This has come up in the Oklahoma beheading case. The TV newsies argue back and forth between "terrorism" and "workplace violence".
Me, I'd rather call it murder in the first degree. Murder is a well established crime, it's been a crime since Moses brought down the Ten Commandments, and that was a long time ago. The newer trendier crimes are vague, not well established, and subject to endless bickering by lawyers. Worse, they are thought crimes, depending upon the state of mind of the perp. I don't like thought crimes, men ought to be free to think anything they like, just so long as they keep their thoughts to them selves. Plus, proving thoughts in court is touchy, the perp merely denies thinking wrong thoughts.
Plus, terrorism is a political thought crime. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Convict the perp of terrorism and bunches of unpleasant people will say that his cause was righteous, and he is a martyr to the cause. Convict the perp of first degree murder and it is harder to generate sympathy for him. And the penalties for murder are still quite drastic. Judge Neopolitano was on Fox a few minutes ago saying that under Oklahoma law, a conviction for murder is straight forward and quite possible, conviction for either "workplace violence" or "terrorism" is problematical . So let's go for murder.
The "workplace violence" just seems pretty wishy washy for cutting off a worker's head. Let's go with murder.