If the assessment finds that an employee's partner threatens, or might threaten, the employee or the organization, targeted protective measures should be weighed, a number of them needing the cooperation of the abused employee and colleagues, such as: keeping the abusive (or suspected abusive) partner away from the workplace, for example by giving security, and where suitable relevant managers or the work group, the abuser's photograph; encouraging or requiring the employee to tell the team or designated staff about significant developments, such as new threats or contact from the partner; offering a parking space near the entrance, an escort to the car, flexible or varied hours, removal from phone directories, a new work email address, a change of office or work location, and call screening; requiring the employee to tell the team or designated staff about any restraining, protective or other court order obtained, and informing security where an order names the workplace; where the law allows, the employer obtaining a restraining order covering the workplace, with the organization weighing whether that is feasible and wise when it learns of threats from the partner; and pointing the employee to outside help, such as local groups working on intimate partner violence, to help draw up a personal safety plan.
This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.