or a production deadline, any resulting injury would likely be considered compensable. However, if the injured worker was the instigator of physical violence after the argument, the claim may be denied. Additionally, if the workplace assault stemmed from a dispute over a private debt or a romantic rivalry that merely happened to boil over in the break room, the claim may be denied under the "personal motive" exclusion.
Case Study: The Parking Lot Altercation
This case study is based on Linda Nalls v. P4 Security Solutions, 25IWCC494 (Apr. 29, 2025).
The incident. A long‑term security guard, "Employee A," was asked by her supervisor to extend her shift and relieve a coworker, "Employee B," at the front desk. After Employee A attempted to cover Employee B's post, Employee B became angry, verbally abusing Employee A on site and in front of a coworker. As Employee A left work and walked alone to her car in the dark parking lot, Employee B approached twice, continuing to threaten and insult her. Employee B threw water at Employee A, then struck Employee A multiple times in the head and face, causing her to fall to the concrete and injure her back, neck, right shoulder, right leg, and head.
The workers comp filing. Employee A filed for medical benefits: temporary total disability and permanent partial disability. As no credits were listed within the commission decision, it appears as though the claim was denied and accident and causal relationship were contested at trial.
The ruling. Consistent with Illinois's 2026 legal climate, the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission ruled the injury as compensable. The reasoning was twofold.
The liability ripple. It is also important to note that, while it did not occur in the above-referenced case, it is not unusual for an employer to also face a secondary "shadow claim." In assault cases, employees sometimes file third-party suits against employers for negligence (negligent hiring, negligent retention, etc.). This highlights a significant issue: While workers compensation is the "exclusive remedy" for the employee against the employer, it does not always shield the employer from commercial general liability exposure if negligence can be proven.
The 2026 Risk Management Tool Kit
As claim complexity increases, insurers and risk managers should consider moving from a reactive to a predictive stance. The use of behavioral analytics is key, and "people analytics" identifies areas of tension before they escalate into physical violence. Further, consideration could be given to expanded post-traumatic stress disorder coverage. In 2026, we are seeing states such as Washington and California seek to expand eligibility for claims involving psychological trauma.
Additionally, the use of external third-party forensic investigators to provide a proper and unbiased investigation is helpful to build a defensible position. Finally, it would be helpful to implement threat management teams—a multidisciplinary team made up of security, HR, and legal employees—to help diffuse situations or employees before an assault can occur.
Closing Thoughts for the Industry
Worker-on-worker assault is no longer a "freak occurrence"; it is a systemic risk fueled by a high-pressure economy and a mental health crisis. For the insurance industry, the mission is clear: It is imperative that we encourage employers to shift from a "slip-and-fall" safety mentality to proactive management of human conflict.
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney, accountant, or other qualified adviser.