HEARING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
WE'RE GONNA START TAKING A
DEEPER DIVE INTO ALL OF THE
ISSUES SURROUNDING SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IN THE CAPITAL.
LOOKING AT NOT ONLY HOW WE
STRENGTHEN OUR RESPONSE ONE
HARASSMENT ABUSE OCCURS BUT ALSO
WORKING TOWARDS PREVENTION AND
CULTURE CHANGE.
AND I MENTIONED BEFORE THAT WE
WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CAPITOL
COMMUNITY AS WE MAKE THESE
POLICIES.
AND WE WANT TO HEAR PEOPLE'S
FEEDBACK WE WANT TO HEAR YOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT WHAT'S
BEEN WORKING IN THE PAST WHAT
HASN'T BEEN WORKING.
WHAT KIND OF WORKPLACE THIS IS
BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA HELP A
DIRECT THE POLICY THAT WE MAKE
WE ARE GOING TO BE EMBARKING ON
A CALL TO CHECK ON A CULTURE
SURVEY HERE IN THE CAPITAL?
AND WE ALSO HAVE CREATED A WAY
FOR PEOPLE TO GIVE US TESTIMONY
AND INPUT WITHOUT HAVING TOGET
UP IN FRONT OF CAMERAS AND IN
FRONT OF MICROPHONES.
SOME PROUD TO LET YOU KNOW THAT
WE NOW HAVE A DIGITAL SUGGESTION
BOX.
THAT PEOPLE CAN USE THROUGH THE
PORTAL ON THE ASSEMBLY'S
WEBSITE.
AND THROUGH THAT YOU CAN SHARE
IDEAS WITH US WITHOUT HAVING TO
SHARE YOUR NAME IF YOU DON'T
WANT TO.
I'M IT'S NOT TO BE USED FOR
REPORTING OF HER* MAN I WANT
TO MAKE THAT VERY CEAR THIS IS
NOT THE PROPER WAY TO DO THAT.
THIS IS MORE TO GIVE YOUR
SUGGESTIONS AND GIVE YOUR INPUT
TO US.
IN A WAY THAT'S EASY FOR PEOPLE
TO DO.
AND TODAY WE'RE GOING TO BE
LOOKING AT HOW WE DEFINE
HARASSMENT WHAT IS SEXUAL
HARASSMENT I THINK IS A LOT OF
THINGS.
ACROSS THE COUNTRY ABOUT WHAT'S
ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT'S NOT
ACCEPTABLE.
.
AND.
THE UNIQUE HALLENGES THAT WE
HAVE HERE IN THE CAPITAL FACING
US UP ABOUT. HOW WE DEFINE
HARASSMENT?
AS WE PROCEED THROUGH THE AGENDA
I'M GOING TO INTRODUCE OUR
WITNESSES BUT YOU CAN FIND OUT
MORE ABOUT THEM IN OUR WEBSITE
ON THE.
WITNESS LIST THAT'S INCLUDED IN
THE MEMBERS MATERIAL I AM ON THE
SUBCOMMITTEES WEBSITE.
THE WEBSITE ALSO INCLUDES A
BACKGROUND PAPER THAT CAN GIVE
YOU A BIT OF A PRIMER ON SEXUAL
HARASSMENT LAW AS WELL AS THE
MATERIALS FROM OUR FIRST
HEARING.
WITHOUT ALTERING TO OUR VICE
CHAIR SENATOR HOLLY MITCHELL FOR
HER OPENING REMARKS NONE READY
TO GET STARTED GREATER.
I'M I WILL ASK.
IT ANY DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE
ANY A BRIEF OPENING REMARKS.
OKAY SO AS IN THE FIRST HEARING
I'M GONNA ASK EVERYBODY TO HOLD
THEIR QUESTIONS FOR EACH PANEL
UNTIL THE CONCLUSION OF THAT
PARTICULAR PANEL.
AND IN THE INTEREST OF FULL
DISCLOSURE TO OUR WITNESSES
TODAY HAVE A CONNECTION ALTHOUGH
THERE'S ELIMINATE
ACTION.
TWO SEXUAL HARASSMENT
INVESTIGATIONS HERE AT THE
CAPITOL WITHOUT ALL LAST THE
FIRST PANEL TO COME UP AS I
INTRODUCED THEM.
WHEN THE MUTUAL UMMAH REPRESENTS
A WITNESS. LET ME JUST FINISH
WITH THOSE CLOSURES FIRST WHEN
EMU SOUL REPRESENTS A WITNESS AN
INVESTIGATION IN THE SENATE AND
BETH WEST HAS A LAW PARTNER IN
HER FIRM. WHO IS CURRENTLY A
FACT FINDER IN ASSEMBLY
INVESTIGATION AS REPORTED IN THE
NEWS MEDIA LAST WEEK MISS WEST
HOWEVER DOES NOT WORK ON SEXUAL
HARASSMENT ISSUES IN THE CAPITAL
AND IS HERE WITH US TODAY TO
SHARE HER PERSPECTIVE? BASED ON
HER EXPERIENCE IN THE PRIVATE
SECTOR SO WITHOUT MOVED TO OUR
FIRST PANEL WHICH IS LEGAL
PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL
HARASSMENT.
ANDREW JOHNSON IS THE SENIOR
COUNSEL FOR STATE POLICY AT THE
NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER WHO
COMES TO US VIA VIDEO FROM
WASHINGTON DC WERE NW ELSIE HAS
IN RECENT MONTHS WORK WITH
CONGRESS ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT
ISSUES.
WENDY MUTUAL CO CHAIRS THE
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE FOR THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION OR SELAH. AND IS A
NAME PARTNER AT SEWARD AMUSED SO
IN SAN FRANCISCO WHERE SHE
PRACTICES CIVIL RIGHTS.
BETH WEST IS AN EMPLOYMENT
MEDIATOR PARA COUNSEL FOR
EMPLOYEES AT THE LAW FIRM OF
WEINTRAUB TOBIN HERE IN
SACRAMENTO.
THE POWER THE PANELISTS ALL
HERE.
THAT'S IF YOU CAN COME UP TO THE
TABLE PLEASE AND JOIN US.
AFTER.
AND WE HAVE OUR BREAK WE HAVE
OUR PANELIST. ON SKYPE AND I
THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE STARTING
WITH HER.
CAN YOU HEAR US.
YES I CAN GIVE YOU WE CAN HEAR
YOU JUST FINE THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR JOINING US TODAY.
THANK YOU YOUR HONOR.
WHAT DID?
MY NAME IS ANDREA JOHNSON.
HELP FOR STATE OF THE NATIONAL
WOMEN'S LOOKS AT.
SHE IS.
AND THE LAWS THAT HAS BEEN
WORKING FOR OVER FORTY FIVE
YEAR.
ADVANCE OF PACKED WOMEN'S
EQUALITY AND OPPORTUNITY.
LONG WORK TO REMOVE THOSE
BARRIERS PEOPLE TREATMENT.
UP FOR WOMEN IN THE WORKPLACE.
WELL HERE AT THE LOW.
I SENIOR COUNSEL. POLICY THAT
WAS ADVOCATES THE STATE
LEGISLATORS ACROSS THE COUNTRY
AND A HOST OF ISSUES FOR EQUAL
PAY. RIGHT AS HE DISCRIMINATION
BUNKS BICU IT'S US THEIR WORK
SCHEDULE.
BUT THE LAST FEW MONTHS BECAUSE
OF THE.
MUCH OF OUR WORK HAS BEEN
SON WORK.
EIGHT BUT.
THERE'S. ARTISTS ENERGY OF THOSE
EIGHT MOMENT. REAL CHANGE AND
AND STOP INCREMENTS ACT OF.
SO MY COLLEAGUE MY A RECOUP
PROJECT WAS IT THE OTHER DAY AND
SHE HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH
AFFECT TRIP.
BUT PAST THAT
ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESS.
CONGRESS.
I HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO A TALKING
WITH LEGISLATORS AND I BOTH.
ABOUT THEIR EFFORTS REPORT
STATE LEGISLATOR THE SEA IS.
THAT'S WHY I'M HERE WITH YOU
TODAY.
FORTUNATELY I DIDN'T YOU KNOW
AND THE ISSUES BROWN SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
THAT YOU.
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE ARE NOT
UNIQUE THAT LET'S SAY ABOUT IT.
THE CONCERNED YOU ARE GRAPPLING
WITH THE PRIVILEGE AND SAT A
TRUCK PARTS AND MANY OTHER
STATES ARE ALSO GRAPPLING WITH
YOUR SOME COMMON THEMES THAT
WOULD BE HELPFUL XIN.
ONE MAJOR THEME IF YOU'RE GONNA
GET IT FOR REPORTING BREAST IT.
A COMMON ISSUE THEY LET THEIR
BODIES THAT OP.
IT FAILURE CURRENT AND BACK IS.
ARE LARGELY FOCUSED ON TRADE.
THAT ARE NOT REGULARLY DO THINK
THAT IF AT ALL.
I'M NOT SEXUALLY.
SO THESE ARE THINGS I'VE BEEN
GOING THROUGH.
ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
WE REALLY REALLY APPRECIATE THE
THOUGHT WORK WORK ALL DAY.
THESE PROBLEMS AND.
GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TESTIFY TODAY TO OFFER SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS ON AND I AM
PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONDING.
THAT ADEQUATE SEIZE OUR HER
SYSTEM.
WHEN IT FIRST STARTED OUT. BY.
WHAT IS THAT IT THE? TALKING
ABOUT. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX
IT A LITTLE BIT OF A?
PROBLEM
CAN YOU MAYBE JUST SLOW DOWN A
LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I IT THE
CONNECTIONS LAGGING A LITTLE SO
IF YOU CAN JUST SLOW SLOW DOWN
AS YOU SPEAK.
THAT MIGHT HELP.
BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU A LITTLE
BIT MORE CLEARLY. TIME EITHER
O'DONNELL THAT'S OKAY IT'S NOT
YOUR FAULT IT'S THE IT'S THE
INTERNET OKAY THINKS.
OKAY TRYING TO GET A GOOD BUT.
THIS IS A.
SO THEY'RE SAYING SEXUAL
CRABGRASS LISBETH POWER. US
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS YOU DID IT.
COURSE CULTURAL NORMS ABOUT
APPROPRIATE BULL KATE YOUR. AND
WORK FOR WOMEN AND MEN AND TO
EXERT CONTROL OVER PEOPLE POWER
IN THE WORKPLACE.
THE WOMEN. BUT ITS COLOR
IMMIGRANTS SEND US BATIK.
NPOWER IMBALANCES ESPECIALLY
CHEAP HERE.
I THINK THIS WORKPLACE CUT.
WHERE WE HAVE HIGH PROFILE ON?
EIGHT PERCENT OF WHOM ARE MAN
AND THEY INTERACT AS LOBBYISTS
AGAIN LANDS AND YOUNG MEN AND
WOMEN WHO ARE JUST STARTING OUT
THEIR CAREER.
SERVING AS LEGISLATURE.
AND IN TERMS.
I WONDER WHAT THE READER INTO
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS THE ONLY A
MANIFESTATION POWER IMBALANCE.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT OFTEN OAK OR
IS IT THAT IS FURTHER ENTRENCHED
BY OTHER FORMS OF SEX BUT.
NATION LIKE PAID VACATION.
ALSO HARASSMENT OFTEN CONTAIN IS
OFFENSIVE CHO. BASED ON MULTIPLE
IDENTITIES LIKE NATIONAL ASIAN
SEX. NOT JUST SEX.
AND MANY WOMEN EXPERIENCE
CRESSMAN. COMBINATION.
OF THEIR GREAT.
S. OR THEIR DISABILITY IMPACT
AND.
SO IN SHORT SOCIAL MODESTO
CURRENT AND YOU. LIVE BRING THIS
UP BECAUSE CRAFT HOPE IS A BIG
VOTE.
HARASSED.
LIMITS OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT
YET THUNDER AND REYES AND ONLY
IN THE WORKPLACE.
WE URGE YOU TO ENSURE THAT ANY
REFORMS THAT YOU'RE THINKING
ABOUT.
I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT'S ALSO BUT
I SHOULD CONNECTED.
EVERYONE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE RARE PICK. UP ALL FOR.
NDA AND SEVERAL FOCUS.
SOME RECOMMENDATIONS. AND
REPORT.
BUT AS FOR THE REPORTS.
FOR ME I AM AND OTHER STATES.
IT'S CLEAR THAT REFORMING THE
PROCESS THE FORTY ABOUT
HARASSMENT.
I ALREADY.
AND MANY OF VICTIMS A AND
BYSTANDERS STRUGGLING WITH THE
FACT THAT.
CITIES RESPONSE.
EVEN COMPLAIN THAT ARE EXCELLENT
ARE OFTEN MEMBERS OR AT LEGAL
COUNSEL OR MAYBE. OR STAFF
MEMBER IS.
KUDOS INJURIES ARE TOWARDS THE
MEMBERS. THAT THEY ARE NECESSARY
AN INDEPENDENT AND TO TEAM.
AND THIS IS AN INTIMIDATING
REPORTING STRUCTURE. BOTH.
AND ONE THAT MANY PEOPLE DOWN.
TO IMPARTIALLY AT HAND CLAIMS.
SO THE LEGISLATURE COULD
PROMOTE.
OUR REPORTING.
PEOPLE FEEL SAFE.
GREEN BY SHARING OUR MULTIPLE
BODIES WERE AT JEWEL. INCLUDING
A BERKELEY AND A TRULY
INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY.
COULD A PERSON COULD REPORT
HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION.
BEYOND ONLY OF SUPERVISORS MIGHT
BE THE HARASSER THE LEGISLATURE.
EGGS ALSO PROVIDE A MECHANISM
WHERE I CAN CLEAN AND SO GIVING.
MEANINGFUL LEGAL AND NON LEGAL
ADVICE AND SUPPORT THROUGHOUT.
EXAMPLE OF THROUGH A A
COUNSELING PROGRAM.
MOREOVER AND SUPPORT GINGER THAT
NON DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS.
ARE NOT A PREREQUISITE TO BE
COMPLAINED THAT OR A MANDATORY
CONDITION ALMONDS WE HEAR ABOUT
THIS A LOT BROADER WORKPLACE
CONTEXT. WHAT'S FILE A CLAIM
STUDY SHOULD.
LET PEOPLE WHO ENGAGE A SHOW BE
HELD ACCOUNTABLE THAT REALLY
CLARITY IN. HOWEVER TELL YOU
THAT. I'M AND MAKE EVERYBODY
AWARE OF IT IS NOT IMPORTANT.
TO PURGE OF.
I THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT LED.
IT MAKES.
THE LACK OF CONCERN
EXPANDABILITY IF YOU ADOPTED
THIS STANDARD
ONE CONSEQUENCE WHAT IF
ACTIVIST.
THIS IS A MAKERS WOULD REQUIRE
LESS SEVERE FORMS OF HARASSMENT
BECAUSE THEY WOULD FEEL IT'S ARE
SUBSTANTIAL.
AND THE PROCESS FORGET.
I AM AND THAT IS ALSO AN ISSUE
REPORTING THAT WE'VE. BEEN
PEOPLE WILL BE RELUCTANT TO
REPORT IF IT THE ONLY
CONSEQUENCE. NATION. UP FOR.
END UP FOR LEGISLATURE'S WE
TALK ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY.
WE ALSO NEED ACCOUNTABILITY TO
THE PUBLIC.
AND THAT MEANS TRANSPARENCY.
THING WE BUT THE THIS IS EACH
OFFICE.
BECAUSE NOT EVERY CLAIM OF
DISCRIMINATION WILL RESULT IN IS
THAT. OUR BOARD.
HOWEVER WE WANT IT.
DRIVE HOME ISN'T REPORT MUST
PROTECT THE IDENTITY
CONFIDENTIALITY OF.
YOU BECAUSE REVEALING THE
VICTIMS IDENTITIES REYES ALT. IT
RETALIATION ADDRESS CONCERT BUT.
I'M FOR IT FOR THE COMPLAINANTS
INCLUDING BEING BLACKBALLED FROM
JOBS BUT LEGISLATE.
SO THANKS THE BALANCE
A VICTIM PRIVACY AND AND
TRANSPARENCY WHICH IS BUT BEFORE
AND.
AND IF IT IS CRUCIAL THAT IF
TAXED
FUNDS ARE USED LITTLE A CLAIM
SOMETHING YOU. THINK IT WAS IN
CONGRESS.
THAT LEGISLATOR IF IT'S LIKE
FUNDS USED LOOK.
.
LEGISLATORS SHOULD PERSON.
NUMBER.
TRADE FOR FINALS EXPANDED ON HIS
OR HER BEHALF.
AND USE OF OFFICE FUND BY LATER
PASTE ON ABOUT SHIFTING SO I.
AND SO.
I HAVE NEVER OTHER
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE IN MY
RIGHT BRAIN TESTIMONY AND SOME
GOING TO PREVENTION THOUGH I
THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER
HEARING ON THAT ISSUE
SPECIFICALLY CHRIS.
AND THAT WILL HELP OFFICES ON
AND THROUGH YOUR COAT RACK.
IT DISCRIMINATION AT THE
LEGISLATURE.
AND AND IDENTIFY ANY FAILURES
IN THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
THAT ARE.
TO PREVENT AN ADDRESS FOR
MEDICINE NATIONS BUT BUT IF.
IN OUR PRACTICE.
WELL. I HOPE YOU'RE ABLE TO HEAR
A.
YEAH ME OKAY GIVEN THE
CONNECTION ISSUES.
THANK YOU AND IF YOU CAN.
STAMBAUGH IF THAT'S OKAY WITH
YOU AS WE GET TO THE OTHER TWO
PANELISTS THAT WE MAY HAVE SOME
QUESTIONS FOR YOU AT THE END.
OKAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OKAY WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO
TO WENDY MUST SELL NOW.
IT MORNING THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH
ALL OF YOU TODAY I THINK THIS IS
A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE AND I'M
GLAD THAT WE HAVE THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE.
OUR OPINIONS ON THIS TOPIC.
I M. THE CHAIR PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION WHICH IS A STATEWIDE
ORGANIZATION.
OF NEARLY THIRTEEN HUNDRED
ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENT WORKERS.
AND DISCRIMINATION HARASSMENT
RETALIATION WAGING OUR
WHISTLEBLOWER ANOTHER EMPLOYMENT
MATTERS.
I MEMBERS HELP PROTECT AND
EXPAND THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF
WORKING MEN AND WOMEN
THROUGH-LITIGATION EDUCATION AND
ADVOCACY.
A I ALSO HAVE BEEN REPRESENTING
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.
FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS AND I'M AN
ADJUNCT PROFESSOR AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO
SCHOOL OF LAW ALTHOUGH MY
COMMENTS ARE.
SILLY MY OWN.
AND ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
ON THE BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY
SAN FRANCISCO SCHOOL OF LAW.
BUT I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST
THINGS THAT. THIS PANEL NEEDS TO
UNDERSTAND IS THE UNIQUE ASPECTS
OF THIS WORKPLACE.
SO EACH OF YOU EACH OF THE
MEMBERS HAS THE ULTIMATE.
HIRING AND FIRING AUTHORITY.
IF SOMEONE IS IN YOUR WORKPLACE.
WHO IS EXPERIENCING SAM OF
SEXUAL HARASSMENT OR SEX
DISCRIMINATION?
OR IF THEY'RE BYSTANDER TO
WITNESS TO SUCH ACTIONS.
AND THEY WISH TO COMPLAIN ABOUT
THIS.
OR TRANSFER TO ANOTHER
DEPARTMENT
OR TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER.
POSITION THAT'S EXCEEDINGLY HARD
IN THIS WORKPLACE IT'S UNIQUE
FACTOR.
OF THE CAPITAL.
SO FOR EXAMPLE IF YOUR WOMAN
EXPERIENCING SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
BY A MEMBER.
WHERE YOU GO YOU CAN EASILY
TRANSFER? ADDITIONALLY IF YOU'RE
STAFFERS SEEING INAPPROPRIATE
CONDUCT IN THE WORKPLACE
COMMENTS THAT PERHAPS SHOULD BE
MADE.
I.
THAT SORT OF CONDUCT.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO COME OUT.
AND SAY THIS IS CONDUCT THAT
SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING BECAUSE
OF THE LACK OF EASY. A MOBILITY
IN THE CAPITAL.
BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE FACTORS OF
THIS WORKPLACE. INCLUDING THE
DIFFICULTY TO DISCIPLINE
MEMBERS.
WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN SEXUAL
HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION
RETALIATION THAT REALLY HAS TO
BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AT THIS
UNIQUE WORKPLACE?
BECAUSE OF THAT I THINK YOU NEED
EVEN MORE STRINGENT POLICIES
PROCEDURES. AND THIS REALLY NEED
TO BE A ZERO TOLERANCE
WORKPLACE.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IN LARGE
PART IS BECAUSE OTHERWISE PEOPLE
ARE NOT GOING TO GO FORWARD.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE YEARS OF
ENTRENCHED BEHAVIOR THAT DOESN'T
COME TO THE FORE. UNTIL YOU END
UP WITH MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS OF
EGREGIOUS CONDUCT.
SO THE FIRST THING I THINK THAT
THIS.
PANEL NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT IS
THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THIS
PARTICULAR WORKPLACE WHICH IS
UNLIKE OTHER STATE EMPLOYERS
WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TRANSFER.
IF YOU'RE EXPERIENCING SEXUAL
HARASSMENT OR RETALIATION IN THE
WORKPLACE OR RIDE A RETURN TO
OTHER.
TATE EMPLOYMENT THAT'S WHY
THIS HAS TO BE MORE STRINGENT
AND THE INVESTIGATION POLICIES
PROCEDURES HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED
TO THE LETTER.
THIS ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THE
DIFFERENTIAL IN POWER WHICH
ALREADY EXISTS
SO MEMBERS.
IT AS ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE.
A GREAT DEAL OF POWER THAT'S
ENTRENCHED IN THEIR POSITIONAL
READY. GIVEN THE UNIQUE FACTORS
OF THIS WORKPLACE THAT POWER
DIFFERENTIAL IS ONLY INCREASE.
.
PART OF WHAT'S REQUIRED BY AN
EMPLOYER WHETHER YOU LOOK AT THE
LEGISLATURE SOME OTHER EMPLOYER.
IS A PAST FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE
IN REMEDY. ALLEGATIONS OF
HARASSMENT IS LIKELY TO
CONTRIBUTED ADDITIONAL
HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE AND
TO ENCOURAGE RETALIATION AGAINST
THOSE WHO COMPLAIN.
THAT WAS ACTUALLY THE HAWKINS
VERSES HENNEPIN TECH CENTER CASE
BUT I THINK IT REALLY SAYS WHAT
WE ALL KNOW IS IF YOU ALLOW
HARASSMENT TO FLOURISH.
IT ENCOURAGES ADDITIONAL
HARASSMENT AND IT ALSO
ENCOURAGES RETALIATION FOR THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO DO COME FOR OUR
ATTENDED KATE THAT THERE'S.
INAPPROPRIATE OR UNLAWFUL.
CONDUCT IN THE WORKPLACE
SOWHAT DO WE DO I'D LIKE TO A
TOP TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF VERY
SPECIFIC TANGIBLE WAYS TO
ADDRESS THIS.
ONE IS OF THE STATUE OF
LIMITATIONS BECAUSE OF THE
UNIQUE FEATUREOF THIS WORKPLACE
WHERE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT.
UP TO FRANKLY COMPLAIN AND ALSO
TO TRANSFER. THE STATUE OF
LIMITATIONS OF ONE YEARS
ESPECIALLY EGREGIOUS.
ON THE CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT
LAWYERS ASSOCIATION AREA AND
CHAOTIC BOMB.
I HAVE TALKED ABOUT AND THERE IS
BEFORE THIS BODY. US IT
LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD INCREASE
THAT STATUE OF LIMITATIONS TO
THREE YEARS I THINK THAT THAT.
HELPS ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES
OF THE DIFFICULTY OF COMING
FORWARD IN THE POWER
DIFFERENTIAL. I THINK THAT'S
CRITICAL.
THERE HAVE BEEN REPORTS.
AND I'M GOING TO FORWARD ON
REPORTS I WILL BE SHARING ANY
ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND
WORK PRODUCT INFORMATION I MAY
HAVE.
INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY BECAUSE I
THINK THAT WOULD BE
INAPPROPRIATE.
HOWEVER
THERE HAD BEEN APPROACH OF
REPORTS IN THE MEDIA REGARDING
NO REHIRE CLAUSES
WELL IF YOU HAVE A NO REHIRE
CLAUSE IF YOU'VE BEEN SUBJECT TO
SEXUAL HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION
IN THE WORKPLACE.
WHERE DO YOU GO NOT ONLY DO NOT
HAVE AN ABILITY TO IT TO
TRANSFER BUT YOU'RE BASICALLY
LOCKED OUT OF AN ENTIRE CAREER
PATH?
HE'S NO REHIRE CLAUSES SHOULD BE
ILLEGAL AS A MATTER PUBLIC
POLICY BUT PARTICULARLY IN THIS
TYPE OF WORK PLACE WHERE
THERE'S.
THESE AGREE JUST POWER
DIFFERENTIALS AND A LACK OF
OPPORTUNITY.
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES IN THIS
WORKPLACE ARE PARTICULARLY
DIFFICULT AND I THINK OUR
AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY THE REASON
FOR THAT IS. IF YOU HAVE A
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE
IT COVERS THE CONDUCT THAT'S
HAPPENING IN THAT MEMBERS OFFICE
IT'S HARD ENOUGH TO COME FORWARD
IT'S HARD ENOUGH IF YOU'RE BY
STANDARD TO SAY. OF WHEN YOU SEE
SOMETHING SAY SOMETHING WHICH IS
WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE BUT WHEN
YOU HAVE THESE CONFIDENTIALITY
CLAUSES YOU COULD BE BARRED AS A
MATTER OF LAW FROM RAISING THIS.
THEIR PARTICULAR TRANSPARENCY
PROBLEMS WITH THIS BODY
OF ELECTED OFFICIALS WERE
SUPPOSED TO BE DOING BUSINESS
WITH THE LIGHT OF THE SUN. THESE
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES ARE
AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY IN
AGAINST.
YOU KNOW BUT A.
WHAT WE HOPE ALL OF OUR PUBLIC
OFFICIALS ARE WHICH IS ACTING IN
THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC NOT
IN THEIR OWN PRIVATE INTERESTS?
ARBITRATION CLAUSES MRS BEEN IN
THE MEDIA AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN
DISCUSSED BEFORE THIS BODY. OF
THIS WEEK ACTUALLY THE.
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S.
A I BELIEVE IT'S FIFTY SIX OF
THEM CAME OUT AND SAID
PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO
SEXUAL HARASSMENT ARBITRATION
CLAUSES.
ARE AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY THERE
AGAINST TRANSPARENCY AND THEY
ALLOW REPEAT PLAYERS ARE REPEAT
HARASSERS TO EXIST AND TO
CONTINUE WITH. THIS UNLAWFUL
CONDUCT I HAVE PROVIDED THAT
DOCUMENT FOR YOUR REVIEW WHICH
AGAIN WAS SIGNED BY FIFTY SIX
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ACROSS THIS
NATION.
THE POLICIES THEMSELVES
OTHER GOVERNMENTS BODY HAVE TO
BE LOOKED AT.
I AM ONE OF THE ISSUES WHICH I
THINK IS A WONDERFUL STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION BUT I THINK
FALLS SHORT.
IS THE ABILITY OF VICTIMS TO GO
STRAIGHT TO WE.
NOW IT'S WONDERFUL THAT THERE IS
A A PLACE THAT INDIVIDUALS CAN
GO AND TO DISCUSS THEIR
EXPERIENCES AND PERHAPS GET
HELP.
PROBLEM LIES IS THAT IT'S NOT
CONSIDERED PROTECTED ACTIVITY SO
IF THIS BODY SAYS TO A PERSON
WHO'S A VICTIM OF HARASSMENT OR
RETALIATION.
GO TO WE'VE.
BUT DON'T TELL THEM THIS IS NOT
CONSIDERED A PROTECTED ACTIVITY
AND THE US YOU ARE NOT COVERED
BY THE WHISTLEBLOWER LAWS IF YOU
DO THAT. I THINK THAT'S A MAJOR
PROBLEM.
EITHER WE NEED TO SAY AS A
MATTER OF PUBLIC POLICY IF
YOU'RE TELLING PEOPLE TO GO TO
WE'VE THAT IS CONSIDERED A
PROTECTE ACTIVITY AND YOU'LL BE
COVERED BY A WHISTLEBLOWER LAWS.
AND OR YOU NEED TO TELL THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO COME FORWARD
WITH HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION
AND RETALIATION CLAIMS. IF YOU
CHOOSE TO GO TO WE'VE THAT IS
NOT.
A PROTECTED US ACTIVITY AND YOU
WILL NOT BE COVERED BY THE LAW
THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A VICTIM
OR SURVIVOR OF HARASSMENT
DISCRIMINATION RETALIATION
SHOULD AT LEAST KNOW WHERE THEY
STAND. IF THEY'RE TOLD UNDER THE
POLICIES TO REPORT SOMEPLACE AND
WHERE THE REPORTING IS NOT
CONSIDERED A PROTECTED ACTIVITY
UNDER THE LAW. THAT'S A MAJOR
PROBLEM.
REGARDING INVESTIGATION.
BUT I THINK IT'S WONDERFUL THAT
THEIR INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE
STARTING I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
FOR TRANSPARENCY HOWEVER. WHEN
WE LOOK AT THE INVESTIGATIONS WE
NEED TO DETERMINE BOMB.
CERTAIN GUIDELINES
AND.
.
TRANSPARENCY REGARDING THOSE
INVESTIGATIONS
SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I
THINK NEED TO BE ANSWERED AS IT
RELATES TO THOSE INVESTIGATIONS
ARE WHAT ARE THE RULES OF THE
PERSONS IN THE INVESTIGATION.
WATER THEIR QUALIFICATIONS AND
EXPERIENCE
DO THEY HAVE ANY CONFLICT OF
INTEREST OR BIAS AYE E. DO THEY
REPRESENT THE ASSEMBLY THE STATE
OR ANY OF THE ACCUSED.
THE LIKELIHOOD IS NONE OF THOSE
THINGS ARE TRUE BUT THE PEOPLE
PARTICIPATING IN INVESTIGATIONS
NEED TO KNOW THAT UP FRONT
RATHER THAN AS THEY WAIT INTO
THE INVESTIGATION ASKING THESE
QUESTIONS ON AN AD HOC BASIS.
WILL INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE
PERFORMING THESE INVESTIGATIONS
BE PRECLUDED AT A FUTURE DATE
FROM REPRESENTING THE SENATE THE
ASSEMBLY OR ANY OF THE ACCUSED.
FEES GO TO CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST ISSUES OR PERCEPTION OF
CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
EVEN IF THERE ISN'T A CURRENT
CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
IF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SUBJECTED
TO HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION AND
RETALIATION IN THE WORKPLACE. OR
ARE BY STANDARDS WOULD LIKE TO
COME FORWARD REGARDING
INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT. IF THEY
FEEL THAT THERE ARE CONFLICTS OR
IF THEY FEEL THAT THE.
PERCEPTION IS THAT THE DECK IS
STACKED THEN THEY'RE NOT GOING
TO COME FORWARD CITIES ISSUES
HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE
FRONT END AND THEY HAVE TO BE.
AFFIRMATIVELY COMMUNICATED.
ARE THERE ANY POLICIES IN PLACE
REGARDING. ANY CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST WHICH MAY MANIFEST IN
THE FUTURE DOES NEED TO BE
CONTEMPLATED UP FRONT.
ADDITIONALLY IS THERE ANY WAIVER
OF ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND
WORK PRODUCT WITH THE
INVESTIGATIVE REPORT.
IF YOU COVER INVESTIGATIVE
REPORTS IF YOU HAVE ATTORNEYS DO
THOSE AND THEN DECIDE THAT
COVERED BY ATTORNEY CLIENT
PRIVILEGE AND WORK PRODUCT.
THAT'S VERY PROBLEMATIC I THINK
FOR THE ASSEMBLY M. AND FOR THE
SENATE BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT
THERE IS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY.
WE'RE ALSO ASKING EMPLOYEES TO
COME FORWARD WHERE THEY HAVE
SIGNIFICANT FEAR OF RETALIATION
BUT NEVER PROVIDING THEM WITH
ANY DATA OF WHAT HAPPENS.
I'M. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS WHICH
NEED TO BE ANSWERED IS WHO GETS
THE REPORTS AND WHAT HAPPENS TO
THEM WHERE DOES THAT DATA GO
WHERE'S IT DISTRIBUTED. IF YOUR
WITNESS AFRAID ABOUT RETALIATION
IN THE WORKPLACE AND YOU DON'T
KNOW WHERE YOUR DATA IS GOING
WHO'S GOING TO BE READING IT HOW
IT'S GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED.
YOU'RE UNLIKELY TO COME FORWARD
AND SHARE ALL OF THE INFORMATION
THAT YOU HAVE AN OPEN AND
STE WAY.
ADDITIONALLY WHAT'S THE SCOPE IN
THE MANDATE OF THE
INVESTIGATION.
IF THERE ARE OTHER IDENTIFIED
PROBLEMS IN THE WORKPLACE LET'S
SAY ONE PERSON COMES FORWARD
WITH AS A REPORT OF
INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT IN THE
WORKPLACE.
THE INVESTIGATOR GOES AND TALKS
TO OTHER WITNESSES AND FINDS OUT
LOAN BEHOLD THIS IS A PATTERN OR
PRACTICE IN THE WORKPLACE THERE
HAVE BEEN OTHER PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
TOUCHED INAPPROPRIATELY. OTHER
COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN A
INAPPROPRIATE IN THE WORKPLACE.
IS THE INVESTIGATOR ALLOWED TO
LOOK AT THOSE ISSUES
I WOULD POSIT THAT YES IF YOU
ARE OPENING UP THAT
INVESTIGATION YOU SHOULD ALLOW
THE SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION
DOING ENCOMPASS THOSE ISSUES.
BECAUSE IT IS YOUR LEGAL DUTY TO
ADDRESS.
ALL ISSUES OF HARASSMENT IN THE
WORKPLACE AND TO UTILIZE ALL
REMEDIAL MEASURES WHICH UNDER
THE LAW IT IS AN EFFECTIVE
INVESTIGATION. OF AN
INVESTIGATION INVESTIGATOR IS
PRESENTED WITH UNLAWFUL CONDUCT
IN THE WORKPLACE.
THIS BODY SHOULD ALLOW THE
INVESTIGATION TO LOOK AT THAT AS
OPPOSED TO PRETENDING THAT
THERE'S BLINDERS AND IT NEVER
HAPPENED THAT DEEP SIX IS THE
INFORMATION AND ENCOURAGES
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT FLOURISH.
WHAT ABOUT ACCESS TO PRIOR AND
SUBSEQUENT COMPLAINTS WHEN
THERE'S ONE COMPLAINT? IT BIG
COULD BE EVEN A MINOR COMPLAINT
LET'S SAY ONE CAN BE CALLED A
MINOR COMPLAINT BUT IF THERE
SPEND THREE OR FOUR COMPLAINTS
AGAINST THE SAME MEMBER THE SAME
STAFFER. IT BEGINS TO LOOK LIKE
A PATTERN AND PRACTICE PROBLEMS.
AND SO THE ISSUE OF WHETHER
THERE'S PRIOR COMPLAINTS OR
SUBSEQUENT COMPLAINTS IS
EXTREMELY RELEVANT IN ORDER TO
GET A PICTURE OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY
HAPPENING HERE.
THE CONVERSE IS TRUE IF THERE
WEREN'T ANY OTHER PER COMPLAINTS
AND THE MEMBER HAS DEEMED TO BE.
AYE ACTING APPROPRIATELY IN
EVERY OTHER WAY AND IF THE
COMPLAINT IS OF WHAT COULD BE
CONSIDERED A STRAIGHT UP A
MINOR ISSUE.
THAT ALSO SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT BUT WE CAN'T EVALUATE
THAT.
UNLESS YOU NO ARE THERE PRIOR
COMPLAINTS BY THEIR SUBSEQUENT
COMPLAINTS AND WHAT WERE THE
NATURE OF THOSE COMPLAINTS.
THAT ALSO GOES TO RECORD KEEPING
WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH RECORD
KEEPING ARE YOU KEEPING THESE
PUPPIES PARA COMPLAINTS.
HOW ARE YOU ACCESSING THAT DATA
WHO IS THAT DATA AVAILABLE FOR I
WOULD POSIT AT THE VERY LEAST
THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO
INVESTIGATORS? IF I'M AN
INVESTIGATOR GOING INTO FIND OUT
IF A MEMBER ACTED APPROPRIATELY
OR INAPPROPRIATELY IN THE
WORKPLACE ONE OF THE FIRST
QUESTIONS I WANT TO KNOW IS.
WERE THERE ANY PRIOR COMPLAINTS
WHAT WHERE THE NATURE OF THOSE
COMPLAINTS WHEN DEBATE HER HOW
DID THEY RESOLVE. DID ANYTHING
HAPPEN TO THAT MEMBER WHERE THEY
DISCIPLINED IN ANY WAY OR WAS IT
FOUND THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY NO
INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT HAPPENED.
THESE ARE CENTRAL QUESTIONS AND
I THINK. OF THIS BODY NEEDS TO.
DECIDE WHAT RECORD KEEPING AND
THERE ARE CERTAIN CONFINES OF
LAW THAT YOU MUST AT.
AB ABIDE BY BUT SEPARATE AND
APART FROM THAT.
IN TERMS OF TRANSPARENCY AND
ALSO FOR THE BEST PRACTICES
THOSE OF PRIOR COMPLAINTS SHOULD
BE KEPT SHOULD BE KEPT IN A
MANNER THAT IS EASILY ACCESSIBLE
IT'S VERY EASY TO
BUT THAT IN A DATABASE I'VE SEEN
THAT.
OTHER STATE AGENCIES THAT I'VE
SEEN.
WHAT'S THE STANDARD OF PROOF.
WHEN ANY FACT FINDER IS LOOKING
AT A SET OF FACTS YOU NEED TO
KNOW WHAT'S YOUR STANDARD OF
PROOF IS ITS PREPONDERANCE OF
THE EVIDENCE IS THIS CLEARING
CONVINCING EVIDENCE.
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT
MATTERS.
AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN
ARTICULATED SO WE NEED TO
DETERMINE WHAT OUR STANDARD OF
PROOF SAYS. OFTEN INVESTIGATIONS
WILL USE A PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE WHICH IS MORE LIKELY
THAN NOT BUT WHATEVER THE
STANDARD OF PROOF YOU'RE GOING
TO USE IT NEEDS TO BE UNDERSTOOD
ARTICULATED. AND SET FORTH BUT
BEFORE YOU START THE
INVESTIGATION BECAUSE OTHERWISE
HOW DOES THE INVESTIGATOR NO IT
HERE SHE IS SUPPOSED TO DO. AND
HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO EVALUATE
THAT EVIDENCE THE FITS.
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT WELL
THAT'S A VERY DIFFERENT STANDARD
AND I WOULD POSIT THAT WOULD BE
AN INAPPROPRIATE STANDARD
PARTICULARLY IN THIS CONTEXT AND
WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
ZERO TOLERANCE I WOULD SAY THAT
WOULD BE AN ANTHEM A TO THAT.
BUT BUT AS A BODY NEED TO MAKE
THAT DETERMINATION.
ADDITIONALLY WE NEED TO LOOK AT
OTHER POTENTIAL CONCERNS FOR
BIAS
REGARDING THE INVESTIGATORS IF
YOU'RE HIRING PEOPLE WHO MAY BE
OUT STANDING ATTORNEYS THEY MAY
BE VERY FAIR BUT A STATE ALWAYS
DEFINED EMPLOYERS. WHAT MESSAGE
IS THAT SENDING UT TO THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO MIGHT BE
COMPLIANCE THEY MAY BE LESS
LIKELY?
TO GIVE THANK YOU.
INFORMATION IF THEY FEEL THAT.
THIS IS AFFIRM WHO MAYBE
OUTSTANDING.
WHO ONLY REPRESENTS EMPLOYERS TO
GIVE THE PERCEPTION OF BIAS IN
THE PERCEPTION OF BIAS IS JUST
AS IMPORTANT TO COMPLAIN AS
ACTUAL BIAS?
REGARDING THE POLICIES.
WHILE I THINK THE POLICIES THAT
ARE IN PLACE ARE GOOD START
THERE ARE SOME CONFLICTS WITHIN
THE POLICIES THEMSELVES. AS IT
RELATES TO WHAT'S CONSIDERED A
COMPLAINT TO REPORT.
THOSE ART. IT APPEARS THAT
THERE SOME CONFLICT.
I THINK ANY ARTICULATION WHETHER
YOU CALL IT A COMPLAINT A REPORT
SHOULD BE LOOKED INTO REGARDING
HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION
RETALIATION THERE SHOULDN'T BE.
.
I DIFFERENTIAL IN THE POLICIES
REGARDING WHEN YOU INVESTIGATE
WHEN YOU DOWN IF YOU RECEIVE
INFORMATION THAT THERE'S.
DISCRIMINATION HARASSMENT
RETALIATION IN THE WORKPLACE
THAT SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO AN
INVESTIGATION IT SHOULD NOT BE
UP TO DISCUSSION. IT COULD BE. A
SHORT INVESTIGATION NOTHING
ACTUALLY HAPPENED IT COULD BE
YOU FIND THAT YOU'RE JUST
SCRATCHING THE SURFACE AND
THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER VICTIMS
BUT HAVING A DIFFERENTIAL IN
YOUR OWN POLICIES REGARDING THE
TERM. REPORTER COMPLAINT LEAVE
SOME THINGS ON THE TABLE ARE
THERE. OF WOMEN OR MEN COMING
FORWARD INDICATING THAT THERE'S
INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL CONDUCT IN
THE WORKPLACE THAT NEVER GETS
LOOKED AT BECAUSE IT'S
CONSIDERED A REPORT.
VERSES A COMPLAINT THAT'S A
MAJOR ISSUE.
WHO DETERMINES AND HOW THEY
DETERMINE WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN
WHETHER SOMETHING SHOULD BE
INVESTIGATED I THINK THAT'S A
HOLE IN YOUR POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES THAT NEEDS TO BE?
LOOKED AT AND CLEARLY
ARTICULATED.
ADDITIONALLY PERMITTING INTERNAL
INVESTIGATIONS AND RESOLUTION BY
SUPERVISOR.
THAT'S RIGHT WITH CONFLICT IF
MY.
IF I'M A WOMAN COMPLAINING
ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT ABOUT MY
SUPERVISOR MY SUPPOSED TO GO
TELL MY SUPERVISOR AND MY
SUPERVISOR. THEN GETS TO
DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENS THAT'S
OBVIOUSLY A SITUATION THAT WE
CAN'T ALLOW TO STAND IN THAT'S
NOT. A ZERO POLLOCK ZERO
TOLERANCE POLICY IN IS CERTAINLY
NOTHING THAT WOULD PASS THE
SMELL TEST UNDER LOCK.
AND AND I THINK THAT LEADS US
BACK TO RECORD KEEPING I THINK
IN ORDER TO HAVE. BUT WHICH WILL
WRAP UP MY TIME. AND THESE ARE
ISSUES THAT I THINK THE POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES NEED TO BE
CLEARLY ARTICULATED THEY NEED TO
BE ARTICULATED UP FRONT THE
STANDARDS REGARDING
INVESTIGATIONS NEED TO BE
ARTICULATED UP FRONT.
AND THERE NEEDS TO BE OF AN OPEN
PLATFORM SO THAT WHEN
INDIVIDUALS DO SEE SOMETHING
THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING
SOMETHING.
AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN
ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU WERE GOING TO BE ASKING
QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THIS
PANEL AND THEN THE LAST PANELIST
ON THIS PANEL IS MISS WEST.
IN HERE UNDER MY CHAIRMAN
FRIEDMAN VICE CHAIRMAN MITCHELL
AND DISTINGUISHED COMMITTEE
MEMBERS FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK
TO YOU TODAY. BY WAY BACKGROUND
I AM AN EMPLOYMENT LAWYER AND
I'VE SPENT THE LAST EIGHTEEN
YEARS REPRESENTING.
EMPLOYERS IN ALL ASPECTS OF
THEIR EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES.
PART OF MY PRACTICE FOCUSES ON
EDUCATING AND TRAINING EMPLOYERS
ON COMBATING BIAS AND PREVENTING
HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION IN
THE WORKPLACE.
I AM ALSO IN EMPLOYMENT MEDIATOR
AND ASSIST PARTIES IN RESOLVING
DISPUTES BOTH PRE AND POST.
LITIGATION AND I AM A
CONTRIBUTING EDITOR TO THE
HARASSMENT CHAPTER IN THE WRITER
GROUPS EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
TREATISE WHICH IS UTILIZED BY
EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA.
WAS PARTLY EVIDENT TO THE
COMMITTEE I'M ALSO WOMAN'S.
AND I AM ALSO AN EMPLOYEE.
SO THE ISSUE OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE. A I
HAVE NOT BEEN IMMUNE TO IN MY
CAREER. BY AND IT IS MY GOAL
WHEN I WORK WITH MY CLIENTS TO
HELP THEM PREVENT HARASSMENT
HAPPENING AND THEIR WORKPLACE.
I WANNA START BY SAYING THAT I
COMMEND AND SUPPORT ALL THE MANY
WOMEN AND MEN WHO HAVE COME
FORWARD. IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS
AND TOLD THEIR STORIES IN
DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES INCLUDING
IN THIS LEGISLATURE.
AND I'M ENCOURAGED THAT THE
SPOTLIGHT THAT'S BEEN PLACED ON
THE ISSUE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
WILL CONTINUE TO RESULT IN
BODIES LIKE THIS SUBCOMMITTEE.
TAKING MEANINGFUL STEPS TO TRY
AND PROTECT EMPLOYEES FROM
HARASSMENT.
I WAS ASKED TO PRESENT TODAY ON
CHALLENGES THAT EMPLOYERS.
CONTINUE TO FACE IN TRYING THEIR
BEST TO PREVENT HARASSMENT IN
THE WORKPLACE
IN MY TIME ALLOTTED I'M GOING TO
TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF
CHALLENGES THEY FACE WITH
RESPECT TO HAVING AN EFFECTIVE
ANTI HARASSMENT PROGRAM IN PLACE
AND THEN I'M GOING TO DISCUSS A
FEW LEGAL.
CAN YOU TO FACE WHEN HARASSMENT
COMPLAINTS ARE IN FACT FILED.
ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT
CHALLENGES EMPLOYERS FACE IS
REALLY GETTING TRUE BY AND FROM
LEADERSHIP.
THE EEOC TASK FORCE WHICH ISSUED
ITS REPORT IN JUNE OF TWENTY. AT
TWENTY SIXTEEN AND IS SUMMARIZED
IN THE BACKGROUND PAPER THAT WAS
PROVIDED TO YOU. MADE VERY CLEAR
THAT LEADERSHIP IN EVERY
ORGANIZATION INCLUDING THIS
LEGISLATURE.
MUST BE COMMITTED TO WORKPLACE
FREE OF HARASSMENT.
ABSENT THAT COMMITMENT IT'S VERY
LIKELY ALMOST PROBABLE.
ALMOST GUARANTEED THAT SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IS GOING TO CONTINUE.
ALSO AN ORGANIZATION HAS TO HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS IN PLACE
TO INSURE THAT THOSE WHO ENGAGE
IN HARASSMENT ARE RESPONSIBLE IN
A MEANINGFUL AND APPROPRIATE
MANNER.
MERELY EVAN POLICIES IN PLACE IN
CONDUCTING TRAINING.
WILL NOT BE ENOUGH IF IN THESE
TWO CORE COMPONENTS ARE NOT
EMBRACED BY THIS LEGISLATURE
LEADERSHIP BY AND. AND
ACCOUNTABILITY.
LIP SERVICE ISN'T ENOUGH.
ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES THAT THE
ASSEMBLY HAS IN PLACE AND THAT
THE SENATE HAS IN PLACE.
THEY NEED TO BE COMPLIED WITH BY
EVERYBODY WHO WORKS IN THOSE TWO
BODIES.
NOW I AGREE A WITH MISTER
JOHNSON'S COMMENT ON A CONCERN
ABOUT ZERO TOLERANCE
AND I ALSO AGREE WITH MY
PANELISTS WENDY WITH RESPECT TO
SOME IMPROVEMENTS THAT CAN BE
MADE AND SOME OF THE POLICIES.
AND I'D LIKE TO FINISH MY
PRESENTATION THE MAYBE ADDRESS
SOME OF THOSE.
IF WE HAVE TIME.
BUT LIP SERVICE IS NOT ENOUGH.
LIKE OTHER WORKPLACES AND
EMPLOYERS A LIKE OTHER
WORKPLACES THIS LEGISLATURE.
WILL ALSO CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE
WITH POWER DYNAMICS AND THE
ISSUE A VERY INFLUENTIAL AND
HIGH VALUED EMPLOYEES.
AND.
THE LEGISLATURE HAS VERY HIGH
POWERED INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE SOME
OF WHOM MAY BELIEVE THAT THE
RULES DON'T APPLY TO THEM.
OR SOMEONE. WHO MAY BELIEVE
GENUINELY ARE NOT?
THAT THEIR CONDUCT IS SOMEHOW
DIFFERENT THAN THE CONDUCT
THAT'S BEING DESCRIBED IN A
POLICY WERE BEING DISCUSSED IN A
TRAINING SESSION.
BUT THERE CAN BE NO EXCEPTIONS
NONE.
THESE INDIVIDUALS REGARDLESS OF
THEIR STATURE. MUST BE HELD TO
THE SAME STANDARDS AND MUST BE
HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR
CONDUCT.
IN ADDITION A POWER DYNAMIC
SEXUAL HARASSMENT OFTEN INVOLVES
BIASES.
BOTH CONSCIOUS AND UNCONSCIOUS.
IN STYRIA TYPES ABOUT THE ROLES
OF MEN AND WOMEN IN OUR SOCIETY
AND IN OUR WORKPLACE.
AND I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT PART OF
A RIGOROUS EFFECTIVE TRAINING
PROGRAM TO PREVENT HARASSMENT IN
THE WORKPLACE MUST ADDRESS
BIASES.
NOT JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THEY
EXIST BUT ACTUALLY EXPLORING
TOOLS TO COMBAT THEM.
THERE ARE MANY STUDIES OUT THERE
THAT SHOW WE ALL HAVE
UNCONSCIOUS BIASES EVERY SINGLE
ONE OF US THERE'S A PRINCETON
STUDY THAT SAID THE SECOND YOU
SAW MY FACE YOU MADE A DECISION
OF WHO I AM.
AND THE SECOND I SAW YOU ALL
YOUR FACES I DID THE SAME THING.
WE OPERATE ON UNCONSCIOUS BIASES
AND WERE NOT AWARE OF IT.
DOESN'T MAKE US BAD BUT IT DOES
MANDATE.
THAT WE USE SELF REFLECTION TO
DETERMINE IF SOME OF THOSE
BIASES ARE NEGATIVE PREJUDICES
THAT ARE MOTIVATING OUR ACTIONS
AND CONDUCT IN RELATION TO OTHER
PEOPLE.
AND THERE ARE LOTS OF RESOURCES
TO HELP THIS BODY DO THAT OCCUR
WHEN INSTITUTE.
THE.
COOK ROSS A WOMAN OWN
CONSULTING FIRM THAT SPECIALIZES
IN THIS I BELIEVE IN YOUR
PREVIOUS HEARING YOU HAD.
.
A A SPEAKER WHO ADDRESSED THIS
ISSUE THERE ARE LOTS OF
RESOURCES.
ANOTHER CHALLENGE FACED BY
EMPLOYERS IS THAT EMPLOYERS HAVE
TO BALANCE EMPLOYEE RIGHTS WHEN
TAKING ACTION IN RESPONSE TO
SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
UNDER THE LAW WELL EMPLOYER HAS
A DUTY TO TAKE ACTION THAT IS
REASONABLY CALCULATED TO END
SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
IT MUST ALSO CONSIDER RIGHTS OF
THE ACCUSED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS
THE DIRT DETERMINATION IS MADE
THAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT OCCURRED.
EMPLOYERS MAY FEEL AS IF THEY'RE
CAUGHT IN A DOUBLE BIND WHEN
DETERMINING WHAT STEPS TO TAKE
WHAT EFFECTIVE DISCIPLINARY
MEASURES TO IMPLEMENT TO STOP
HARASSMENT.
THERE IS CASE LAW THAT SAYS THE
DISCIPLINARY A REMEDIAL ACTION
THAT IS TAKEN CANNOT BE OR
SHOULD NOT BE DISPROPORTIONATE
WITH THE HARASSING CONDUCT.
THERE'S ALSO ISSUES EMPLOYERS
FACE WITH POTENTIAL LEGAL SUITS
FROM THE ACCUSED.
NOT JUST THE HARASSER I MEAN NOT
JUST THE VICTIM OF HARASSMENT
POTENTIALLY WRONGFUL TERMINATION
CASES THEIR DEFAMATION CASES
THAT ARE BEING.
DEFENDED IN COURT AND THIS
HAPPENS IF AN EMPLOYER FAILS TO
HAVE FAIR OBJECTIVE
INVESTIGATIONS TO GIVE ALL
PARTIES AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PARTICIPATE. OR IF AN EMPLOYER
JUMPS TO QUICKLY TO MAKE
DISCIPLINARY DECISIONS BASED ON
FAULTY FINDINGS.
THEREFORE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT
IN ANY ANTI HARASSMENT PROGRAM
THAT AN INVESTIGATION BEEF
PROMPT
FAIR NEUTRAL AND OBJECTIVE. MIT
COLLEAGUE WENDY IDENTIFIED IT IS
VERY IMPORTANT UP FRONT TO
DETERMINE IF THERE'S CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST OR BIASES.
TO HAVE THE RIGHT.
ALL PARTIES IN THAT
INVESTIGATION HAVE TO BE GIVEN
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE.
AND HEARD BEFORE ANY FINDING IS
MADE AN ACTION IS TAKEN.
FINALLY. EMPLOYERS CONTINUE TO
STRUGGLE WITH THEIR STRICT
LIABILITY FOR SUPERVISOR
HARASSMENT.
IF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
COMMITTED BY A SUPERVISOR AN
EMPLOYER IS STRICTLY LIABLE EVEN
IF UPPER MANAGEMENT AND OWNERS
OF AN ENTITY IN THIS CASE EVEN
IF.
THE.
MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY AND
SENATE HAD NO IDEA THAT A
SUPERVISING EMPLOYEE HAD THE
PROPENSITY TO ENGAGE IN THAT
CONDUCT.
WELL FEDERAL LAW MIGHT PROVIDE
LIMITED DEFENSES UNDER TITLE
SEVEN UNDER WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE
LA A FAIR DEFENSE
TO EMPLOYER LIABILITY WHEN A
SUPERVISOR. IS BAD FOUND TO HAVE
A RAST.
THERE IS NO DEFENSE TO LIABILITY
UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW.
NOW THERE MAY BE A POTENTIAL TO
REDUCE DAMAGES UNDER WHAT IS
KNOWN AS THE AVOIDABLE
CONSEQUENCES DOCTRINE.
BUT THERE IS NO DEFENSE TO
LIABILITY FOR THE EMPLOYER.
CONSEQUENTLY EMPLOYERS LIKE THIS
LEGISLATURE ARE FACED WITH THE
HARSH REALITY.
BUT EVEN IF THEY HAVE A ROBUST
ANTI HARASSMENT PROGRAM IN
PLACE.
WITH THESE COMPONENTS A
COMPREHENSIVE POLICY TAILORED TO
THE WORKPLACE EFFECTIVE TRAINING
SECURE REPORTING MECHANISMS.
FAIR AND IMPARTIAL
INVESTIGATIONS APPROPRIATE AND
EFFECTIVE DISCIPLINE AND
REMEDIAL MEASURES AND PROTECTION
AGAINST HARASSMENT.
THEY STILL FACE.
LIABILITY.
IF A SUPERVISOR VIOLATES THAT
ANTI HARASSMENT PROGRAM AND
ENGAGES IN HARASSMENT.
NOW I NO ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT
CODE THE LEGISLATURE MAY HAVE
SOME RECOURSE IN RECOUP.
YOU KNOW DEFENSE COSTS OR
SOMETHING TO A MEMBER OR SENATOR
WHO IF HERE SHE HAPPENS TO BE.
THE HARASSER IN THAT SITUATION
BUT
THE FACT REMAINS LIABILITY.
IS ATTACHED UNDER STRICT
LIABILITY.
WHAT'S THE ANSWER FOR THE
LEGISLATURE.
NOT SURE THERE IS A PERFECT
ANSWER.
EMPLOYERS ARE NOT SEEKING TO
AVOID LIABILITY WHEN IT'S BEEN
DETERMINED THAT THEY'VE DONE
SOMETHING WRONG.
INSTEAD WHAT THEY'RE WISHING TO
SEEK.
IS TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL DEFENSE
WHEN IT'S DETERMINED THAT THEY
DID THINGS RIGHT.
BUT YET A ROGUE SUPERVISOR STILL
ENGAGED IN HARASSMENT.
MAYBE ONE OF THE ANSWERS.
UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW AS AN
AMENDMENT TO THE FAIR EMPLOYMENT
HOUSING ACT TO. COME UP WITH THE
DEFENSE IN LINE WITH
INCOMPARABLE TO THE HOURS FAIR
DEFENSE.
I BELIEVE THAT.
IDEA IN YOUR CAPABLE HANDS.
I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADDRESS A
FEW THINGS IN THE POLICY SOME OF
WHICH AND.
THE OTHER PANEL MEMBERS HAVE
DISCUSSED THE ZERO TOLERANCE
POLICY THAT IS EXPRESSED IN BOTH
THE SENATE'S POLICY AGAINST
HARASSMENT AND THE ASSEMBLIES.
UP POLICY AGAINST HARASSMENT
COULD RAISE SOME CONCERNS
BECAUSE AS MS JOHNSON SAID IT
DOES SEEM TO CONVEY THAT ANY.
FORM OF HARASSMENT RESULTS
ULTIMATELY IN TERMINATION OF
EMPLOYMENT AND AS I INDICATED
THERE IS CASE LAW THAT MAKES
CLEAR THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION
SHOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF AN
INVESTIGATION AND THE EXTENT AN
EGREGIOUS NESS OF THE HARASSMENT
THEREFORE IT MAY NOT BE
APPROPRIATE MAY BE
DISPROPORTIONATE AND THAT TO
HAVE AN ABSOLUTE ZERO TOLERANCE
POLICY.
THE ASSEMBLY POLICY ALSO SEEMS
TO INDICATE THAT.
INVESTIGATIONS WILL BE DONE IF
A COMPLAINT OF INAPPROPRIATE
HARASSING CONDUCT IS MADE WITHIN
ONE YEAR OF THE CONDUCT NIGH
UNDERSTANDABLE I BELIEVE I
UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE FOR
THAT TIME LIMIT IT'S IN LINE
WITH THE CURRENT ONE YEAR.
PERIOD IN WHICH EMPLOYEES CAN
REPORT TO THE DFV AGE HOWEVER I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
TO BE MINDFUL OF TWO THINGS.
EMPLOYERS SHOULD NEVER DENY
INVESTIGATING INAPPROPRIATE
CONDUCT IN THE WORKPLACE NO
MATTER WHEN IT'S BROUGHT FORWARD
BECAUSE WE ALWAYS HAVE A
CONTINUING DUTY TO MAKE SURE AND
AS. MY PANELISTS WENDY POINTED
OUT THERE MAY BE OTHER CONDUCT
THAT'S GOING ON WITH RESPECT TO
THE CO WORKERS OF THAT PERSON
WHO COMES FORWARD AND IT'S OUR
DUTY AS EMPLOYERS TO GET TO THE
BOTTOM UP.
BUT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT
THERE IS ALSO A DOCTRINE CALLED
THE AVOIDABLE.
THE CONTINUING VIOLATION
DOCTRINE AND SO YOU MAY HAVE AN
EMPLOYEE WHO COMES IN REPORT
SOMETHING TO YOU THAT HAPPENED
OVER YOU SOMETHING EGREGIOUS
POTENTIALLY THAT HAPPENED OVER A
YEAR AGO WHEN YOU THINK AND YOUR
PA.
SEE THEY DIDN'T REPORT IT TIMELY
BUT IF OTHER MICRO INEQUITIES
AND HARASSING INAPPROPRIATE
CONDUCT IS
AND WITHIN THAT ONE YEAR PERIOD.
THAT EGREGIOUS CONDUCT THAT WAS
HAPPENING OVER YEAR AGO CAN BE
BROUGHT IN. TO THE CURRENT.
AND.
EVALUATION OF WHETHER WE HAVE A
HOSTILE WORK NVIRONMENT OR SOME
OTHER HARASSMENT IN THE
WORKPLACE AND ACTIONABLE
HARASSMENT. SO WE SHOULD NEVER
PUT A TIME LIMIT THAT WE SHOULD
ENCOURAGE PROMPT REPORTING SO
THAT WE CAN FULFILL OUR DUTIES
TO TAKE PROMPT ACTION AND
INVESTIGATE BUT WE SHOULD NEVER
PUT A TIME LIMIT. AND SAY THAT
WE WILL ONLY INVESTIGATE IF YOU
WERE IF YOU REPORTED WITHIN A
YEAR.
.
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT'S REYES AND
MY.
PANELIST WENDY ADDRESSED IT
WITH RESPECT TO THE REPORTING IN
RESOLUTION OF SOME COMPLAINTS BY
A SUPERVISOR. SHE BROUGHT FORTH
A VERY GOOD POINT THAT IF THE
SUPERVISORS THERE ISN'T IT
SUPERVISOR IS THE HARASSER THEN
IT SURELY NOT.
S. THE REPORTING POINT THAT AN
EMPLOYEE HAS TO GO TO.
BUT EVEN MORE SO.
A SUPERVISOR SHOULD NEVER BE THE
ONE TO INVESTIGATE OR RESOLVE
ANY CLAIM OF HARASSMENT EVEN
BETWEEN CO COURTS AND PEERS IF
THAT SUPERVISOR HAS NOT BEEN
TRAINED ON HOW TO DO THAT.
THAT CAN ONLY EXPOSE THE
EMPLOYER TO MORE LIABILITY IF
THEY GET IT WRONG.
THANK YOU VERY OUGHT AND MUCH
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO
YOU.
THANK YOU THAT'S ALL I'M.
REALLY.
GREAT AND VERY COMPREHENSIVE
INFORMATION.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PANEL UP
NOW TO QUESTIONS AND WE HAVE OUR
THIRD PANELIST AVAILABLE SO
CALLED ALL START WITH A COUPLE
OF QUESTIONS.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU
MENTIONED THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT
THANK YOU THAT I'VE BEEN TRYING
TO GRAPPLE WITH MY OWN MIND.
I'M HAS TO DO WITH.
THE IDEA OF THE ZERO ZERO
TOLERANCE AS YOU TALKED ABOUT AS
BEING IN SOME WAYS PROBLEMATIC
BUT ALSO WANTING TO MAKE SURE WE
HAVE ACCOUNTABILITY AND WE DON'T
ALLOW WORK. PLACE ABUSES TO
CONTINUE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD
A CHANCE TO SEE OUR LAST PANEL
BUT WE HAD ARM PEOPLE FROM THE
HUMAN RESOURCES WORLD COME IN
AND WE ALSO HAD A PROFESSOR WHO
SAID.
ACTUAL HARASSMENT
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY
ALL SAID PRETTY CONSISTENTLY WAS
THAT YOU DO NEED TO HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU WANT TO
GET TO A WORKPLACE WHERE.
PEOPLE FEEL GOOD COMING TO WORK
WHERE YOU HAVE MUTUAL RESPECT
AND THAT THE MORE YOU FOCUS ON
ACCOUNTABILITY AND PUNISHMENT.
ON THE MORE TOXIC OF A WORKPLACE
YOU CAN CREATE BECAUSE PEOPLE
BECOME AFRAID THEY'RE AFRAID OF
THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH EACH
OTHER.
AND IFEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING TO
A PLACE HERE IN THE CAPITAL
QUITE HONESTLY WHERE PEOPLE ARE
AFRAID THEY'RE AFRAID OF. OF OF
WHETHER THEIR BEHAVIOR CROSSES
THE LINE O MAKE MY QUESTION IS
BOTH ABOUT WHERE IS THAT LINE
AND HOW.
START TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S
CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT'S
OT BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE A
MOVING TARGET RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO
HOW DO WE BALANCE.
HAVING A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE
PENALTIES FOR ACTING
INAPPROPRIATELY BUT ALSO WITH
THEY'RE NOT AFRAID ABOUT ALL OF
THEIR BEHAVIORS.
WELL I I THINK TOLERANCE
POLICIES DON'T MEAN THAT THE
REMEDY IS ALWAYS EXPULSION AND I
THINK FRANKLY.
.
WHAT TO DO IN THIS PARTICULAR
WORKPLACE BECAUSE YOU'RE ELECTED
OFFICIALS THAT BECOMES EVEN MORE
DIFFICULT RIGHT?
THIS ISN'T A NORMAL WORKPLACE
WHERE YOU HAVE YOU YOU COULD BE
FIRED AND YOU'RE OUT TO TOUR SO
I THINK. I'M.
IN ANY WORKPLACE HOWEVER ZERO
TOLERANCE DOES NOT MEAN NIGHT
IT'S A PREDETERMINED REMEDY BY
E. THERE COULD BE TRAINING THERE
COULD BE. I'M SOMEWHAT LOWER
FORM OF DISCIPLINE PART OF
EXPULSION SO I THINK THOSE ARE
TWO SEPARATE CONV CONV STRIKES
ONE IS. THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF
WORKPLACE WHO WANT TO HAVE WE'RE
GONNA HAVE ZERO TOLERANCE. FOR
HARASSING DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT
AND RETALIATORY CONDUCT IN THE
WORKPLACE WHICH IS AT THE FAR
SPECTRUM. OF EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS
THE VAST MAJORITY OF DATING OUR
ACTIONS ARE NOT HARASSING
DISCRIMINATORY. OR RETALIATORY
IN THE WORKPLACE I THINK BUT THE
IDEA THAT THERE ARE SOME SORT OF
OVER CORRECTION IS ACTUALLY NOT
TRUE AT ALL WHAT THE CONDUCT
THAT'S COME OUT IF THEY COME
HERE AT THE CAPITOL I THINK WE
CAN ALL AGREE THAT THE
ALLEGATION.
OF COURSE HE SENT UP AND
DETERMINED YET SO ALL OCCUPANT
ALLEGATIONS ARE AGREE JUST
CONDUCT THAN ANYONE COULD COULD
DETERMINE THAT YOU DON'T DO
THOSE THINGS IN THE WORKPLACE.
THIS IS NOT THE THINGS THAT ARE
COMING OUT ARE NOT. I AM I HAVE
THAT.
.
TAKING YOU TO LUNCH AND WERE
HAVING A NICE CONVERSATION
ABOUT.
MY CHILDREN OR SOMETHING WE CAN
COUNT ON THE COULD THE CONTACT
THAT'S COMING OUT IS VASTLY
DIFFERENT THAN NOT IN IS VERY
STE SEXUAL IN NATURE. AND ARE
EXPLICITLY RETALIATORY SO I
THINK THAT LOOKING AT THE
CONDUCT THAT'S ALLEGED.
THIS ISN'T RUN OF THE MILL
CONDUCT IN THE WORKPLACE.
SO I WOULD BE WARY OF ANY SORT
OF INTERNALIZATION OF AN OVER
CORRECTION OR THAT.
BEING OVERLY PC IN THE
WORKPLACE I THINK THAT'S
ACTUALLY NOT HAPPENING AT ALL I
THINK WHAT YOU HAVE IS AT THE
OPPOSITE SPECTRUM THAT YOU HAVE.
THE HISTORIC.
STARKLY YOU HAVE A WORKPLACE
IT'S AFRAID TO COME FORWARD.
AND SO WHAT YOU HAVE IS A
BOTTLENECK.
AND SO WOMEN AND MEN ARE COMING
FORWARD WITH EGREGIOUS CONDUCT
THAT HAS JUST FRANKLY NOT.
BEEN BROUGHT TO THE FORE
BECAUSE THERE WASN'T A SAFE
SPACE FOR IT THAT WASN'T CLEAR
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. AND
THERE WAS CERTAINLY CONCERNS
REGARDING BACKLASH I MEAN
THERE'S A REASON WHY OVER A
HUNDRED AND FIFTY WOMEN'S
SIGNED.
A LETTER SAYING THEY'VE BEEN
SUBJECTED TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT
OR INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT OF AN
AGREED JUST NATURE.* THAT
DIDN'T HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT AND
THOSE AREN'T RUN OF THE MILL
EMPLOYMENT.
DISCUSSIONS.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
THE ZERO TOLERANCE DOES NOT
MEAN.
YOUR PRE JUDGING.
WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO ABOUT IT?
IF I YOU NEED TO TAKE THAT ON A
CASE BY CASE BASIS AND I AGREE
UNDER THE LOT DOES SAY. THAT YOU
LOOK AT WHAT THE CONDUCT IS AS
TO WHAT THE REMEDY OUGHT TO BE.
THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE LINE
I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN
INCONSISTENT WITH. OTHER
POLICIES ARE THE POLICIES ARE
GOING WITH THIS BODY.
YOUR QUESTION I THINK.
IS FAIR AND I DON'T THINK IT'S
UNIQUE TO THIS BODY ACTUALLY I
WAS ATTENDING A LEGAL CONFERENCE
IN SAN FRANCISCO LAST WEEK THE
WOMEN LAWYERS TWENTY EIGHTEEN
CONFERENCE AND THIS EXACT ISSUE
CAME UP. WHERE THERE'S A SENSE
OF WALKING ON EGGSHELLS AT LEAST
THAT'S WHAT'S BEING DESCRIBED
AND THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO
OVERCOMPENSATE IN A RATIONAL WAY
FOR EXAMPLE IN A LAW FIRM WHERE
A? MALE PARTNER HAS A NUMBER OF
ASSOCIATES ON HIS TEAM AND IF
THE CASE REQUIRES THAT.
THERE BE TRAVEL AT A TOWN
HE IS NOT GOING TO INVITE THE
FEMALE ASSOCIATE TO ACCOMPANY
HIM BECAUSE HE'S JUST NOT EVEN
GONNA PUT HIMSELF IN THAT
SITUATION FOR FEAR OF SOME FALSE
REPORT.
UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T THINK THAT
THAT'S.
AFFAIR REACTION I THINK ALL OF
US NO WERE ALL ADULTS AS TO WHAT
OUR CONDUCT AND NEEDS TO BE THE
LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SELF CENSOR
BEFORE WE SAY AND DO THINGS
RIGHT OUR INTENT DOESN'T MATTER
ARE THE IMPACT DOES. AND.
I THINK.
THIS OVER REACTION THIS FEAR
THAT YOU DESCRIBED AND WHAT
OTHER PEOPLE ARE DESCRIBING.
WILL.
FIND ITS WAY BACK.
TO SOME SENSE OF NORMALCY AT
SOME POINT BUT BECAUSE OF WHAT
WE'RE HEARING.
IN THE NEWS IN THE PRESS THESE
DAYS THAT IS A REACTION BUN
THERE'S NO LEGAL ANSWER TO THAT
THE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE
THE STANDARDS ARE GOING TO
REMAIN THE SAME AND EVERYBODY
HAS TO BE HELD THEM.
IN THIS.
BUT IF I MAY ADD.
.
THIS IS SOMETHING WORTH THINKING
ABOUT ALLIES.
IT HERE AS YOU RECOGNIZE A
MEDIA ATTENTION HAS BEEN FOCUSED
A LOT ON THE MOST EGREGIOUS
ORMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
NOTABLY SEXUAL ASSAULT AND
CRIMINAL JUSTICE TYPE RESPONSES
TO THAT I THINK IS CUTE THE
CONVERSATION.
AND. YOU KNOW SEXUAL HARASSMENT
AND VOTE INVOLVES A RANGE OF
BEHAVIORS AND IT ALSO INVOLVESA
RANGE OF. RESPONSES TO THOSE
BEHAVIORS AND I THINK.
WE ALL IS ADVOCATES HERE ON THE
PANEL AND.
AS LEGISLATIVE BODIES AYE THAT
YOU CAN PLAY A ROLE IN TRYING TO
NEW ONES THAT DISCUSSION A BIT
MORE AND EDUCATE THE PUBLIC
ABOUT WHAT HER ASMAN LOOKS LIKE
CALL THAT'S MANY FORUMS.
AND THE TYPE OF RESPONSES AND
THAT THAT MY.
THE APPROPRIATE EACH EACH
CIRCUMSTANCE I THINK ASPECT OF
TRAINS DR CRESSMAN TRAINS WILL.
GO THROUGH THAT.
AND AND LAY THAT OUT AND ARE
ACTUALLY WE HAD A SEXUAL
HARASSMENT TRAINING HERE.
YESTERDAY.
APPROPRIATELY I MEAN TO YOU.
GO TO WORK AND SUCCEED I'M AND
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO TO
STOP AND THERE ARE.
A WHOLE RANGE OF LEVELS OF
RESPONSES TO THAT.
SO I THINK WE HAVE A
RESPONSIBLY TO NUANCE THAT
DISCUSSION. AROUND SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND IT WILL HELP UP
AS A BIT OF THE PANELISTS SAKE
OF BRING THIS CONVERSATION. I'M
BACK TO.
A COMFORTABLE PLACE.
Q. HOW DO YOU BALANCE THE.
THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND
EXPECTATION OF TRANSPARENCY%
AGAINST CONFIDENTIALITY.
PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO
AYE TALKING ABOUT. THUMB
RELEASING DATE LEGAL STANDARD OF
HOW THAT'S
DONE OR HOW YOU JUDGE THAT.
AND IN ADDITION ON HOW SHOULD
WE.
ALSO CONSIDER RELEASING
INFORMATION ABOUT MEMBER
TRANSGRESSIONS WHEN THERE IS
THAT CONTINUUM OF OFFENSE
SO. IS THE EXPECTATION THAT.
WITH A MEMBER LET'S SAY. ARM OF
THAT YOU WOULD RELEASE ANYTHING
THAT VIOLATES OUR POLICY TO THE
YOU KNOW TO THE PROCESS OF THE
PUBLIC OR ONLY THOSE EGREGIOUS
CASES I MEAN HOW WHAT WOULD HOW
WOULD YOU ADVISE US AS WE CRY.
IT'S POLICY.
SELF.
I THINK THIS IS A UNIQUE BODY
THEN YOU'RE ALL ELECTED
OFFICIALS. AND THE PERSON WHO
YOU RESPOND TO IT.
THAT'S NOT IN A PRIVATE
CORPORATION
SOME THERE ARE DIFFERENT.
INTERESTS HERE MY ANSWER MIGHT
BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FOR
PRIVATE CORPORATION AND IT WOULD
BE FOR THIS
A KILLER BODY WHERE WHAT YOU'RE
DOING IS FOR THE PEOPLE. AND THE
ACTIONS THAT YOU TAKE ARE
SUPPOSED TO BE UNDER THE
SUNSHINE LAWS IN THE LIGHT OF
DAY I ALSO THINK.
WHERE YOU DO HAVE SUCH A GRAVE
POWER DIFFERENTIAL
THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT? AND ONE OF THE BEST
THINGS. THAT WE'VE SEEN.
TO ADDRESS THAT POWER
DIFFERENTIAL. IS SUNSHINE LOOK
AT THE ONE SEEN MANNER.
YOU KNOW IT BECAUSE OF THAT
GREAT POWER DIFFERENTIAL IN THAT
PARTICULAR INDUSTRY IN FOR THAT
PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL. THOSE
ABUSES WERE ALLOWED TO GO ON FOR
FAR LONGER THAN THEY EVER
SHOULDN'T.
THE SAME SORT OF CONSIDERATIONS
MUST BE CONSIDERED HERE.
PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO IF
YOU FIND THAT THERE'S VIOLATIONS
A POLICY OR PROCEDURE OF COURSE
I DOUBT YOU'RE GOING TO BE
ADDRESSING WITH THOSE VIOLATIONS
OF LAW WITH YOUR INVESTIGATIONS.
ALTHOUGH THAT'S SOMETHING YOU
OUGHT TO CONSIDER ONE WAY OR THE
OTHER WHETHER YOU DOING.
BUT ASSUMING THAT THE WHAT THE
CONSTRUCT IS IS ARE VIOLATIONS
OF POLICIES OR PROCEDURES I
THINK. DESCRIBING WHAT THOSE ARE
I THINK.
PUTTING THAT INFORMATION OUT ON
THE PUBLIC IS NOT STUPID THEY
CAN EVALUATE THESE THINGS IF IT
WAS.
THE CONVERSATION.
ONE CONVERSATION ONE TIME WHICH
WAS NOT LADEN WITH PROFANITY AND
SEXUAL INNUENDO OR PUT PRO QUO
VERY DIFFERENT THAN A SEXUAL
ASSAULT. I THINK THE PUBLIC IS
ABLE TO EVALUATE THAT IN BECAUSE
THE RIGHT TO EVALUATE THAT.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO ULTIMATELY
DECIDE DO WE WANNA.
HOW THAT NUMBER COME BACK ARE
WE GONNA VOTE THEM BACK IN AND I
THINK WE'RE SEEING THAT ON A
NATIONAL SCALE AS WELL AS ON THE
STATE'S SCALE? IS THE PEOPLE DO
HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHICH IS A
DIFFERENT THAN A PRIVATE
CORPORATION.
WHERE I WOULD ARGUE THERE
SHOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENCY IN
MORE RECORD KEEPING AND THAT
THAT IS A MATTER PUBLIC POLICY
THAT SPOT TO?
OCCUR HOWEVER.
THERE IS A BATTLE A GREATER
BALANCING OF THE RIGHT TO
PRIVACY.
IN PERSONNEL RECORDS
PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO.
PRIVATE EMPLOYER AS OPPOSED TO
THIS BODY.
I DO THINK.
CONCERNS ABOUT.
INDIVIDUALS COMING FORWARD THERE
IS A GREAT DEAL OF FEAR ABOUT
RETALIATION AND IT'S REAL.
AND THE IDEA OF BLACKLISTING IS
QUITE REAL.
WHERE INDIVIDUALS FEEL THAT? IF
THEY COME FORWARD THEY MIGHT NOT
GET A JOB.
IN THE CITY OR ARE IN THIS
BUILDING.
AND I THINK THAT ALSO HAS TO BE
TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WITH THE
CULTURE CHANGE IN THE POLICY
PROCEDURE. AGAIN INVESTIGATORY
CHANGES BECAUSE IF I'M
CONSIDERING COMING FORWARD I
NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN TO ME.
AND WHERE MY DATA GOES SO IN
ORDER TO ALLOW THAT INDIVIDUAL
TO MAKE THAT.
DECISION.
ABOUT WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES
WOULD BE FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL TO
COME FORWARD YOU WANT AN
ATMOSPHERE WHERE THEY FEEL
COMFORTABLE.
PART OF FEELING COMFORTABLE AS
IF THEY COME FORWARD THAT
ACTUALLY SOMETHING HOW.
THAT THEY'RE NOT MAKING A
COMPLAINT AND THEN THERE'S NO
ACTION THERE'S NO INVESTIGATION
AND THEY HERE TWO YEARS LATER.
THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO
ANOTHER WOMAN OR ANOTHER MAN.
SO PART OF THE CONSIDERATION IS
NOT ONLY CONCERN OF THE
IMMEDIATE DISCOMFORT OF THAT
PERSON WHO IS A WITNESS.
BUT ALSO IF THEY'RE COMING
FORWARD THAT IS GOING TO BE
EFFECTIVE NOBODY JUST LIKE IF
YOU'RE BRING UP SAFETY ISSUES.
WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S FIXED
SO THAT OTHER PEOPLE DON'T END
UP BEEN THE SAME PROBLEM IF YOU
HAVE SOMEONE WHO SEXUALLY
ASSAULTS AND.
THE WORST CASE SCENARIO AND YOU
MAKE A COMPLAINT.
YOUR EXPECTATION IS I MAKE THIS
COMPLAINT THOUGH SEXUAL ASSAULTS
STOP.
SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT THIS BODY
NEEDS TO CONSIDER AS IT BOUNCES
ISSUES OF TRANSPARENCY VERSUS
PRIVACY.
I'M NOT SURE I HAVE MUCH MORE TO
ADD EXCEPT I WOULD.
.
YOU KNOW ENCOURAGE THE
PROTECTION OF THE INTEGRITY OF
INVESTIGATIONS AS THEY.
ARE GOING ON I THINK IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT THAT AN INVESTIGATIVE
PROCESS HAVE INTEGRITY AND THAT.
WE REMEMBER THAT THEY ARE
ALLEGATIONS UNTIL THERE'S A
DETERMINATION MADE THAT UP BASED
ON THE APPROPRIATE A STANDARD OF
PROOF.
THAT IT DID OR DID NOT OCCUR
AND IF THERE IS GOING TO BE
DISCLOSURE IN PUBLICATION TO THE
PUBLIC AS THIS BODY I AM. IS
REQUIRED TO DO I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO MAKE VERY CLEAR
WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING WAS
SUBSTANTIATED OR UNSUBSTANTIATED
AFTER A FAIR.
INVESTIGATION.
IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT
BEING ABLE TO PROTECT WITNESSES
AND AND VICTIMS CONFIDANTE
CONFIDENTIALITY VERSES SAW THAT.
DESIRE FOR TRANSPARENCY DO YOU
HAVE ANY.
EXPERIENCE WITHOUT ERROR IS IS
THAT SOMETHING THAT.
HOW DO YOU TAKE THAT INTO
ACCOUNT?
I I THINK THIS IS A A KEY ISSUE.
SOME INDIVIDUALS AYE AYE
CURRENTLY REPRESENT INDIVIDUAL
SOME WHO WISH TO COME FORWARD.
AND ARE VERY HAPPY TO TALK TO
THE PRESS OR TO TALK
WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO LISTEN
ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED AND I HAVE
OTHERS. WHO REALLY WOULD RATHER
NOT?
AND SO I AM BECAUSE THEY'RE
AFRAID OF RETALIATION BECAUSE
THEY'D LIKE TO NOT THINK ABOUT
IT BECAUSE IT'S THEIR CHOICE.
AND SO I THINK THAT IS IT A
MAJOR ISSUE I DON'T THINK AT THE
POINT. IN INDIVIDUAL MAKES UP A
COMPLAINT. AND PROVIDES
DOCUMENTATION THAT THAT
IMMEDIATELY BAD BEFORE AN
INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO.
B. PUBLICIZED I THINK YOU HAVE
TO HAVE A PROCESS FOR THAT.
ULTIMATELY HOWEVER I THINK THERE
HAS TO BE BY THE FINDINGS.
AND WHETHER THIS BODY HAD THE
CONSIDERS US SOME REDUCTIONS OF
THAT PARTICULAR WITNESS NAMES
ARE VICTIMS NAMES. THAT'S
SOMETHING YOU'D HAVE TO GRAPPLE
WITH.
.
BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE
IS.
REASONABLE POSITIONS ON BOTH
SIDES BUT I THINK.
PART OF WHY PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO
HAVE THEIR NAME COME FORWARD IS
BECAUSE OF THE ADVERSE
CONSEQUENCES.
AND SO.
WE HAVE TO EXAMINE THAT AND BASS
IF THOSE ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO
THEM ARE HANDLED. WHERE THEY
FEEL THAT?
THEY'RE BEING HANDLED THEY'RE
MORE LIKELY TO TO.
BUT. NOT BE AS CONCERNED IF
THEIR NAME IS INCLUDED IN SOME
SORT OF.
BUT IF THEY FEEL THE REPORT GOES
NOWHERE AND THAT CONDUCT
CONTINUES THEN UNDERSTANDABLY
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE A GREATER
CONCERN.
VALLEY ON.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY TODAY A. SO
YOU HAVE A QUESTION PURSUE A IN
THE CASES THAT YOU WORK ON ARE
THEY ALL BASED OFF OF CALIFORNIA
LAW AS IT STANDS TODAY.
SO IN MY FIRM WE REPRESENT A
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE FEDERAL
WORKERS SO UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
YOU HAVE TO BE.
STATE WORKERS ABOUT BOTH IT'S
BEEN STATE AGENCIES AS WELL AS
COUNTIES POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND
PRIVATE EMPLOYERS.
SO. MUCH THE BODY OF MY.
WHO MY REPRESENT COVERS ALL OF
IT? SO WE DO LOOK AT
COMPARATIVELY. ABOUT FEDERAL LAW
VERSUS STATE LAW AND WE LOOK AT
WHERE WOULD WE LIKE TO BRING
CASES WHAT'S THE VENUE AND WHY.
I THINK YOU MISUNDERSTOOD MY
QUESTIONS MAYBE I DIDN'T
ARTICULATED WELL NOT.
SO BUN.
A PREFACE IT WITH I JUST PASSED
MY COLLEAGUE HERE MCCAULEY
ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR STAFF AT IT
A FEE. SO HE SIGNED A.
A AT EASE OUT ILL EMPLOYEE FOR
THIS STATE ASSEMBLY.
WHEN HE WHEN HE TOOK HIS JOB.
I'M AN EMPLOYER MYSELF.
PRIVATELY OUTSIDE OF THE CAPITAL
HERE. AND THERE'S ALL KINDS OF
LAWS IN FACT WE HAVE TO POST
THEM ON THE WALLS FOR. LABOR
LAWS THAT WE HAVE THAT ARE.
ST LOS.
SO ARE IN THE CASES YOU TRY
EVERY PERSON THAT YOU REPRESENT
HOUSE THOSE LAWS IN THE BACK SO
THAT WHEN YOU TO TALK ABOUT SUN
SHINING OUT THE LAWS.
SO AT THE AT THE CAPITOL YOU
KNOW WHAT THE WORST JOB IN THE
CAPITALIST HR PERSON IF YOU HAVE
ALL THESE OUT WILL EMPLOYEES AND
THEY HAVE NO LAWS THAT BACK HIM
UP.
I'M ASSUMING THAT DID SO WELL
THAT THE FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND
HOUSING ACT AS WELL AS TITLE
SEVEN OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
APPLIES TO ALL EMPLOYERS
INCLUDING THE CAPITAL REGARDLESS
OF WHETHER YOU'RE
AT WILL EMPLOYEE OR WHETHER.
TWO SEPARATE ISSUES
SO YOU AS A PRIVATE EMPLOYER ARE
OBVIOUSLY COVERED BY THE FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT AS
WELL AS TITLE SEVEN.
AS IS THIS BODY.
SO WHEN WE WORK
SO I IS A QUESTION SO WE ARE
WHEN WE'RE AT THE INTERSECTION
WE WORK A FIFTEEN HOUR DAY WE
SHOULD BE PLAN OUR EMPLOYEES.
TIME IN HALF.
WELL THAT'S A REALLY INTERESTING
QUESTION.
THAT'S ABOUT UP UP. UP UP I
WOULD SAY BEFORE SHE ANSWER
SPECIFICALLY YOUR QUESTION.
IS BUT I WOULD ASK THIS BODY.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO PASS LAWS
THAT YOU WON'T APPLY TO
YOURSELVES WHAT WHAT MAKES THE
LEGISLATURE SPECIAL THAT THEY
SHOULD OWN IT?
COVERAGE SHOULD WHY SHOULD THEY
REQUIRE EMPLOYERS IN CALIFORNIA
FOLLOW LAWS THAT THEY'RE
UNWILLING TO FOLLOW THEMSELVES
SO I JUST AS A PUBLIC POLICY
QUESTION.
YOU KNOW IN A WHISTLEBLOWER
PROTECTIONS AS WELL AS OTHER
AREAS ONE HAS TO ASK ONESELF IF
YOU'RE PASSING THE LAWS BY WHEN
YOU APPLY IT TO YOURSELF.
YOU CAN ANSWER THE SPECIFIC WAIT
AN HOUR QUESTIONS I WAS BEING A
LITTLE FACETIOUS AIR THE OFF
TOPIC THAT YOU DO.
BROUGHT FORTH BUT YOU KNOW. AS A
TRUE LAWYER RESPONSIVE DEPENDS
WHETHER YOU HAVE TO PAY THE HER
EMPLOYEE OVERTIME IN THAT
SCENARIO.
DEPENDING ON THEIR EXEMPT
STATUS AND SO FORTH.
SO THE QUESTION EARLIER I HEARD
FROM. THE PERSON THAT WERE
SCRAPING IN THIS IS THAT THIS IS
ABOUT POWER. NOT NOT ABOUT TAXES
WHAT I HEARD.
AND SO IF YOU PUT A POSITION
WHERE YOU HAVE THAT MORE POWER
IN IN THE CASE OF. OF.
MY COMPANY I HOME MY EMPLOYEES
HAVE RIGHTS AND THEY KNOW THOSE
RIGHTS AND WE HAVE TO DISPLAY
THOSE RIGHTS TO THEM SO TEY
HAVE SOME POWER. WHEN THINGS ARE
NOT RIGHT.
OKAY IF I DO SOMETHING TO THEM
THAT'S NOT RIGHT LIKE NOT PAY
THEM RIGHT NOT DO ALL THAT
THERE'S A WHOLE HOST A LAWS THEY
HAVE POWER TO RETALIATE BACK. SO
THAT THEY'RE NOT INTO.
IN A SITUATION WHERE I HAVE MY.
TOO MUCH POWER OVER THEM THEY
HAVE THEIR BRIGHTS.
DO OUR EMPLOYEES IN THIS CAPITAL
HAVE THOSE SAME RIGHTS I DON'T
THINK SO BECAUSE WE DON'T ABIDE
BY SOME OF THE SAME RULES THAT I
HAVE TO IN MY PRIVATE WORLD. AND
THAT SETS UP A POWER STRUCTURE
WHERE YOU.
PUSHY TALKED ABOUT.
THE CASE WHERE YOUBECAUSE
YOU'RE OUT WILL YOU CAN BE.
FIRED WITHOUT CAUSE BASICALLY
EVEN IF THERE IS A THERE'S NO
ABILITY TO COME BACK SO I GUESS
THAT I'M TRYING TO.
BUT I'M TRYING TO DO IS FIGURE
OUT HOW WE GET OURSELVES IN A
POSITION WHERE.
BECAUSE WELL HOPEFULLY AFTER
ALL THIS COMES OUT WE'RE GONNA
PUT SOME POLICY IN PLACE THAT
WILL HELP.
THE PERSON WHO A DIP OR THE
PEOPLE ARE IN THAT HR DEPARTMENT
HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT
WHERE WE GO FORWARD TO
REPRESENT.
BOTH THE EMPLOYER AND THE
EMPLOYEE.
UNLIKELY IN THIS AREA THAT THE
LAWS ARE THE SAME MEETING UNDER
THE FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
ACT.
THAT THIS BODY IS COVERED.
SAME AS THEY ARE AT MY BUSINESS
OR YOUR BUSINESS.
AND SO THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE
THAT YOU HAVE TO. A. TACKLED
BECAUSE YOU'RE EXPRESS IT THAT
LEGISLATORS EXPRESSLY COVERED BY
THAT DIFFER EMPLOYMENT AND
HOUSING ACT WHICH COVERS.
HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION AND
RETALIATION IN THE WORKPLACE THE
AT WILL DOCTRINE DOES NOT
OBVIATE THAT BECAUSE YOU CAN
HIRE OR FIRE SOMEBODY FOR GOOD
REASON OR NO REASON AT ALL AND
SO LONG AS.
IT'S NOT A DISCRIMINATORY REASON
IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF A PROTECTED
STATUS OR NOT BECAUSE OF A
VIOLATION OF STATE OR FEDERAL.
LAW OR POLICY REGULATION YOU CAN
SAY SAKE I SAY THAT A LOT TO
PEOPLE WHO CALL ME. SO. AS IT
RELATES TO THIS ISSUE.
OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION
THIS BODY IS COVERED IN LIKELY
YOU DON'T NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.
BOMB AT THIS JUNCTURE. I ALSO
WOULD HESITATE
TWO ABOVE ARGUE THAT ELEVEN NO
TWO POINT FIVE WHICH IS THE
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT.
IS THAT THIS BODY IS NOT
COVERED NOW THERE'S NO APPELLATE
CASE WHICH SQUARELY ADDRESSES
THAT BUT I THINK THIS BODY
SHOULD.
ACT AS THOUGH AND WAIT FOR THE
APPELLATE COURTS TO MAKE THEIR
WAY THERE'S GONNA BE I'M SURE A
CASE AT SOME POINT WHICH
SQUARELY ADDRESSES THAT AS A
MATTER OF LAW.
AND THAT THE CURRENT
WHISTLEBLOWER LEGISLATION THAT
WAS JUST PASSED
SHOULD BE AUGMENTING ELEVEN A
TWO POINT FIVE AS OPPOSED TO.
IN PLACE OF ELEVEN NO TWO POINT
FIVE SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS
BODY OUGHT TO CONSIDER ITSELF
COVERED UNDER THE WHISTLEBLOWER
PROTECTION ACT. PERHAPS YOU MAY
EVEN WISH TWO AND LEGISLATIVE
FINDINGS CLARIFY YES IN FACT WE
ARE AND THAT'S INDICATIVE OF
PRIOR LAW. AND IT SIMPLY
CLARIFYING YES.
THERE IS NO APPELLATE CASE LAW
THAT.
SO. I THINK AS IT SPECIFICALLY
RELATES TO WHAT WE'RE DEALING
WITH HERE WHICH.
ALSO IS ABOUT RETALIATION
WHISTLEBLOWING.
THAT THERE'S THE NEW
LEGISLATION AND I WOULD ARGUE
LEFT.
FIVE OR EIGHTY COVERS SAID.
BUT AGAIN WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT
FOR THE COURTS TO TO GIVE THE
FINAL WORD ON THAT.
I THINK TO TRULY BE HELPFUL IN
THIS PROCESS BOMB AS WE GATHER
INFORMATION AND DATA ABOUT HOW
TO CREATE A SYSTEM. THAT IS FAIR
AND YES IT WOULD BE NAIVE OF US
TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE
ASSUMPTION. THAT THE POWER
DYNAMIC IS YOU KNOW ALMOST A ONE
WAY STREET BETWEEN ELECTED
OFFICIALS AND STAFF IT IS MUCH
MORE COMPLEX THAN THAT. YOU'VE
REFERENCED THE HUNDRED FIFTY
WOMEN WHO SIGNED ONTO LETTERS
MANY OF THEM WERE WOMEN FROM
THIRD HOUSE WHO TALKED ABOUT THE
DYNAMIC OF. THIRD HOUSE POWER
BROKERS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON
THIS BUILDING.
WE HAVE LEGISLATIVE COLLEAGUES
WHO FEEL THAT SOME OF THE
TENSION THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO
THEM IS AS A RESULT OF.
EXTERNAL.
BROKERS WHO HAVE A VESTED
INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME OF
POLICIES THAT THAT HAPPEN IN
THIS BUILDING.
INFLUENCING THE PROCESS AND SO
TO SIMPLY ASSUME THAT IT'S
LEGISLATORS AND STAFF. IT'S NOT
IT NOT EVEN IF IN THE END AND WE
CAN'T AFFORD THE FOCUS ON JUST
THAT RELATIONSHIP. IT'S MORE
BROUGHT ITS BROADER.
WHICH MAKES THIS PROCESS.
AND THE POLICIES WE HAVE TO COME
UP WITH MUCH MORE COMPLEX AND
AND AND LAYERED.
AND THE NOTION OF BIAS.
COMES INTO PLAY AS WELL.
GIVEN THAT COMPLEXITY.
BOMB WHAT CONCERNS ME IS.
.
THE TERMINOLOGY WE CONTINUE TO
USE THAT CAN BE INTERPRETED BY.
DIFFERENT PEOPLE SO MANY
DIFFERENT WAYS.
AND SO PERCEPTION OF BIAS ZERO
TOLERANCE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS
TRANSPARENCY DUE PROCESS.
FIGURING OUT HOW WE.
DEVELOP A CULTURE.
WE'LL WE CAN COULD CLEARLY
DEFINE WHAT IS HARASSMENT.
AND WHAT THE POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES WILL BE TO ADDRESS IT
I THINK IS.
I HAVE TO BE AT THE TOP OF OUR
AGENDA AND SO EVERYONE HAS
CLARITY ABOUT THE PROCESS OF HOW
THEY CAN BE PROTECTED.
MY COLLEAGUE ASKED ONE QUESTION
TERMS OF BALANCE BUT I I'VE GOT
ANOTHER BASED ON JUST.
THE NEWS AT IT CONTINUES TO
EVOLVE AND UNFOLD EVERYDAY AND
THAT'S WHEN COMPLAINTS COME
FORWARD.
AND CHOOSE IT IS A CHOICE TO
REMAIN ANONYMOUS.
AND HOW WE'VE BEEN BEGAN TO.
WELL IN THIS DESIRE TO HAVE A
TRANSPARENT PROCESS
HOW WE GUARANTEED DUE PROCESS
FOR ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED.
.
WHEN.
PEOPLE COME FORWARD AND WISH TO
REMAIN ANONYMOUS.
BAH I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT WE
CAN HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE PEOPLE
FEEL COMFORTABLE AROUND
PERCEPTIONS OF BY SIX CETERA.
.
IF THAT IS.
TO CONTINUE AND I'M REALLY
CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR RESPONSE TO
THAT.
WELL I THINK YOU BROUGHT UP TO
ISSUES.
ONE IS IF THERE'S UP POLITICAL
PAID BACK.
WHICH I THINK IS PART OF WHAT
YOU'RE RIGHT DURING TO RIGHT
THAT SHOULD COME OUT NAY
INVESTIGATORY PROCESS THEN
CERTAINLY CONCERNED ABOUT
BIASING CREDIBILITY. AND BIAS
AND CREDIBILITY ARE SHOULD BE
PART OF ANY.
COMPETENT
HE SAYS ESCRITORIO PROCESS KNOW
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT IN ANY.
INVESTIGATION WHETHER IT'S THIS
BODY OR IN A PRIVATE CORPORATION
WHETHER THERE'S ALL TEARY
MOTIVES.
AND CREDIBILITY CONCERNS ON ALL
SIDES.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT VERY
FAIRLY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN
ANY COMPETENT INVESTIGATION.
.
SO REGARDING THE ISSUE OF
ANONYMOUS REPORTING I THINK.
THERE'S A REASON ARE SYNONYMOUS
WITH.
AND AND PART OF IT IS THE FEAR
OF RETALIATION BUT OF COURSE
ONCE YOU RECEIVE THAT. ANONYMOUS
REPORT YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING
WITH IT.
AND THERE HAS TO START TO BE AN
INVESTIGATION.
AND IT TURNS ON WHAT ENTRY POINT
IT COULD BE LET'S JUST SAY
HYPOTHETICALLY YOU RECEIVE A
LETTER.
THAT DISCLOSES CERTAIN CONDUCT
BY MEMBERS.
THEN AN INVESTIGATION HAS TO
START AND USUALLY THERE'S ENOUGH
INFORMATION TO START THAT
INVESTIGATION TO MAKE
DETERMINATIONS ONE WAY OR THE
OTHER.
AND IN IN SHIRLEY CREDIBILITY
AND BIAS
CONCERNS SHOULD BE A PART OF
THAT INVESTIGATION.
IF IT'S ONE MEMBER AND IT SAYS
THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN HAPPENING
IN THE STAFF WHEN YOU KNOW THE
STATUS IT DOESN'T TAKE ROCKET
SCIENCE TO TALK. TO WHO'S IN THE
STAFF WERE TO GO BACK WHO IS THE
STAFF LAST YEAR THE YEAR BEFORE.
WHO ARE THE PEOPLE THAT THEY
HAD?
WHERE DID THEY GO FOR VARIOUS
EVENTS AND AND WHAT HAPPENED AT
THOSE EVENTS AND I THINK? IT
WOULD BE.
.
I WOULD NOT WANT TESTS TO ASSUME
SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU'RE ALLOWING
AN AVENUE OF MORE INFORMATION TO
COME INTO THIS BODY THROUGH
ANONYMOUS REPORTING. THAT
THERE'S ANY INDICATION THAT THAT
MEANS THAT THIS BODY COULD NOT
ADEQUATELY INVESTIGATE THOSE
DOES NOT MY ASSUMPTION THAT'S
NOT MY SOME SHIRT ALL.*.
IF I CAN TOUCH UPON IT I
ACTUALLY. WAS RETAINED AS A
NEUTRAL INVESTIGATOR IN RESPONSE
TO AN ANONYMOUS LETTER IN A
RATHER LARGE STATEWIDE AGENCY A
FEW YEARS BACK AND IT DOES. POSE
SOME CHALLENGES THAT OTHER
INVESTIGATIONS DON'T HAVE WHEN
YOU KNOW WHO THE COMPLAINT INTO
THIS. BUT AS WENDY INDICATES IT
DOESN'T.
.
IT DOESN'T A FOR GIVE THE
EMPLOYER'S OBLIGATION TO
INVESTIGATE AND REMEMBER.
THE STANDARD UNDER THE LAW IS
NOT THAT WE ABSOLUTELY GET
EVERYTHING RIGHT.
RIGHT WHEN WE INVESTIGATE WE
HAVE THE CO TRAIN CASE IT'S BEEN
ON THE BOOKS FOR MANY YEARS IN
THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT
CASE THAT SAYS EMPLOYERS HAVE TO
ACT REASONABLY. IF TO TAKE
REASONABLE STEPS TO TRY TO
DETERMINE WHAT IN FACT HAPPENED
AND IF SOMETHING INAPPROPRIATE
UNLAWFUL HAPPENED WE HAVE TO
TAKE APPROPRIATE REMEDIAL
ACTIONS TO STOP IT AND PREVENT
IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN. AND SO
ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS HAVE TO BE
INVESTIGATED LIKE ANY OTHER
COMPLAINT IT'S JUST YOU'RE GOING
TO GO THROUGH MAYBE SOME
DIFFERENT MEASURES TO DO IT.
AND YOU'RE GOING TO BE
REASONABLE.
ONCE YOU MAKE A FINDING AND
YOU'LL TAKE THE APPROPRIATE
REMEDIAL STEPS BASED ON THOSE
FINDINGS.
I APPRECIATE THAT A LAST
QUESTION MADAM CHAIR WITH REGARD
TO RETALIATION IT IT OF COURSE
IS OUR COLLECTIVE GOAL.
I'M SORRY WERE YOU GOING TO SAY
SOMETHING.
THE IT THANK YOU YEAH I JUST
WANT.
WANTED TO ADD THAT.
.
RECOGNIZING THE DIFFICULTY OF
REPORTING AND AND THE POWER
IMBALANCES THAT MAKE IT
ESPECIALLY HARD WITHIN A
LEGISLATURE. WE ARE EXCITED TO
SEE MORE LEGISLATURE'S OWN AND
CONGRESS CONSIDERING
I'M CLIMATE SURVEY IS WHICH IS A
WAY TO GET SORT OF. OR
GENERALIZED INFORMATION ABOUT
WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND PREVALENCE OF HARASSMENT
THE EFFICACY OF THE POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES AND.
JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THERE
WILL STILL BE PEOPLE WHO WON'T
COME FORWARD HAVING SOME SORT OF
WAY TO COLLECT THE INFORMATION.
YOUR CLIMATE SURVEY IS
IMPORTANT.
AND I THINK DRESSES SOME OF THE
ISSUES THERE.
I AGREE AND AM HAPPY THAT THE
LEGISLATURE.
IS CONDUCTING ONE AS WE SPEAK
OR AT LEAST BEGINNING THE
PROCESS.
I THINK WITH REGARD TO
RETALIATES OF COURSE IT'S OUR
COLLECTIVE GOAL TO TUNE TO
CREATE A CULTURE AND A WORKPLACE
WHERE. RETALIATION IS AN AT THE
AT THE TOP OF ONE'S LISTEN TERMS
OF FEAR ABOUT STEPPING UP OF
PROTECTING THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL.
RIGHTS
I AM CURIOUS BASED ON YOUR
COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCES IF YOU
CAN POINT TO A CIRCUMSTANCE OR
WORKPLACE.
WHERE?
WHERE A SYSTEM WAS PUT IN PLACE
WERE RETALIATION WAS NEVER A
QUESTION?
AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE MY
CONCERN IS WE HAVE THESE. ARE
EXTREME EXPECTATIONS.
AT AND I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT
I'M OPEN TO BE CONVINCED
OTHERWISE THAT A SYSTEM EXIST
WHERE THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO
OPPORTUNITY FOR RETALIATION.
AND I DON'T WANT TO CREATE AN
EXPECTATION THAT WE EVEN THERE'S
A HIGHER STANDARD BECAUSE WE ARE
ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WE SPENT
AND AND WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY
TO THE PUBLIC.
BOTH IN TERMS OF OUR CONDUCT OUR
BEHAVIOR AND PUBLIC RESOURCES
USED.
.
BUT THE PEACE AROUND RETALIATION
AN EXPECTATION THAT I'M
PROTECTED.
PERIOD I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S
REALLY REASONABLE REALISTIC.
NOW I THINK THAT'S A FAIR
CONCERN YEAH I'M UNFORTUNATELY
STATISTICS SHOW THAT WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HARASSMENT
DISCRIMINATION RETALIATION IT IS
RETALIATION.
MORE
THEN THE OTHER FORMS OF A
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT YOU COULD HAVE
A SEXUAL HARASSMENT COMPLAINT.
BASED ON ALLEGATIONS OF
INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT THAT MAY
NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF ILLEGAL
OR ACTIONABLE HARASSMENT
RETALIATES AND.
THAT PERSON WAS RETALIATED
AGAINST READ THE EEOC STATS
EVERY YEAR READ THAT IF THE H.
SETS EVERY YEAR MORE MONEY IS
RECOVERED IN RETALIATION
LAWSUITS THAT DISCRIMINATION AND
HER.
SO IT'S VERY FAIRS MAFIC WHEN I
DO TRAINING WITH MY CLAIM
TELL THEM
THIS IS THE AREA OF LAW THAT YOU
NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO. AND
THEN I TRIED TO GIVE THEM AN
ANALOGY. OF GO BACK TO WHEN WE
WERE IN.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND ON THE
PLAYGROUND DAHLE AND TOMMY GOT
INTO A FIGHT YOUR AND THE
TEACHER IN THE CLASSROOM
BECOMING CRYING YOU DIDN'T
WITNESS SAID.
WHAT HAPPENS IN CASES LIKE THIS
USUALLY HAVE A GROUP OF FELLOW
EMPLOYEES OR FELLOW? SUPERVISORS
WHO SUPPORT THE PERSON WHO'S
MAKING THE COMPLAINT AND THEN
YOU HAVE A GROUP WHO SUPPORTS
THE ACCUSED AND WHAT'S WHERE WE
HAVE. TROUBLE BECAUSE IF THOSE
INDIVIDUALS ARE VERY ROOTED IN
THEIR DEFENSE OF ONE PERSON OF
THE OTHER. AND THEY. ENGAGE AN
ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION
TOWARDS THE COMPLAIN ENTER ANY
WITNESS WHO'S INOLVED IN AN
INVESTIGATION WE ARE IN A
RETALIATION SITUATION NOW. IS IT
EVERY WORKPLACE INCIDENT ADVERSE
AND GIVES RISE TO A RETALIATION
CLAIM NO WE HAVE LEGAL STANDARDS
AS WELL RIGHT IT HAS TO
MATERIALLY AFFECT AND CHANGE THE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT. DETER PEOPLE FROM
COMING FORTH IN BRINGING OTHER
CIVIL RIGHTS CLAIM
SO FOR.
BUT THAT'S THE TRUE REALITY OF
IT IF WE JUST LOOK AT IT FROM A
HUMAN PERSON.
RIGHT IS THAT YOU HAVE TO GROUPS
OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORTING TO
DIFFERENT PEOPLE ON TWO SIDES OF
THE SITUATION.
SO I AGREE WITH YOU AND.
THERE'S PROBABLY NOT A PERFECT
WORLD WHERE RETALIATION WILL
NEVER BE AN ISSUE IT'S A VERY
TOUGH PROBLEM AND ONE EMPLOYERS
HAVE TO
COMMITTED.
TO PREVENTING.
AND THEN WHAT HAVE YOU FOUND.
IT THE AND CULTURE IN POLICY
AND PRACTICE.
THAT CAN MITIGATE THAT ON THE
FRONT END.
IF I'M THE FRIEND AND I AM A
FIRM BELIEVER IN.
BIAS TRAINING BEING A PART OF
AN ANTI HARASSMENT PROGRAM I
THINK A LOT OF.
US ALL OF US AS I SAID BEFORE
HAVE UNCONSCIOUS SPICES WE WALK
THROUGH THE WORLD WITH
PERCEPTIONS AND MISPERCEPTIONS.
BASED ON WHAT WE VIEW OF PEOPLE
NOT LIKE US LIKE GUYS AND SO
FORTH AND SOMETIMES WE'RE NOT
EVEN AWARE OF IT THAT WERE
ACTING ON IT. AND SO I THINK ON
THE FRONT END OF WE DO SOME
PREVENTATIVE TRAINING IN THE
ELIMINATION OF IMPLICIT IN AN
UNCONSCIOUS BIAS WE MAY BE
BECAME CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MORE
AWARE WHEN AN ACTUAL SITUATION
HAPPENS AT WORK AND NOT ACT ON
IT.
BEEN AGREE WITH YOU MORE.
MR MARLA.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
.
BUT I'VE BEEN TO A FEW OF THESE
HEARINGS NOW.
AND THAT THE MORE I LISTEN THE
MORE I REALIZE.
THIS IS SO MUCH MORE COMPLEX.
THEM ERA YOU WOULD THINK ON THE
SURPLUS SO I APPRECIATE THE TERM
WALKING ON EGG SHELLS.
.
SO FOR ME I WANT TO ADDRESS THE
CREEPS.
NOW WHEN I GET TO THE CORE IN
TOKYO WHO THEY BEAT THE REAL
ABUSERS AND.
AND AND TAKE CARE BUT I I WAS
PARTNER IN A CPA FIRM. I NEVER
HAD AN INCIDENT. THAT I RECALL I
WAS DID THE. HAD FOR A ONE OF A
LARGE COUNTIES IN THE NATION
SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT MY
WORKFORCE WERE FEMALE. NEVER HAD
AN INCIDENT FACT THE EEOC
OFFICER WITH BECAME WE BECAME
FRIENDS BUT I NEVER HAD TO DEAL
WITH THEM. ON A PROFESSIONAL
RELATIONSHIP BUT. SO IS AND I'VE
BEEN A I'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF FROM
SOMETIMES FROM PRINCE FOR BEING
PURITANICAL AND. UPROOTED TIMES
SO WE JUST KIND OF.
SET A TONE AT THE TOP ALL THE
TIME.
BUT I'M.
WHEN I WAS UP CHAIRMAN OF THE
BOARD IN TWENTY TWELVE. WE HAD A
CREEP.
SENATOR BATES AND I HAD TO DEAL
WITH WITHOUT A MANAGER WHO.
HE KNOWS JUST REMARKABLE WHAT HE
WAS ABLE TO.
PULL OFF OF HIM. INTEL MENTALITY
IT CAME OUT. SO.
I'M LOOKING FOR THE BALLOTS
BECAUSE NOW I AM IN A CAREER
WHERE I AM IN THE POLITICAL
WORLD AND I KNOW THAT CANDIDATES
CAN BE.
DESTROYED BY WHISPERING
CAMPAIGNS
AND I HAVE HAD PLENTY OF.
CAMPAIGN MATERIALS THAT SAID
THINGS THAT WERE. ABSOLUTELY
FALSE.
IF IT WERE NOT TRUE AND AND I
GET THAT YOU KNOW THEN YOU GO
LIVE WITH THAT IN YOUR FAMILY
GETS TO LIVE WITH THAT. AND AND
AND SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED IN
THE WHOLE BALANCE OF THIS TOPIC.
OF FALSE ACCUSATIONS.
BECAUSE WE CAN MANIPULATE AND I
HAVE.
WATCH CERTAIN THINGS HAPPEN I'M
YOU KNOW I'M DONE WELL THIS IS
THE OTHER SIDE OF. THE EQUATION
SO I'M I'M REALLY CONCERNED.
ABOUT.
THAT BECAUSE AS AN ELECTED
OFFICIAL YOU WILL BE PAGE ONE.
SENATOR ACCUSED OF.
AND THEN YOU WILL BE
INVESTIGATED.
AND THEN YOU WILL BE FOUND THAT
IT'S NOT TRUE.
AND THEN YOU WILL FIND THAT THE
NEWSPAPER ON PAGE C. TWENTY
THREE.
WILL SAY CHARGES DROPPED YOU
KNOW SO YOU DON'T GET FRONT PAGE
CHARGES PUTIN. YOU KNOW IT'S SO
IT'S LIKE.
HISSES.
SO SO WRONG AND SO.
I WANTED TRY AND MAKE SURE THAT
WE ADDRESS MALICIOUS INTENT.
SO ARE THERE.
BESIDES SUING FOR DEFAMATION.
ARE THERE OTHER REMEDIES ARE
THERE ARE THERE CRIMINAL.
URGES IF YOU LIE AND YOU FALSELY
ACCUSE SOMEONE ARE THERE.
CRIMINAL REMAIN HE'S ADJUSTED.
HIS EUROPE EUROPE NOW CREATED A
DIFFERENT KIND OF VICTIM RIGHT
SO NOW THE ACCUSED IS THE VICTIM
WHEN THAT PERSON MAY HAVE. DONE
NOTHING AT ALL BUT IT'S JUST
PART OF ATTACK IS THAT UNLIKE
THE.
POLICIES ARE THE POLITICS
YOU'RE A OF OF THAT PERSON. AND
SO I'M JUST
CURIOUS HOW WE BRING THE BALANCE
IN HERE SO THAT. WE WOULD TAKE
HER THE CREEPS.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE ALL THESE
SCARLET LETTERS.
THAT BALL PEOPLE FOR THE REST
THEIR LIVES WHEN THEY WERE
INNOCENT.
YEAH I APPRECIATE THAT CONCERN
AND.
.
UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T THINK
THERE IS A. HIGH PERCENTAGE OF
TRULY MALICIOUS FRAUDULENT
CLAIMS BEING FILED THAT'S NOT
WHAT WE ARE HEARING IN THE NEWS
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT
YOU'RE EXPERIENCING HERE IN THE
LEGISLATURE. BUT I WILL TELL YOU
THAT IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO HAVE
THE ISOLATED. ILL MOTIVATED
MALICIOUS FRAUDULENT CLAIM MADE
FOR ALL TERRIER REASONS.
AND.
IT SHOULD NOT CHANGED THE
APPROACH TO INVESTIGATING.
THAT COMPLAINTS AND A GOOD
INVESTIGATOR THROUGH CREDIBILITY
ASSESSMENTS AND EVIDENCE
GATHERING HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET TO
THE BOTTOM AS TO WHETHER THERE'S
REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT THIS
IS A FRAGILE ESQUE FRAUDULENT
CLAIM.
THERE IS CASE LAW TO SUPPORT
THAT IF THERE IS A DETERMINATION
MADE THAT A HARASSMENT COMPLAINT
IS MADE FRAUDULENTLY. WITH
MALICE THAT APPROPRIATE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION UP TO AND
INCLUDING TERMINATION CAMBY HAT
SO FROM AN EMPLOYMENT
PERSPECTIVE BUT I WOULDN'T CROSS
THAT BRIDGE QUICKLY RIGHT I MEAN
I WOULD REALLY MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE A CREDIBLE. OBJECTIVE
FINDING THAT THIS CLAIM WAS
BROUGHT FRAUDULENTLY IS SO
THOUGH THERE IS CASE LAW TO
SUPPORT THAT THE EMPLOYER SAYS
LOOK YOU YOU KNOW YOU'RE ATTY
HERE RIGHT.
THAT'S WHAT YOU CAN DO IS AN
EMPLOYER.
AS THE PERSON AS THE INDIVIDUAL
WHO HAD THOSE FALSE.
ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST HIM HER
YOUR REDRESS REALLY IS IN OUR
LEGAL SYSTEM IT IS THROUGH THE
CIVIL.
CLAIMS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
THERE ARE EMPLOYEE MEN
ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE NOW STARTED
TO MAKE THAT THEIR SPECIALTY ONE
OF WHICH IS ACTUALLY IN OUR
REGION HERE AND HE'S VERY GOOD
AT IT.
BUT IT IS A CIVIL REMEDY NOT A
CRIMINAL REMEDY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE SEEN
AS IT RELATES TO.
IT CONCERNS OF OF.
ALLEGATIONS AS WELL AS
ADDRESSING RETALIATION IS PROMPT
INVESTIGATIONS. BY THE CASE
RIGHT NOW IS JUST ARGUING IN
FRONT OF THE CALIFORNIA COURT OF
APPEALS YESTERDAY BUT THE
INVESTIGATION TOOK THREE POINT
FIVE YEARS THREE POINT FIVE
YEARS. ABOUT MY LAW DEGREE
LISTA.
THAT DAY TO INVESTIGATE A A
SIMPLE AYE ISSUE IN THE
WORKPLACE.
AND SO THAT CUTS BOTH WAYS IT
GIVES THE MESSAGE.
WE DON'T CARE AND WE DON'T WANT
YOUR COMPLAINTS
BOB AND SO IF YOU'RE GONNA
COMPLAIN IT'S GOING TO GO INTO A
HOLE AND AND THERE'S GONNA BE NO
REMEDIAL MEASURES. NOW IF ON THE
FLIPSIDE.
THAT THE PERSON FROM FROM WHOM
THAT COMPLAINT WAS MADE ABOUT
THEY HAVE AN OUTSTANDING
COMPLAINT AGAINST THEM FOR THREE
AND A HALF YEARS.
SO THAT OF COURSE IS ONE OF THE
WORST I'VE SEEN.
IN REPRESENTING PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES FOR TWENTY YEARS YOU
DON'T WANT TO HAVE AN
INVESTIGATION GO ON FOR THREE
POINT FIVE YEARS.
BUT.
THAT ISN'T IT IS GOING ON AND I
THINK HAVING A PROMPT
INVESTIGATION.
IS KEY TO ADDRESSING SOME OF
THESE ISSUES AND REAL TIME.
.
IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE THE KIND
OF WORKPLACE THAT YOU WANT AND
DISCOURAGE CONCERNS BOMB WHETHER
THOSE CONCERNS ARE ARE VALIDATED
BY STATISTICS ARE NOT. THE
CONCERNS ABOUT US SOME SORT OF
FALSE REPORTING WHICH AGAIN I
THINK FALSE REPORTING AS
INDICATED BY MY COLLEAGUE IS IS
REALLY STATISTICALLY NOT AN
ISSUE.
BY PRETTY I DISLIKE THAT I GO
LIVE ENTITLED FELLOW PANELISTS
IN SAYING THAT I THINK ARE
SHOULD FOCUS SHOULD BE ON.
ACROSS THE SEA IS.
PROM PROCESS CEASEFIRE FOR
HANDLING CLAIMS.
AND THAT BENEFITS
BOTH THOSE ON BOTH PARTIES AND
THAT SHOULD BE OUR FOCUS ON
THAT.
I THINK WE'RE GETTING A
SITUATIONS WHERE IS MUCH MORE
LIKELY THAT SOMEBODY WILL.
REPORT DONE AND NOT HAVE THE
CLAIMED TAKING SERIOUSLY.
THAT IS THE REAL CONCERNED
RIGHT NOW.
AS OPPOSED TO THE FALSE
ACCUSATIONS BUT. THAT BOTH
CIRCUMSTANCE THAT IS A FAIR
PROCESS BY INDEPENDENT NEUTRAL.
ENTITY AT THAT REACTS PROBABLY
IS BENEFITS EVERYBODY.
THANKS BECAUSE OF RISK RESULT
YOU'VE AT LEAST MENTIONED THE
ISSUE OF.
.
PRIOR COMPLAINTS
YOU KNOW SO THAT IF YOU GOT ONE.
BUT YOU GOT FOUR FIVE OR ONE
SKINNER TOLD BACK YOU KNOW WE
GOT MILLIONS.
WITH ME THAT'S THE CREEPS
THOUGH THE CRIPS I WANTED TAKE
CARE OF OUR. OWN. WANT THEM OUT
OF THE SYSTEM BUT I DON'T WANT I
DON'T WANT IT. SOMEONE BEING THE
VICTIM OF.
A FALSE COMPLAINT SO I'M JUST
TRYING TO FIND THE BALANCE I
THANK YOU FOR COMING TODAY AND.
ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR.
THIS PIGGYBACK ON THAT FOR A
SECOND.
.
I SAID. I WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER
ANNA A CITY BEFORE I CAME HERE
AND I CERTAINLY SAW TIMES WHEN
AND AND WE TAUGHT YOU TALKED
EARLIER ABOUT SETTLEMENTS ABOUT
HAVING. A PEOPLE THAT WERE Q.
SOMETIMES PAY SETTLEMENTS BUT I
HAD DEFINITELY SEEN TIMES WHEN
IT WE CITIES. PAID CLAIMS
AGAINST THE US SETTLEMENTS TO
EMPLOYEES THAT THEY FELT.
WHAT THEY MIGHT NOT BELIEVE THAT
THEY THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN
INCLINED TO?
FIGHT THE CHARGER GO TO COURT
BUT INSTEAD OF EVEN
INVESTIGATING THINGS LIKE
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT COMPLAINT
THEY DECIDED TO SETTLE THESE ARE
EMPLOYEES WHO HAD LEFT WHO ARE
THEN GOING TO BRING.
CIVIL LAWSUITS FORWARD AND
DECIDED TO SETTLE JUST BECAUSE
OF DOING A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
AND THINKING THAT IT WAS JUST
LESS EXPENSIVE FOR THEM TO
SETTLE. A CASE THEN TO TAKE IT
TO COURT OR TO EVEN LAUNCH OF A
FORMAL LONG INVESTIGATION.
SO HOW DO YOU.
NOW I UNDERSTAND SOME BECOMING
FOR WITH THE WORKPLACE
COMPLAINTS ARE FROM THEM CALLING
A LAWSUIT.
BUT
DOES THAT IF IF WE'RE GOING TO
MAKE EVERY SETTLEMENT PUBLIC.
OR MAKE.
MEMBERS OR EMPLOYEES PAY FOR
SETTLEMENTS WOODEN THAT THEN SAY
THAT YOU WOULD BASICALLY STOPPED
DOING THOSE SORTS OF SETTLEMENTS
WERE I KNOW WHAT YOU CALL THEM
I'M NOT A LAWYER. WERE SORT OF
EVERYONE THE THEY SAY THEY'RE
NOT AT FAULT BUT THEY'RE GONNA
PAY THE CLAIM AND YOU'RE
SETTLING THE CASE RATHER THAN
GOING TO COURT. AND HAVING TO GO
THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM AND
THEN RESULTING IN A JUDGMENT HOW
DOES.
HOW DOES THAT IMPACT?
THE DESIRE TO SETTLE VERSUS THE
DESIRE DESIRE TO TAKE SOMETHING
TO COURT. TO ADJUDICATED IF
YOU'RE GOING TO THEN MAKE THE
ACCUSED PAGE THAT SETTLEMENT OR
MAKE THE RESULT OF A SETTLEMENT
PUBLIC EVEN IF. THERE WAS NO
INVESTIGATION FINDING SOMEONE TO
FALL.
WELL IF THIS BODY HAS A
PARTICULAR.
IS THAT THE RULES RELATING TO
PUBLIC SETTLEMENTS ARE ARE
DIFFERENT FOR STATE ENTITIES
BECAUSE THIS TAXPAYER MONEY.
SO THE TAXPAYER HAS A RIGHT TO
KNOW WHERE THE MONEY IS BEING
SPENT.
.
I HAVE BEEN REPRESENTING
PUBLICAN PLAYS FOR TWENTY YEARS
AND.
WHEN I AM PRESENTED WITH
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES.
BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE STATE
ENTITY MY RESPONSES THIS A STATE
MONEY AND THAT IT TAXPAYER HAS A
RIGHT TO KNOW WHERE THAT MONEY
IS GOING.
SO THAT'S THAT'S ONE THING I
THINK THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS
AS TO WHETHER YOU CAN HAVE.
PRIVATE OUR CONFIDENTIALITY
CLAUSES AND I AND I QUESTION
ABOUT THE PUBLIC POLICY
IMPLICATIONS OF ALLOWING SUCH
POLICIES TO EXIST I THINK IT'S
AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY AND I
THINK IT ENCOURAGES. ADDITIONAL
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT HAPPEN IF YOU
HAVE SECRET SETTLEMENTS.
AND GAG CLAUSES THAT'S WHAT
ALLOWS THESE THINGS TO FLOURISH
AS OPPOSED TO HAVING.
.
PUB PUBLIC ABOUT THESE SORT OF
BY A SETTLEMENT SENATE IN THE
SECOND ISSUE BUT JUST.
CLARIFY WASN'T IMPLYING THAT THE
SETTLEMENTS ARE SECRET.
I'M SAYING THAT.
THEY'RE DONE WITH SORT OF A NO
FAULT CLAUSE SO FROM TYPICALLY A
CITY.
CONSULT A WORKPLACE CLAIM WITH
BY COMING TO AN AGREEMENT WITH
AN EMPLOYEE YOU'RE AN EX
EMPLOYEE TO PAY A CERTAIN AMOUNT
OF MONEY SAYING WE'RE NOT A
FAULT WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT WORD
FALL BUT WE'RE GOING TO PAY THIS
CLAIM BECAUSE IT'S.
MORE EX IT'S IT'S ACTUALLY LESS
MONEY FOR THE TAXPAYERS TO. PAY
TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
THAN TO TAKE IT TO COURT AND WHO
KNOWS WHAT'S GONNA END UP
HAPPENING.
SO I'M WONDER AND AND I'VE
NEVER SEEN WITH A SEXUAL
HARASSMENT CLAIM. ARM BUT I HAVE
SEEN THAT DONE WITH WORKPLACE
DISCRIMINATION.
CLAIMS BROUGHT TO DEFER
MUNICIPALITIES IT'S NOT THAT I'M
BECAUSE I MEAN YOU SAW THAT
UNCOMMON.
SO HOW WOULD THAT IMPACT THAN
IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE.
PERSON WHO IS ACCUSED TO PAY
THAT CLAIM.
BUT CURRENTLY UNDER THE LAWS. AB
IN THE LEGISLATURE OR THAT FOR
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES THE INDIVIDUALS
INDEMNIFIED UNLESS THEY'VE ACTED
OUTSIDE OF THE COURSE AND SCOPE
OF THE
PLANET.
SO AS THE LAW EXISTS TODAY THE
STATE DOES NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR
EITHER THE DEFENSE OR THE COSTS
IF THEY MAKE THE DETERMINATION.
THAT THE INDIVIDUALS ACTING
OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL SCOPING
COURSE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT.
YOUNG PLAYERS
DO INDEMNIFY AND THERE'S A
STRATEGIC REASON FOR IT THEY
WANT TO CONTROL. THE HARASSMENT
OF THAT THE ALLEGED HARASSER
DEFENDANT BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE
THAT PERSON.
GOING OUT ON THEIR OWN IN AND
MAKING STATEMENTS IN THE LAWSUIT
THEY COULD SAY I DID IT.
ANOTHER'S LIABILITY FOR THE
EMPLOYER SO.
THAT IS A STRATEGIC DECISION
THAT'S NOT A DECISION AS A
MATTER OF LAW. THAT IT.
THE TOOLS ARE ALREADY THERE
THAT ESTATE EMPLOYER CAN DECIDE
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO INDEMNIFY.
AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DEFEND
THAT ALREADY EXISTS IT'S JUST
THAT. AS A STRATEGY DECISION
THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO.
ADDITIONALLY IT AS A MATTER OF
LAW PUNITIVE DAMAGES ARE NOT
PAID BY THE STATE YOU CANNOT
OBTAIN PUNITIVE DAMAGES BY THE
STATE'S TO EVEN IF YOU CHOOSE
TO.
INDEMNIFY.
UP CORRECT SOMEONE WHO IS FOUND
TO HAVE BEEN A HARASSER YOU
DON'T PAY THE STATE DOESN'T PAY
THOSE PUNITIVE DAMAGES THOSE
WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT OF THE
POCKET OF THE HARASSER.
THINK IT IS.
THERE.
WELL WOULD MAKE SURE THAT I'M
ADDRESSING.
.
DIRECTLY YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE
IT ALSO IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
THE ACCUSED WHILE EMPLOYED IS
AND IS SUBJECT TO
INDEMNIFICATION ARE ENTITLED TO
INDEMNIFICATION UNDER LABOR CODE
TWENTY EIGHT OF TWO. UNTIL THERE
IS A DETERMINATION MADE.
THAT THE HARASSMENT DID IN FACT
OCCUR BECAUSE THAT IS CONSIDER
CONDUCT OUTSIDE THE COURSE AND
SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT AND
THEREFORE THE EMPLOYER DOES NOT
HAVE TO INDEMNIFY.
AS FOR THE MOTIVATION FOR
EMPLOYERS ENSURING INTO PRIVATE
SETTLEMENTS IN LIEU OF
PROTRACTED LITIGATION.
A THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT
MOTIVATIONS FOR THAT ONE OF
WHICH COULD BE THE PURE COST AND
TIME INVOLVED IN. A LITIGATION
OUR COURTS ARE VERY IMPACTED
THESE CASES GO ON FOR YEARS AND
IF IN FACT YOU DO END UP.
ALWAYS.
SURE.
THAT JURY IS GOING TO BE AND
WHAT THE RISK AS A OTHER
MOTIVATIONS ARE.
WE IN FACT NEED TO RESOLVE THIS
BECAUSE THIS IS BAD. RIGHT THEY
SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WE
DON'T HAVE. LEGITIMATE DEFENSES
TAKING THIS TO TRIAL SO WE
SHOULD GET IT RESOLVED TO THEIR
MANY DIFFERENT REASONS.
BUT OFTEN TIMES.
I BELIEVE AND WHAT YOU WERE
REFERRING TO. AND CHAIRWOMAN WAS
JUST THE DECISION TO HAVE A
SETTLEMENT WITH THE NON
ADMISSION BECAUSE TO GET THIS
PUT BEHIND US
AND SO IF WE ENTER INTO THESE
BUT YET WE TURN AROUND. AND WE.
PUBLICIZING MAHLER DISCLOSE THEM
BECAUSE WERE A PUBLIC BODY TO
THE. TO THE PUBLIC HOW DOES
THAT.
BECAUSE THAT HELP IN ANYWAY
VERSE IS JUST GOING TO TRIAL AND
IT BEING PUBLIC AND I THINK
YOU'VE GOT TO DETERMINE. WHAT
ARE THE REASONS WHY AN EARLY
SETTLEMENT IS BETTER THAN A
PROTRACTED LITIGATION TO?
PASSED FOR PATIENTS FOR MY
COLLEAGUES WHO I KNOW HAVE
QUESTIONS AND ASK THE PANEL IF
YOU CAN STAY FOR A FEW MORE
MINUTES BUT WE DO HAVE A
PANELIST TO HUSTLE LEAVE BECAUSE
SHE'S CATCHING AIRPLANES HOPE
YOU DON'T MIND I'M GONNA CALL UP
AND REBEL.
TO. MAKE HER COMMENTS AND ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN I ASK
YOU TO COME BACK UP IF THAT'S
OKAY.
AND I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUES FOR
THEIR UNDERSTANDING.
WILL COME.
THIS RATTLED.
WELL LET MISS WEST.
GO OVER SO THAT SHE DOESN'T
HAVE TO I'M SORRY NOT MISS WEST
MR JOHNSON LEAVE SO THAT SHE
DOESN'T HAVE TO SAY STARING AT A
SCREEN. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR HELP SAY WAS VERY
HELPFUL EACH YEAR THEY GIVE US
OPPORTUNITIES.
MADAM CHAIR I'M I'M ACTUALLY I
HAVE A CLASS TO TEACH AND.
.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING ME A LITTLE
BIT OUT OF OUT OF ORDER A MY
NAME IS ANN RAVEL AND I'M THE
FORMER CHAIR OF THE CALIFORNIA
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES
COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE.
OF FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION.
AND.
FIRE HERE BUT NOT TO SPEAK
ABOUT. SEXUAL HARASSMENT PER SE
BUT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.
OF RELATING TO THE ENFORCEMENT
OF MATTERS AGAINST
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
AND.
I.
FRANKLY BELIEVE. THAT. AND I
HAVE DONE SEXUAL HARASSMENT WORK
WHEN I WAS A LAWYER FOR THE
COUNTY.
BUT I DO THINK THAT.
THE LEGISLATURE IS UNIQUE.
AND THAT HOW TO ADDRESS THESE
ISSUES. IS A LITTLE MORE
COMPLICATED THAN.
AS A REGULAR EMPLOYEE.
AND FOR THE REASONS THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED.
MANY OF THEM BECAUSE.
OBVIOUSLY THE.
DESIRE.
TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OR THE
ALLEGED VICTIM.
UP AND TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS A
PAPER FAIR PROCESS IS THE SAME.
NO MATTER WHAT. BUT.
THERE IS UNIQUE.
ASPECTS.
OF.
INDIVIDUALS WHO IN A POLITICAL
POSITION.
AND HOW AND.
PRESS AND OTHER AND INFORMATION
THAT COMES OUT IS BEING USED.
AGAINST THEM. AND FOR THAT
REASON I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK
AT. AND THIS IS I THINK WHY I'VE
BEEN ASKED TO SPEAK.
I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT
MIGHT BE.
A BETTER PROCESS.
RATHER THAN A REGULAR.
EMPLOYERS WHO MIGHT HAVE AN
INTERNAL PROCESS.
SO I AND EXCUSE ME IF YOU.
.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE'S A
NUMBER OF WAYS TO LOOK AT AT
THESE COMPLAINTS.
BOTTOM.
ONE OF THEM IS JUST HIRE AN
INVESTIGATOR A LAWYER WHICH I
THINK.
PEOPLE HAVE REFERRED TO TODAY
I'M WHICH I DO NOT THINK IS
PROBABLY THE BEST.
WAY UP AND THERE'S ALSO. A
HIDDEN SOMEBODY'S.
HAVE A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL LIKE
AND I. AYE G..
WHO WOULD BE THE PERSON? TO
OVERSEE AN INVESTIGATOR OR DO
THE INVESTIGATION THEMSELVES. IN
A SEPARATE BODY I'M SORRY AND
INSPECTOR GENERAL.
AND.
.
SOME COMMISSIONS LIKE THE F.
PPC.
OF ACTUALLY IN OTHER STATES
ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE ONE
COMMISSIONER.
AND DIDN'T BESSIE GATORS.
BUT.
FRANKLY HAVING SEEN BOTH THE
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION AND
THE CALIFORNIA FAIR POLITICAL
PRACTICES COMMISSION.
MY VIEW IS THAT THAT IS.
A REALLY GOOD MECHANISM.
FOR REVIEWING COMPLAINTS AGAINST
ELECTED OFFICIALS WHETHER IT BE.
FOR OTHER.
VIOLATIONS OF THE POLITICAL
REFORM ACT IS THAT IS.
OR. ETHICS VIOLATIONS WHICH THE
FPC ALSO HAS AUTHORITY OVER.
OR SOMETHING LIKE THIS I'M AND
THE REASON FOR THAT IS. IF YOU
LOOK AT IT.
.
THE COMPANY COMPOSITION OF THE
F. PPC. IT IS SPECIFICALLY
BIPARTISAN.
AND IT IS INTENDED TO BE
NONPARTISAN. AND YOU KNOW I.
THIS IS NOT WASHINGTON DC I
UNDERSTAND THAT HAPPY TO BE BACK
IN CALIFORNIA WHERE IT IS NOT.
BUT. BURDEN. NONE THE LESS
THERE ARE POLITICAL ASPECTS.
TO THESE ISSUES NO QUESTION
ABOUT IT.
SO HAVING A BIPARTISAN
COMMISSION. IS A REALLY. GOOD
ALTERNATIVE.
TO HAVING ONE PERSON WHO MAY BE
APPOINTED BY SOMEBODY. OF ONE
PARTY OR ANOTHER.
I'M. IT THE. SUDDEN OTHER.
ASPECT OF IT IS THAT BECAUSE
THOSE COMMISSIONS ARE TOTALLY
INDEPENDENT.
AND ACT IN DEPENDENTLY DO NOT
REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE PER SE
EXCEPT.
INSOFAR AS THEY HAVE
RELATIONSHIPS AND THEY SHOULD.
TO DO TRAINING TO TO.
.
TRY TO CHANGE THE CULTURE AS YOU
SPOKE ABOUT. A AND TO GET
COMPLIANCE
AHEAD OF TIME RATHER THAN
FOCUSING SOLELY ON.
PUNISHMENT AND WELL OF COURSE
THERE'S THAT THAT WHOLE TIMIDLY
HAS TO TAKE PLACE IS WELL WE
ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW.
BUT.
REALLY WITH THOSE KINDS OF
ORGANIZATIONS.
TENDS TO SEE THEIR ROLE.
IN MANY WAYS AS.
TRYING TO WORK WITH THE BODY
THAT THEY ARE THERE TO OVERSEE
IN THE SENSE.
TO GET.
VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE TO CHANGE
THE CULTURE SO THAT IT'S NOT.
PURELY PUNITIVE BUT IT IS UP.
EDUCATION. AND ABOUT HOW TO HOW
THEY INTERACT.
PURSUANT TO THE LAW.
SO THIS IS WHY. IN SOME WAYS I
THINK.
THAT MODEL IS A GOOD ONE AND FOR
THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW I
MEAN.
AND THEY'RE PROBABLY LOTS OF
DIFFERENT WAYS OF SETTING IT UP.
ON LEGISLATIVELY IF YOU WERE
GOING TO. PURSUE SOMETHING LIKE
THIS BUT THE F. PPC THE
APPOINTMENTS.
ARE.
EACH CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER.
HAS IT BEEN APPOINTMENT.
UP AND AND IF THERE ARE AS IN
THE CASE OF CALIFORNIA.
ONLY ONE PARTY S. CONSTITUTIONAL
OFFICERS
THEN SOME OF THE APPOINTMENTS
MUST BE MADE UP AND IN THIS CASE
UP BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
UP AND AND THAT.
PROVIDES THAT BALANCE AND THAT
SORT OF CHECK. ON THE AUTHORITY
OF THE COMMISSION.
WHICH THEN.
OVERSEAS BE INVESTIGATORS WITHIN
THE WITHIN THE AGENCY. OF.
SO BAD INDEPENDENCE I THINK IS.
A REALLY GOOD THING BECAUSE WHAT
IT DOES IS IT.
REQUIRES UNLIKE THE A FDC. WHERE
IT WAS A BODY OF SIX?
AND A THE ESSENTIAL APPOINTEES
WERE EITHER THE MAJORITY LEADER
OR THE. MINORITY LEADER OF THE
SENATE.
AND.
AS A RESULT THERE WAS.
SOME SENATE'S.
ABED.
THEY WERE BEHOLDEN TO THOSE
INDIVIDUALS
SO THEY ESSENTIALLY BECAME MUCH
MORE POLITICAL AND I THINK YOU.
RENDON VIEW.
MY REPORT THAT I WROTE BEFORE
WHEN I LEFT THE FEC AND IT.
CERTAINLY HAD AN IMPACT IN
ENFORCEMENT.
AT THE FTC. BUT.
BE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE
BEEN SPOKEN ABOUT BY THE
PREVIOUS PANEL. ARE ALSO REALLY
IMPORTANT BECAUSE CLEARLY.
THE ABILITY OF SUCH AN
INDEPENDENT COMMISSION TO ACT.
IS ALSO DEPENDENT ON THE FACT
THAT THEY ARE PROVIDED AMPLE
BUDGET. TO DO SO.
UN AND HEAD.
AND.
IN MANY.
COMMISSIONS NATIONWIDE UP AND
HOW THE. LEGISLATURE OVER OR
LOCAL. GOVERNMENT UP MANAGES TO
ASSURE THAT THERE IS NO ACTUAL.
ITEM FAIR ACTIVITY OF THOSE
COMMISSIONS IS THAT THEY ARE
STARVED FOR RESOURCES.
SO RESOURCES ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR BOTH ASPECTS BOTH
FOR THE EDUCATION.
THE ADVICE
ASPECT WHICH SHOULD BE A
COMPONENT OF IT. BUT ALSO FOR
THE ENFORCEMENT AND
INVESTIGATION ASPECT IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT THERE BE
SUFFICIENT.
OF RESOURCES.
.
SO A. THE OTHER THE OTHER THING
IS I'M AS IS TRUE OF THE PPC.
THE THE COMMISSIONERS CAN'T BE
REMOVED DURING THEIR TERMS.
SO IT THERE CAN'T BE ANY
RETALIATION OR ANY ANY.
ACTIONS IF PEOPLE DO NOT AGREE
WITH THEIR WITH THEIR ACTIONS
WITH REGARD TO THE
INVESTIGATIONS AND I THAT DO
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
TO HAVE INVESTIGATORS THAT BEEN.
OF MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
COMMISSIONERS. A AND I
ABSOLUTELY AGREE THEY HAVE TO BE
TIME TIMELY I SPIT THINK THAT'S
BEEN SAID BEFORE. BUT THAT IS
REALLY REALLY IMPORTANT NO
MATTER WHAT. THE CONTEXT.
BUT IN PARTICULAR IN SEXUAL
HARASSMENT MATTERS IT THEY.
MUST BE TIMELY AND I WOULD
SUGGEST.
BUT ANY RULES RELATING TO SUCH A
COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TARGETS.
FOR FOR TIMELINES NOT
NECESSARILY. REQUIRING THEM
BECAUSE SOME THINGS ARE MORE
COMPLEX THAN OTHERS.
BUT TIME OF TARGETS ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT BOTH FOR THE VICTIMS
AS WELL AS THE CUES.
AND I ALSO THINK THAT THE
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS ITSELF AND
I MAY DIFFER FOR THEM.
WHAT SOME OF THE OTHERS ON THE?
PANEL. PRIOR TO. HAVE SAID OF.
I BELIEVE THAT THE INVESTIGATIVE
PROCESS SHOULD BE.
TOTALLY CONFIDENTIAL.
AND I. DO NOT THINK
THAT UNLESS THERE IS.
OF FINDING
THAT THERE IS A. VALID.
BELIEF OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
OCCURRED.
THAT THERE SHOULD BE PUBLICITY
SURROUNDING AND I THINK THAT IT
IS.
SO IMPORTANT AND I SAW THIS AT
THE AT PPC.
JUST BE ALLEGATION.
JUST THIS STATEMENT JUST A
COMPLAINT BEING FILED AND YOU
CAN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM.
PUBLICIZING THEIR OWN
COMPLAINTS.
BUT JUST THAT COMPLAINT.
IS ENOUGH FOR PEOPLE TO.
HAVE BEEN ADVERSE VIEW. OF THE
PERSON WHO IS BEING COMPLAINED
AGAINST AND THAT IT I THINK. YOU
SAID OF WE KNOW THAT'S ON THE
FRONT PAGE.
BUT THE SACRAMENTO BEE OR
WHATEVER HOMETOWN NEWSPAPER. AND
THEN THE DECISION.
WHERE NOTHING IN NOTHING IS
PROVEN?
IT IS USUALLY HIDDEN SOMEWHERE
IN ONE PARAGRAPH OR MAYBE NOT AT
ALL. AND SO I I DO HAVE
CONCERNS.
ABOUT HAVING PUBLICITY AND I AM
A. BIG BELIEVER IN GOVERNMENT
TRANSPARENCY WITHOUT A DOUBT
BUT.
SOMETIMES THESE CASES.
CAN HAVE.
CONSEQUENCES THE BETTER REALLY
UNFAIR AND I THINK THAT THE
PROCESS.
BUT IT LET ME JUST SAY AND I
THINK I MENTIONED THIS.
TEARS STAFF.
WHEN A LISTING ON THE WEBSITE.
OF
ALL THE COMPLAINTS THAT HAD BEEN
FILED AND SO IT RAISE THE. A.
IT RAISES THE NOTORIETY OF IT.
WHICH.
I DO NOT THINK THAT AN
INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY.
SHOULD ENGAGE AND BE
INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY MUST ENSURE
THAT THE PROCESS IS FAIR TO THE
VICTIM. ALLEGED VICTIM TO THE.
ALLEGED PERPETRATOR. AND ONCE A
DETERMINATION IS MADE. THEN.
PUBLICITY IS FINE NOT A PROBLEM.
BUT PRIOR TO THAT TIME I I DO
NOT THINK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE.
.
SO. I I ALSO THINK I MEAN.
I UNDERSTAND WHY ACCUSERS LIKE
THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT
ANONYMOUS ACCUSERS.
I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WOULD BE
ANONYMITY. UP NO QUESTION AND BE
THERE HAS TO BE PROTECTION FOR
THE ACCUSERS AS WELL AND SO.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THERE BE
SOME KIND OF A FLEXIBLE
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS.
SO THAT THE ROOM RIGHTS IN THE
PRIVACY OF THE ACCUSERS.
ATTACKED.
BUT.
WITH COGNIZANT OF THEM
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE RIGHTS
AND PRIVACY NEEDS OF THE.
DEFENSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING
ACCUSED AS WELL.
SO WITH THAT I DON'T WANT TO
TAKE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME BUT
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER
SINCE.
I'M THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
AT YOU KNOW WERE.
ARE STARTING TO IS GOOD THE
PANEL IS MOVE IS STARTING TO
MOVE FROM IDENTIFYING PROBLEM.
LOOKING AT ISSUES AND ALSO INTO
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
SO ARMED THIS IS A YOU KNOW A
VERY INTERESTING AREA AND
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF SUGGESTION
AND A LOT OF FOUGHT AMONGST US.
ABOUT BREEN OUTSIDE ENTITY OF
SOME SORT IN OR CREATING ONE AND
HOUSE AND HOW YOU BALANCE.
THE GOVERNANCE OF THIS BODY
HAVING BEEN FROM WITHIN. THE
LEGISLATURE.
TO LOOKING AT THESE OUTSIDE NOT
JUST INVESTIGATORS OR ADVISORS
BUT THE F. PPC ACTION IS ALSO AN
ENFORCER. AND WHEN IT COMES TO
CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND IT COMES TO
CERTAIN TYPES OF ETHICS
VIOLATIONS.
WE DON'T POLICE OURSELVES WE
SEEM TO HAVE AN OUTSIDE BODY
THAT DOES THAT WHICH HAS SOME
CHALLENGES BUT ALSO.
A IS THEM OUT IN MY MIND A MUCH
FAIRER. WAY FOR EVERYBODY OF
HAVING THAT DONE.
BECAUSE.
PEOPLE HAVE SAID WELL THE LATEST
LEGISLATURE'S INCAPABLE OF
POLICING ITSELF BUT I WOULD ALSO
SUBMIT THAT IT'S ON
FAIR.
TO EXPECT COLLEAGUES TO POLICE
OTHER COLLEAGUES AND I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT IN THE PRIVATE
SECTOR WE ASK.
PEOPLE TO BRING THEIR EVILS EN
IT THERE'S BEEN A WORKPLACE
ISSUE AND THEN VOTE ON WHAT
HAPPENS TO THEM YOU KNOW THE LOG
GUIDES US IN GUIDELINES GUIDE
US.
BUT I WILL ALSO SAY THAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT ISSUES THAT ARE
VERY MUCH WORKPLACE ISSUES ABOUT
HOW PEOPLE WORK WITH EACH OTHER
WHICH IS DIFFERENT.
CAMPAIGN ISSUE OR ANOTHER TYPE
OF ETHNICAL ISSUE SO HOW WOULD
YOU.
JUDGE THAT WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE
CHO CLEARLY YOU THOUGHT ABOUT
THIS. A PROCESS WHERE.
YOU RULES AND HUMAN RESOURCES
DEALS WITH ISSUES THAT THEY CAN
DEAL WITH BUT WHEN THINGS SORT
OF HIT CERTAIN THRESHOLD THAT WE
ALL UNDERSTAND.
OF CROSSING AN ETHICAL LINE THAT
THEY WITH THEM BRING THE F. PPC
CN OR WOULD EMPLOYEES GO
DIRECTLY TO THE F. PPC WANTED AN
ALLEGATION INVOLVES A MEMBER.
HAVE YOU GIVEN THAT ANY THOUGHT
DO YOU THINK THAT THAT'S ALL
KIND OF TO BE DETERMINED WELL I
THINK IT IT. COULD BE DETERMINED
ALBUM BASED ON WHAT THE
LEGISLATURE OBVIOUSLY FEELS IS
THE MOST COMFORTABLE I DON'T
THINK IT'S A QUESTION OF.
WHAT'S THE BEST OR WHAT VOTE.
EITHER WAY WOULD WORK ALTHOUGH.
AND CERTAINLY A DOZEN AGENCIES
SUCH AS A FPP SEE.
WOULD BE SUITED TO DO THAT
BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AS
YOU AS YOU MENTIONED.
ETHICS ISSUES SOME OF THEM CAN
RELATE TO WORKPLACE.
ISSUES TO AND SO. FPP SEE
ALREADY HAS.
.
GROUP THAT IS SET UP TO
INVESTIGATE CASES AND OF
OBVIOUSLY THESE DO HAVE.
A LITTLE MORE. I'M.
SENSITIVITY AND NAY PROBABLY
WOULD REQUIRE MORE WITNESSES
THEN WHAT NORMALLY IS DONE
THROUGH FTP SI INVESTIGATIONS
BUT.
AN OUTSIDE AGENCY COULD DO ALL
OF THE ABOVE AND MAKE IT I'M A
LOT MORE.
MAY BE A LOT MORE INDEPENDENT
JUST IN GENERAL.
SO YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE OR WHAT
YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE THINKING IS
IN THE SAME WAY THAT WHEN THERE
ARE SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS.
AGAINST MEMBERS THE LEGISLATURE
CURRENTLY HIRES OUTSIDE
INVESTIGATORS YOU WOULD. YOU SAY
THAT THE SAME THING WOULD HAPPEN
IT SHOWS THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF THAT OVERSIGHT WHICH SHIFT TO
THE F. PEOPLE
SEED.
TO BASICALLY HIGHER SORT OF THE
SAME FROM THE SAME BUT I WOULD
THINK LIMITED GROUP OF
INVESTIGATORS THAT ARE THERE.
AND THEN THE DECISION THAT WILL
BE MADE AS TO WHT THE WHERE I'M
AT AND WHETHER OR NOT.
AFTER ALLEGATIONS SUSTAIN AND
THE PENALTIES WOULD BE.
EITHER SUGGESTED BY THE HAPPY
PEACE HERE ACTUALLY ENFORCED AND
SORT OF HANDED DOWN BY THE F.
PPC. RIGHT WEALTHY WHAT THE F.
PPC DOES AS THE COMMISSION IS
THERE ARE TIMES THAT THEY WOULD
LOOK AT A RECOMMENDATION FROM
THE INVESTIGATOR. AND I'M
SAYING.
EITHER WE THINK THAT THERE IS.
AN ERROR IN THE JUDGMENT.
AND THAT THIS IS NOT A MATTER
THAT IS ACTUALLY SEXUAL
HARASSMENT OR THE REVERSE.
I SO THE AT THE COMMISSION WOULD
EXERCISE INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT IN
THAT RESPECT WITH REGARD. IT'S
NOT.
COMMON BUT IT HAPPENS IT DOES
HAPPEN. OF THAT. NOT ONLY DO YOU
OF MAKE THE DECISION AT THE. AT
THE COMMISSION LEVEL AS TO WHAT
THE PENALTY SHOULD BE. BUT
SOMETIMES YOU DON'T AGREE WITH
THE INVESTIGATORS.
ASSESSMENT OF A PARTICULAR CASE
THE OTHER.
ASPECT OF IT IS THAT THE F. PPC
CAN DO WELL THERE.
OVERSEEING THE INVESTIGATORS IS
TO DETERMINE WHICH IS SOMETHING
THAT THAT WAS ALWAYS ON MY MIND.
WHEN DEALING WITH THE OTHER
ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AT THE F.
PPC. IS WHETHER EITHER THEY ARE
BEING.
TO BLACKS OR BEING TOO ONEROUS
AND SO YOU YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT
PATTERNS.
OF THE INVESTIGATORS TO BE ABLE
TO ACTUALLY. A ASSESS WHETHER OR
NOT THEY YEAR BEING. FAIR AND
UNBIASED
AS WELL.
SO YOU WOULD COME BACK THEN THE
UP PPC WOULD COME BACK WITH THE
FINDING. BASIN INVESTIGATION
THAT THEY OVERSAW BUT THEN WHAT
WHAT THE PENALTIES BICU
BECAUSE TYPICALLY WITH THE
CAMPAIGN VIOLATION THERE WOULD
BE A MONETARY PENALTIES
SOMETIMES THERE COULD BE A
CRIMINAL PENALTY.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND YOUR THE
VIOLATION IS AGAINST AND
EMPLOYEES IN THE LEGISLATURE.
HOW WITH THE F. PPC THEN?
IN RESOLVE THAT. RIGHT WELL
THAT WOULD BE HAVE TO BE PART OF
WHATEVER LEGISLATION. IS A.
ULTIMATELY ENACTED BY THE
LEGISLATURE AS TO WHAT THEY
THINK THAT THE RANGE.
OF WHAT WHAT THE RANGE OF AND.
POTENTIAL PENALTIES SHOULD BE AB
ACCORDING TO AS ONE OF THE
PREVIOUS A PANELISTS TALKED
ABOUT.
DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE A
HAPPENING.
WITH THE VIOLATION ALLEGEDLY WAS
AND WHAT IS FOUND.
TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S
COMMENSURATE WITH WHATEVER THAT
IS SO DEFINITELY THERE WOULD
HAVE TO BE NEW RULES NEW LAWS.
THAT WOULD.
GOVERNED.
SUCH.
OF A RULE FOR THE F. PPC IF
THAT'S WHO IT WAS THAT YOU CHOSE
AS OPPOSED TO STARTING UP
ENTIRELY NEW COMMITTEE.
AND WE'VE TALKED HERE ABOUT
HAVING A MORE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA
ABOUT WHAT PENALTIES WOULD BE
FOR LEGISLATORS.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY WHEN YOU
MENTION THE COMMISSION ARE YOU
TALKING ABOUT THE F. PPC ITSELF
FOR A NEW COMMISSION MUCH JUST
FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT. THAT IT
COULD BE EITHER.
IT COULD BE EITHER MEAN IT IT.
PROBABLY CONVENIENT THAT IT
ALREADY HAS. A COMMISSION
PROCESS SET UP OLD LOW. AND.
OBVIOUSLY I I WOULD GUESS
THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
PRESENTLY ON THAT COMMISSION ARE
PEOPLE. WHO ARE PARTICULARLY
INTERESTED IN POLITICAL LAW
PERHAPS OR ISSUES RELATED TOTO
THE GOVERNMENT ETHICS?
AND SO IT MIGHT BE AT A
DIFFERENT GROUP OF COMMISSIONERS
THAT MIGHT. BE BETTER SUITED TO
HANDLE CASES SUCH AS THIS BUT
THEIR COULD CERTAINLY BE COUNSEL
WHO GUIDES THEM YES WHOSE ARM
YOU KNOW. EXPERT IN THIS TYPE OF
LAW BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT
THAT THE PENALTY PART IS SOME.
YOU KNOW HAS BEEN PRETTY CALM
BROUGHT US MANY TIMES.
OF THERE BEING A LACK OF
CLARITY.
.
FOR YOU KNOW FOR MEMBERS AND FOR
OTHERS ABOUT WHAT PENALTIES ARE
WHAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE LAW.
I'M IN IN THE PAST YOU KNOW
PENALTIES OF RANGE FROM PEOPLE
KEVIN COMMIT YOU KNOW THERE
COMMITTEE CHAIRS TAKEN AWAY TO A
TALKING.
.
OKAY NOW THE OTHER.
ES QUESTION I WOULD ASK YOU
THAT'S GONNA RELATE BACK TO YOUR
OWN UNCONSCIOUS OR CONSCIOUS
BIAS. WHICH IS THAT PEOPLE AS
WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS
PROCESS HAVE SUGGESTED A LOT OF
DIFFERENT ENTITIES TO DO THIS
ROLE WE'VE HEARD SUGGESTIONS
FROM THE AUDITOR TO THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL. A COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
HAS AN INTERNAL PROCESS FOR
THEIR OWN PROMOTION
INVOLVES.
NINE OF CIVIL LAW JUSTICE I
JUST.
JUDGES WHO WERE THEN IN PANEL
DIDN'T THREE BY THREE TO MAKE
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO
DEPARTMENT HEADS SO.
THERE'VE BEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT
SUGGESTIONS ABOUT WHAT'S THE IF
WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS WHAT'S
THE CORRECT BODY I SERVED ON THE
METROPOLITAN WATER. DID.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
METROPOLITAN WATER ONBOARD AND
THEY HAD AN INTERNAL. ETHICS
OFFICER WHO WAS INDEPENDENT WHO.
DID THIS ROLE SO HAVE YOU GIVEN
THOUGHT TO YOU GIVEN YOUR OWN
UNCONSCIOUS BIAS OF HAVING RUN
THE OF PPC. WHETHER WHAT THE
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES ARE
OTHER BODIES AS OPPOSED AT PPC.
RIGHT WELL.
I.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO JUDGES
AND RETIRED JUDGES.
.
MANY OF THEM.
IN.
ARE NOT A.
ARM WHILE THEY'RE IN GOVERNMENT
IN A ROLE. THERE NOT THAT AND
SENSITIVE TO SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
HERE TODAY. AND SO I'M NOT SURE.
THAT. IT WOULD.
BE THE. RIGHT BODY CLUB. TO
HANDLE SUCH A THING. I'M NOT
FAMILIAR WITH THE AG'S OFFICE
INTERNAL ETHICS PERSON. BUT MY
MY CONCERN ABOUT THAT FOR THE
LEGISLATURE MIGHT JUST BE THAT.
UP THAT PERSON WHILE THEY'RE
INDEPENDENT. THERE. IN IN IN AN
EXECUTIVE BRANCH OFFICE.
ITH AN ELECTED OFFICIAL WHO IS
THE HEAD OF THAT OFFICE.
AND THAT MAY POSE. PROBLEMS FOR
THE LEGISLATURE AS A WHOLE THEY
MIGHT BE CONCERT THE CONCERNED
ABOUT SOME.
POLITICAL BIAS WITH RESPECT TO
THAT PARTICULAR OFFICE BUT
THAT'S A JUDGMENT FOR YOU TO
MAKE.
BUT FOR ME. BUT FROM WHAT I'VE
SEEN NATIONWIDE NOT BLEEDING TO
THESE ISSUES OF COURSE BUT.
IN THIS INDEPENDENT TRULY
INDEPENDENT GROUPS.
TEND TO BE.
VERY COGNIZANT OF.
BALANCING ALL OF THE OTHER.
INTERESTS AND TRYING TO BE
ABSOLUTELY FAIR.
GREAT WITHOUT I'M GONNA SEE IF
ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS.
PERMITS RAVEL LOSSES HERE.
S. INSPECTS.
I THINK YOU. VEIL I THINK WHAT
YOU DID FOR ME IN YOUR
TESTIMONY.
YOU REALLY ADDRESS THE BALANCE
ISSUE THAT WE STRUGGLE WITH IN
TERMS OF OUR TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY TO. OUR TAXPAYERS
CLEARLY IF PPC ARLFC ALREADY HAS
THAT RESPONSIBILITY. ARE
BRINGING UP THE ISSUE OF THE NEW
LAW SO THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH THE
LEVELS OF ACCOUNTABILITY. AND
PENALTIES IS PROBABLY THE
BIGGEST TIME PROBLEM THAT WE'VE
GOT IS THE COMMISSION WHERE DO
WE GO WITHOUT. ARE SO I
APPRECIATE ALL YOUR VERY
THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS I THINK MOST
OF US AS ELECTED OFFICIALS OF
HAVE FUN INTERACTION WITH A PPC.
I WILL SAY THAT IN MY OWN CASE
MANY YEARS AGO THE TIMELINESS OF
IT FAILED AND I WAS REALLY.
AFFECTED JOB FOR A NUMBER OF
YEARS BY A JUDGMENT THAT WAS
FINALLY RULED AROUND THE HOUSE
BUT IT TOOK THREE AND A HALF
YEARS.
IN AFFECTED CERTAINLY ON MY MY
MY BUSINESS AT THAT TIME. BUT
YOU KNOW PEOPLE IN
ACCOUNTABILITY AND MISTAKES
HAPPEN IN MINUS CORRECTED BUT I
THINK IN THIS INSTANCE SOMETHING
THAT TOOK THAT LONG OUGHT TO.
ADJUDICATE AND THEN FIND SOMEONE
INNOCENT WHEN THEY WERE A
PERCEIVED AS GUILTY FOR THAT
AMOUNT OF TIME IS HORRIFIC IT'S
HORRIFIC TO THEIR CAREER PATH AS
YOUNG PEOPLE. IT'S HORRIFIC TO
PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THIS FOR A
SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE OF
TERM LIMITS MUST RETURN. OUGHT
TO THEIR FORMER ALL CAREER ALSO
WE HAVE TO BE EXTREMELY MINDFUL
OF THAT AS WE GO FORWARD AND WE
COME UP WITHOUT A LEVEL IN LIST.
OF CONSEQUENCES AND HOW THAT
WILL BE HANDLED IN I DO I VOTE I
DON'T MAKE IT VERY PUBLIC I
BUILT FOR TOTAL. OUR
CONFIDENTIALITY UNTIL THERE'S A
RULING THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE IN
THE COURTS AND THAT CLEARLY IS
WHAT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE
ALL EMBRACE HERE. SO THANK YOU
FOR BRINGING THAT PERSPECTIVE
FORWARD I THINK I THINK LONG
LONG OVERDUE THANK YOU BUT I
AGREE WITH YOU I CAN'T EMPHASIZE
ENOUGH HELLO TIMELINESS IS
SOOOOOO CRUCIAL IN THESE.
ADMITTEDLY THE.
SEE HAS NOT ALWAYS HAD A GOOD
RECORD UN IN THAT RESPECT UP
BUT.
IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I
THINK IS IMPORTANT AND THAT'S
WHY.
ANY ANY LEGISLATION IF THAT'S
WHAT YOU DETERMINE THAT YOU'RE
GOING TO DO SHOULD INCLUDE
TARGETS FOR TIMELINESS.
AND MY ISSUE IS A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AS A MAYOR OF A CITY
MAHOOD AND WHETHER I DID OR
DIDN'T HAVE ONE AND IT WAS ALL
VERY SPECULATIVE AND A LOT OF
PEOPLE BECAUSE OF OTHER ISSUES
GOING ON. WE'RE ATTACKING THE
WHOLE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME BUT
IT TOOK THAT LONG. AND THOSE ARE
THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO BE VERY
MINDFUL OF HERE.
THANK YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE PANEL.
THANK YOU MISERABLE REALLY
APPRECIATE COMING THANK YOU FOR
TAKING THE TIME OUT OF LIKELY
APPRECIATE IT. SO I WOULD ASK MY
COLLEAGUES IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS
FOR THE PREVIOUS PANEL THERE
WAITING PATIENTLY SHOULD I BRING
THEM BACK UP. OKAY.
RIGHT AND WE DO HAVE ONE MORE OF
SPEAKER BUT WHY DON'T WE.
FINISH WITH THE QUESTIONS WITH
THE WHAT THE PREVIOUS PANEL ON
THEM WILL BRING OUR LAST
PANELIST UP.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
I WANTED TO COMMENT.
ON.
BUT.
OKAY.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR I'M I WANT
TO COMMENT ON WHAT ONE OF OUR
COLLEAGUES SAID.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER DOLLY ABOUT AT
WILL EMPLOYEES AND REALLY
THERE'S A WAY TO FIX THAT IF WE
WANT TO ORGANIZE THE WORKPLACE
AND WHEN MEMBERS ARE AND WHEN
WORKERS ARE UNDER UNION
CONTRACT.
IT FIXES A LOT OF WHAT AILS US
IN THE WORKPLACE BECAUSE THE
EMPLOYERS KNOW WHAT THEY CAN AND
CAN'T DO AND THE WORKERS KNOW
WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO. SO I
JUST THROW THAT OUT IS SOMETHING
THAT WE COULD LOOK AT.
I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT RETALIATION BECAUSE I
THINK RETALIATION IS INCREDIBLY
REAL FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO
IS NOT ELECTED. THAT WORKS IN
THE BUILDING AND THIS IS WORKING
HERE IN THE CAPITAL IS NOT LIKE
WORKING IN ANY OTHER PROFESSION.
IF YOU ARE BLACK CALLED IF YOU
ARE RETALIATED AGAINST WHERE DO
YOU GO AND GET A JOB AND THIS
MIGHT BE YOUR JUST BECAUSE
YOU'RE NOT THE ELECTED. YOU'RE
PASSIONATE ABOUT PUBLIC POLICY
YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE THINGS
BETTER I KNOW I COULD DO MY JOB
WITHOUT MY STAFF.
SO THINK WE REALLY HAVE TO THINK
ABOUT RETALIATION AND HOW.
EVERYONE HERE WORRIES ABOUT THAT
AND THEY'RE FEARFUL OF THAT.
I INVESTIGATING GRIEVANCES FOR
TWENTY YEARS WHEN I WAS IN THE
LABOR MOVEMENT AND WE USE TO SAY
THAT THERE'S TWO SIDES TO EVERY
STORY AND THE TRUTH LIES
SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN. AND IT'S
NOT EVER BECAUSE SOMEONE'S
ACTUALLY LYING IT'S USUALLY
SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE LYING BUT
USUALLY IT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST
REMEMBER THINGS DIFFERENTLY SO
SOMETIMES INVESTIGATIONS MIGHT
TAKE A LITTLE LONGER BECAUSE YOU
HAVE TO TALK TO BROADER. A
BROADER BASE OF PEOPLE AND I
THINK WE SHOULD ALWAYS DO THAT
PUMP ISS WEST I WANTED TO THANK
YOU. FOR BRINGING UP THAT WE
SHOULD NEVER PUT A TIME LIMIT ON
INVESTIGATING BECAUSE WHAT I'VE
HEARD. THROUGHOUT THE LAST
MONTHS.
SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID OH WELL
WHY IS THIS COMING OUT IT
HAPPENED SO LONG AGO.
WELL IT'S BECAUSE AS PEOPLE COME
FORWARD AND AS VICIOUS SO MANY
WOMEN HAVE COME FORWARD IT MAKES
ANOTHER WOMAN FEEL CONFIDENT
ENOUGH TO COME FORWARD. SO WE
CAN'T EVER SAY BECAUSE IT
HAPPENED FIVE YEARS AGO TEN
YEARS AGO THAT IT'S NOT VALID I
THINK ABOUT THE.
STATUE OF LIMITATION ON RAPE
BILL THAT WE PASSED OUT OF.
THAT THE GOVERNOR SIGNED INTO
LAW A COUPLE YEARS AGO YOU CAN'T
PUT A TIME LIMIT ON JUSTICE AND
EVERYONE HERE SAW THAT THE
GOVERNOR SAW THAT AND I THINK WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE. THAT WE'RE
LOOKING OUT FOR STAFF THE WE'RE
TAKING CARE OF THEM THERE ARE
HUNDRED AND TWENTY OF US THAT
WORK HERE IN THIS BUILDING AND I
WAS ITS I AM LIKE A HUNDRED AND
TWENTY LITTLE. OFF ON PRIVATELY
OWNED BUSINESSES BECAUSE WERE
ALL A LITTLE DIFFERENT WE ALL
COME FROM DIFFERENT WALKS OF
LIFE. BUTWE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT
THE STAFF WHO WORK HERE BECAUSE.
WHEN I'M TURNED OUT MANY OF MY
STAFF STILL HAVE A CAREER AHEAD
OF THEM AND THEY WILL WANT TO GO
WORK FOR SOMEONE ELSE SO I JUST
PUT THAT OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE
THAT WERE COGNIZANT. OF THOSE
WHO REALLY HELP US HERE IN THE
BUILDING THE ONES WHO CAN BE
MOST TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF SO WE
HAVE TO HAVE POLICIES IN PLACE
TO PROTECT THEM BECAUSE ALL OF
US ELECTIVES ARE DIFFERENT AND
WE ALL COME FROM A DIFFERENT
PLACE. AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A
STAFF BEFORE YOU WERE ELECTED
YOU MAY NOT KNOW WHAT IS OKAY
AND WHAT IS NOT OKAY TO DO SO I
HOPE THAT WE WILL CONTINUE THIS
AND WE WILL. WE'LL GET TO WHERE
WE NEED TO BE.
THANK YOU MAY I RESPOND MANAGER.
HOME I. STAND FIRM WITH MY
BELIEF THAT THE HUNT AT THAT THE
ONE YEAR TIME LIMIT IN THE
POLICY SHOULD SHOULD NOT BE
THERE THAT ALL CLAIMS. OF
HARASSMENT SHOULD BE
INVESTIGATED BUT I THINK THERE'S
A COUNTER.
ARGUMENT OR BALANCE TO THAT
AND ONE AND I THINK WE WANT.
VERY VERY STRONGLY TO ENCOURAGE
PEOPLE TO REPORT.
RIGHT AWAY VERY QUICKLY OF FOR A
NUMBER OF REASONS ONE SO WE CAN
STOP THE CONDUCT STOP IT FROM
ESCALATING. ALSO BECAUSE AS YOU
JUST INDICATED ABOUT PERCEPTIONS
AND MEMORIES THE LONGER TIME
GOES BY MEMORIES FADE AS TO WHAT
DID OR DID NOT OCCUR. SO WELL I
DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD EVER BE
A TIME LIMIT ON INVESTIGATING A
REPORT OF MISCONDUCT IN THE
WORKPLACE AGAIN IF THEY BRING
SOME
FORWARD IT HAPPEN TO THEM YEARS
AGO. EITHER CONDUCT COULD BE
HAPPENING TO THEM AND OTHERS.
WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD IS MY
PANEL MEMBER AND INDICATED BUT
ALSO. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THINGS
QUICKLY AND THE LONGER THE TIME
GOES BY THE HARDER IT IS TO
REALLY TRY TO. MAKE A REASONABLE
DETERMINATION AS TO WHAT
OCCURRED.
IF I ME. I COULD NOT AGREE MORE
WE WANT PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD
BUT THAT'S ON US THAT'S ON US
MAKING SURE THAT WE PUT IN PLACE
SOMETHING THAT MAKES PEOPLE THAT
THAT.
EMPLOYEES IN THIS BUILDING STAFF
IN THIS BUILDING FEEL SAFE AND
THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN COME
FORWARD BECAUSE I AGREE I DON'T
LIKE TO EE PEOPLE SIT ON THINGS
BUT I UNDERSTAND WHY IT HAPPENS.
SO IT'S ON US TO TRY AND FIND A
WAY THAT WE MAKE IT A SAFE
ENVIRONMENT COME FORWARD AND AND
I THINK YOU'VE TAKEN THE RIGHT
STEP WITH THE RECENT
WHISTLEBLOWER A BILL THE CAT
SIGNED YES.
THANK YOU ISRAEL'S.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND THANK
YOU PANELISTS.
THE AREA THAT I I WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IS
CONFIDENTIALITY.
THE RESERVES STATEMENT MADE
THAT REPORTING IS THE VICTIMS
CHOICE.
I AGREE.
BUT IN THE END AFTER THE VICTIM
HOUSE.
CHOSEN TO TO REPORT AND IT IS
INVESTIGATED.
THE ISSUE OF A CONFIDENTIALITY
CLAUSE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE
VICTIM.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT BUT I
THINK I KNOW THAT IT YOU HAVE
STRONG OPINIONS REGARDING THIS.
IT'S BECAUSE THE END YOU'VE
MENTIONED THAT IT HAS TO DO
WITH.
A PUBLIC POLICY.
IT TRANSPARENCY AND I I
RECOGNIZE ALL OF THAT. IF THAT
IS SOMETHING THAT THE VICTIM IS
ASKING FOR UNDER WHAT
CIRCUMSTANCES IF ANY WOULD YOU
FEEL THAT THAT WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE.
SO AYE I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS
THAT LABOR CODE TWO THREE TWO
POINT FIVE ALLOWS AND ACTUALLY
MANDATES.
THAT THERE CANNOT BE LIMITATIONS
ON DISCUSSIONS ABOUT TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT.
SO THAT'S A LAW THAT ALREADY
APPLIES TO THIS BODY. AND IF
YOU'RE A AND SO I WANTED TO
RAISE THAT IT ALSO WITH THE NLRB
HEADED DECISION ABOUT CONCERTED
ACTIVITY. AND YOU SO IF YOU'RE
GOING TO GAG. INFORMATION FLOW
DURING AN INVESTIGATORY PROCESS
YOU REALLY HAVE TO QUESTION
WHETHER THAT'S.
AND IN KEEPING WITH CURRENT
LEGAL STANDARDS
SO I WANTED TO ADDRESS AT FIRST.
SECONDLY I THINK.
IT CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES ARE
GAGGING THE VICTIM THAT'S WHAT
THEY ARE.
I AM IN DO WE AS A BODY THINK
THAT AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC
POLICY WE OUGHT TO BE GAGGING
VICTIMS.
AND I WOULD SAY NO. THERE'S MANY
REASONS FOR THE US.
BOB ONE IS IT IT CONTINUES THE
CONDUCT THE UNLAWFUL CONDUCT IT
CERTAINLY DOESN'T BRING IT TO
LIFE IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T. A.
LEAD TO ANY ADEQUATE REMEDIAL
MEASURES
SO.
I THINK AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC
POLICY WE SHOULD HAVE
LIMITATIONS REGARDING SUCH
CAUSES WHICH ARE UBIQUITOUS.
A EMPLOYERS ASK FOR THESE AS A
MATTER. OF COURSE WHETHER IT
ACTUALLY BENEFITS THEM OR NOT
THEY MAY WISH TO HAVE THEIR
STORY COME OUT THEY MAY WISH TO
SAY YOU KNOW WHAT THAT'S NOT HOW
IT WENT DOWN. AND WE TOOK THIS
AS A BUSINESS DECISION ARM BUT
IF.
DATE UBIQUITOUS NATURE OF
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES
PROHIBITS THAT SORT OF PUBLIC
DISCUSSION AND I THINK. WHAT
REALLY HAPPENS IS THE VICTIMS
ARE THE ONES THAT ARE GAGGED
IT'S NOT THE EMPLOYER?
SO IT IT THAT'S WHAT I FIND IN
MY PRACTICE IS THAT IF THERE'S A
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE. IT'S
REALLY THE WOMAN WHO CAN'T TELL
HER DAUGHTER DON'T GO WORK FOR
THAT MEMBERS DON'T GO WORK FOR
THAT EMPLOYER. IT'S THE WOMAN
WHO CAN'T.
DISCUSS IT WITH HER THERAPIST
ENEMIES ARE AGAINST PUBLIC
POLICY AND I THINK THOSE THINGS
HAVE TO STOP.
NOT ONLY IN THE.
ONE ON ONE INTERACTION OF
GAGGING SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN THE
VICTIM OF A CRIME WE DON'T SAY
FOR HOMICIDE VICTIMS. IF TO BE
SILENT.
THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE
HOMICIDE VICTIM IT'S THE SAME
THING HERE THIS IS A CRIME.
AND WE CERTAINLY SHOULDN'T
ENABLE A CRIME BY KEEPING IT
ILENT I THINK THE SILENCE. IS
PART OF THE PROBLEM SO YES I DO
HAVE VERY STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT
IT.
.
THERE ARE SOME.
INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY CHOOSE
BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID OF
RETALIATION. I'M NOT TO COME
FORWARD I HAVE AGAIN CLIENTS WHO
REGULARLY RECIEVE PRESS CALLS
AND THEY DECLINED THEM.
AND THERE'S REASONS FOR THAT
AND I THINK. THAT'S SORT OF
CHOICE SHOULD LIE WITH THE
SURVIVOR.
BUT I DON'T THINK.
IT SHOULD BE AS A MATTER OF LA A
SURVIVOR OF HARASSMENT.
CAN KEEP THINGS CONFIDENTIAL BY
SIMPLY DOING NOT SPEAKING ABOUT
IT.
BUT NOT BEING MANDATED BY LAW
NOT TO SPEAK ABOUT.
SO. A VERY SIMPLE SOLUTION YOU
JUST DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.
.
BUT ALLOWING THOSE
CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSES TO
PROCESS.
I THINK CREATES THOSE SYSTEMIC
PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH
TODAY.
ALONG THOSE SAME LINES YOU.
MIGHT COME SORRY DON'T RECALL
WHO WAS THAT TALKED ABOUT IT.
THAT VICTIMS ABOUT THE VICTIMS
ABILITY TO GO STRAIGHT TO WEAVE.
AND TO HAVE THAT AS A PROTECTED
ACTIVITY BELIEVE IT WAS HERE.
WEST.
.
TELL US ABOUT WHY THAT IS SO
IMPORTANT
THAT THAT IT BE A PROTECTED
ACTIVITY. AND THEREFORE CANNOT
BE RETALIATED AGAINST
YES
SO WHILE I THINK IT'S A VERY
GOOD STEP TO ALLOW RESOURCES FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO'VE BEEN
SUBJECTED TO HARASS.
TERMINATION RETALIATION
TO BE ABLE TO GO SOMEWHERE TO
OBTAIN THOSE SORT OF RESOURCES.
IN ORDER TO GET THINGS LIKE
THERAPY.
BUT IF AS A BODY YOU'RE SAYING
YOU CAN GO REPORT AGENCY AS A.
BUT WE DON'T CONSIDER THAT
REPORTER PROTECTED ACTIVITY WHAT
THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT
IS IS IF THERE IS RETALIATION IN
THE WORKPLACE.
THAT IS NOT CONSIDER TO
PROTECTED ACTIVITIES SUCH THAT
DOT VICTIM THEN CAN HAVE LEGAL
REMEDIES SITS THEY ARE. A
SUBJECTED TO RETALIATION
ADDITIONALLY.
IT DOESN'T ALLOW THIS BODY TO
LOOK AT WILL WHAT WIRE THERE
THESE COMPLAINTS COMING OUT OF A
CERTAIN MEMBERS OFFICE HOW CAN
WE STEM THAT TIDE.
ARE TOSE VALID COMPLAINTS
INVALID COMPLAINTS.* SO IT
DOESN'T ALLOW. IT IN THIS BODY
TO TAKE ADEQUATE REMEDIAL
MEASURES TO ADDRESS IT SO I
THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL RESOURCE
I'M VERY HAPPY THAT IT'S IN
PLACE. BUT I THINK IT NEEDS SOME
TINKERING TO ALLOW IT TO BE A
PROTECTED ACTIVITY. OR TO SAY
VERY CLEARLY IF YOU GO TO WE.
YOU'RE NOT PROTECTED BY THE LAW.
YOU MAY GET A RESOURCE THAT'S
WONDERFUL ANY MAY GET RESOURCES
TO DEAL WITH TRAUMA YOU MAY GET
THERAPY THAT YOU NEED.
AND THAT HAS ITS OWN VALUE.
BUT.
THAT NEEDS TO BE STATED UP
FRONT.
THAT THAT I HAVE CERTAIN LEGAL
CONSEQUENCES AND ALLOWS THE
PERSON IN THAT SITUATION TO
DECIDE DO THEY WANT TO MAKE A
COMPLAINT.
AND BE COVERED UNDER THE LAW FOR
PROTECTED ACTIVITY WATERGATE
WANNA GET THERAPY NOT TALK ABOUT
IT AGAIN THEY CAN MAKE THAT
CHOICE BUT THEY OUGHT TO KNOW
THE CHOICE THAT MAKE.
ONE OF THE COMMENTS THANK YOU SO
MUCH. ONE OF THE COMMENTS HAVE
TO DO WITH.
KEEPING THE INVESTIGATION.
CONFIDENTIAL TOLD IT WAS A
FINDING.
GOES TO THE VERY PURPOSE OF OUR
JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT OF DUE
PROCESS
IF YOU ARE BEING INVESTIGATED
THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE. HAVE
BEEN CONVICTED YOU ARE BEING
ACCUSED.
BOB HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT HOW
DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU DO
KEEP THESE INVESTIGATIONS.
A CONFIDENTIAL DURING THE
PROCESS SO THE TO DO PROTECT
BOTH THE VICTIM. AND OF THE
CUTEST.
I THINK THE THIRTY EXISTS UNDER
THE LAW MEANING EVEN IF I'VE
BEEN THE VICTIM OF A SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IN A MEMBER'S OFFICE.
I SHOULD BE ALLOWED AND LEGALLY
I AM ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT THE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF MY
EMPLOYMENT. THAT'S DIFFERENT
THAN WHAT I STAND NEXT DAY TO
THE INVESTIGATOR IT MAY BE THE
EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCES BUT
THAT THERE'S A THERE'S A.
A DELINEATION THERE THAT I THINK
IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE. IF
I'M SAYING I REPORTED EXPLAINS
THE TO THE INVESTIGATOR WHILE
THE INVESTIGATION IS ONGOING
THAT COULD AFFECT OTHER
WITNESSES STATEMENTS.
TALKING ABOUT THE EXACT SAME
CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE IT IS THE
CONDITIONS THAT EXIST IN MY
WORKPLACE THAT'S LEGAL.
UNDER LABOR CODE. TWO THREE TWO
POINT FIVE AS WELL AS ANOTHER
AND ALL OUR BE DECISIONS SO I
THINK.
TRENT WANTING TO TAP DOWN ALL
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT IS
ILLEGAL.
AND IS SEPARATE AND APART FROM
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN AN
INVESTIGATION.
BUT IF I MAY I I DO THINK I
TOUCHED UPON THIS AS WELL AS
COUNSEL FOR EMPLOYERS AND AS AS.
A NEUTRAL INVESTIGATOR FROM TIME
TO TIME HIRED BY OTHER.
EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS. IT IS
IMPERATIVE THAT THE INTEGRITY OF
AN INVESTIGATION BE PROTECTED
AND PART OF THAT IS TO KEEP
CONFIDENCES FOR PEOPLE TO USE
DISCRETION AND JUDGMENT WITH
RESPECT WHO THEY TALKED TO WHEN
THE INVESTIGATION IS ONGOING.
FOR THE VERY REASON THAT WE
DON'T WANT US STORIES OF
WITNESSES TO BE INFLUENCED BY
OTHER WITNESSES AND FOR THE VERY
REASON THAT WE WANT THE
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS TO GO
FORWARD.
TOWARDS A REASONABLE CONCLUSION
BASED ON WHATEVER THE BURDEN OF
PROOF IS.
IN OUR WORLD IT'S THE
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
YEARS AGO IS MY PANELISTS.
MAKO PANELIST AT HAS INDICATED
WE GOT A VERY STRANGE RULING
FROM THE AN HOUR BE
A BANNER CASE WHICH ESSENTIALLY
SAID THAT THE LONG STANDING
TRADITION OF INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATORS.
GIVING WITNESSES INVESTIGATIONS
AN ADMONITION AND THAT THEY
SHOULD KEEP.
WHAT'S DISCUSSED WITH THE
INVESTIGATOR CONFIDENTIAL SO AS
NOT TO RUN THE RISK OF.
OF AT THE INTEGRITY THE
INVESTIGATION WAS A UNLAWFUL
PRACTICE UNDER SECTION SEVEN OF
THE NRA THAT HAS BECOME A VERY
DIFFICULT.
.
DECISION FOR INDEPENDENT
WORKPLACE INVESTIGATORS TO
GRAPPLE WITH THEY DIDN'T SAY
THAT YOU COULDN'T GIVE ANY
ADMONITIONS TO WITNESSES AND AN
INVESTIGATION IF YOU COULD
IDENTIFY ACTUAL TANGIBLE. RISKS
OF OTHER WITNESSES BEING
INFLUENCED AND YOU CAN GIVE THAT
ADMONITION YOU SHOULD NOT TALK
TO SO AND SO BECAUSE WE BELIEVE
THAT THERE'S A RISK.
BUT THE GENERAL OVERALL
STATEMENT OF PLEASE KEEP THINGS
CONFIDENTIAL USE GOOD JUDGMENT
AND DISCRETION OF THE BANNER
CASE SAID I WAS A VIOLATION OF
SECTION SEVEN I AGREE WITH MY
PANELISTS THAT. EMPLOYEES UNDER
THE LABOR CODE HAVE A STATUTORY
RIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF THEIR
EMPLOYMENT BUT I DO STILL
BELIEVE THAT. IN AN
INVESTIGATION WE WANT TO KEEP
THINGS.
.
AS CONFIDENTIAL AS POSSIBLE
PROTECT THE INTEGRITY
INVESTIGATION UNTIL WE HAVE A
DETERMINATION THAT IN FACT
MISCONDUCT IN HARASSMENT HAS
OCCURRED WE ARE DEALING WITH
ALLEGATIONS EVERYBODY HAS A
RIGHT. TO PARTICIPATE AND AND
AND BE HEARD.
FINALLY MADAM CHAIR. I THINK
IT'S CLEAR FROM THE TESTIMONY
THAT WE'VE RECEIVED
THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BALANCE.
WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT AT THE
VERY TOP OF THE LIST.
THAT OUR VICTIMS TO COME FORWARD
TO OUR BRAVE ENOUGH TO COME
FORWARD THAT THEY ARE PROTECTED
IN EVERY WAY THAT THEY CAN BE
PROTECTED.
AND THAT THE THE THEIR
ALLEGATIONS ARE.
ARE INVESTIGATED PROPERLY SO
THAT WE COME QUICKLY TO A
SOLUTION.
IT'S CLEAR ALSO THAT THE ACCUSED
WE DO HAVE DUE PROCESS.
AND WE DO HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT
THEIR HOUSE TO BE PROTECTION.
FOR THOSE WHO ARE ACCUSED AND
DUE PROCESS IS PART OF WHAT THE
FABRIC OF OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
THE EMPLOYER HAS GREAT
RESPONSIBILITIESWE'VE TALKED
ABOUT STRICT LIABILITY AND
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO
BE MINDFUL OF.
BUT I ALSO WANT TO APPRECIATE.
THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE
REGARDING.
OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE
PUBLIC.
THE PUBLIC PAYS.
OUR SALARY THE PUBLIC PAYS THE
SETTLEMENTS THE PUBLIC IS
ABSOLUTELY. OUT HAS THE ABSOLUTE
RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS WE'RE
DOING. WE DO WANT TO PROTECT THE
PUBLIC BUT THE PUBLIC DOES HAVE
A RIGHT TO KNOW. SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS
I DO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
THANK YOU I'M A BI FOR A THREE
ALLOWS THE LEGISLATURE TO.
DETERMINE WHICH GROUPS ARE
GOING TO BE.
HAVE PROTECTED DISCLOSURE AND
I'M GONNA DIRECT STAFF TO LOOK
INTO MAKING.
IT'S CLEAR THAT WE'VE WOULD BE
ONE OF THOSE SOURCES ARM FOR
PROTECTED DISCLOSURES SO I
REALLY APPRECIATE PREMEDITATION
FORD AND WILL MAKE SURE THAT. WE
ARE MEANT BEGIN THAT PROCESS
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY LAST
QUESTIONS FOR THIS PANEL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH THIS WAS
VERY REVEALING AND I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME THANK YOU
THANK YOU. AND WITHOUT WE'RE
GOING TO BRING UP OUR LAST
PANELISTS ARE KATHLEEN
REWRITTEN.
TO THE. ARM HOW CHECKS BUSINESS
GOING ON CRACK.
STOP TO LOOK AT.
IT'S CLEAR THAT WE.
WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE EXPERTS.
OR.
PROTECTION CLOSURES RIGHT EARLY
CHRISTIAN WE NOTICED.
SURE THAT.
ARE YOU THERE.
YES I AM.
TERRIFIC WE CAN HEAR YOU VERY
WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
JOINING US TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION I
RECEIVED.
OKAY.
YOU'RE YOU'RE ON LITERALLY HERE
RAM IT. WELL
I AM LISTENING.
I WHICH LOOKING OUT FROM A
DIFFERENT VANTAGE WILL ENSURE
THAT IS.
LARGELY BRING ALL MY.
I COMMUNICATION YOURS.
A SHOULD NOT GET HURT.
.
TO BEAR ON HOW WE TALK ABOUT.
GENDER BASED AFFECT.
AND I HOLLER BACK YOU BOASTS
IRAQ DISCS DIFFERENCES.
I AM NOT STATE IT EGGS.
YOU NO BETWEEN TYPE II EARLY NOT
ACTUALLY BUT THERE ARE BIRDS
SAT.
IT'S FOR A CERTAIN AREA DOUBLES
AINDA SPURS.
OR VARIOUS LEVELS THAT ARE.
BUT A SIMILARLY DECREASE. SAYS.
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF CRIME.
OKAY STANDS.
AND I DON'T EXPECTS LEADERSHIP
STYLE.
TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU ACT.
I'D OF VOCABULARY.
WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS
ARE.
THAT.
IT'S LIKE JUST THIRTY.
THEIR UNDERSTANDING.
IS THAT YOUR.
THEY'RE WORKING TOGETHER.
OKAY PERSON AT.
WHERE IS IT USING?
A COMPLEX.
OR THE PERSON WHO. A BEEN
ACCUSED. DATA THAT YOU ARE
FORCED NATIONALLY BURKE.
AND WEARING A PUTATIVE TYPE
RIGHT OUT THERE SO.
A GREAT DEAL OF.
I LIKE.
I THINK ROAD BARELY ENOUGH.
THIS GIVE US ONE MOMENT.
OKAY
.
OKAY.
I THINK.
OKAY SO.
YUP.
ALRIGHT A. IT BUT I THINK
GARRETT'S BUCKLEY BACK.
IT IS UP.
MEANING.
YOUR HONOR.
RIGHT.
NOW OKAY.
AND.
I AM HERE NOW BETTER.
OKAY GREAT YOU.
I HELP YOU NOT TOO HUNGRY AT
JUST THE RIGHT.
I.
BUT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT TOOK.
YOU LEVEL UP.
MISCONDUCT.
RIGHT NEXT WEEK FOR IT IS CLEAR
OF TOLERANCE YOU NEED TO HAVE
ZERO TOLERANCE BUT WE. DID.
TO WATCH.
AND SO AS YOU OVER.
I CAN SEE I CAN SEE THAT THAT'S
THE
I'M SO WELL THAT.
YOU'RE YOU'RE VERY.
IT'S BETTER NOW THAN IT WAS.
SO IF YOU JUST.
SPEAKS SLOWLY AND A LITTLE
BITLITTLE BIT LOUDER WE'RE DOING
OKAY HERE.
OKAY.
OUR I TOLD ME SPEAKER ZERO
TOLERANCE.
A WE NEED TO SPEAK ABOUT IRAQ
OUT.
TO WHAT.
ARE AND RIGHT OUT OF THE THEORY
THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.
DAY.
AND IT ALSO LEVELS OF RETALIATES
ERA SPEAK TO IN A MOMENT. ALL
THESE THINGS ARE RELATED OUT WE.
HOW WE LOOK AT?
ACTUAL SCHOLAR.
BUT AGAINST.
SO.
I WANTED BUT I DID ITSELF.
WORKING BRIGGS.
FOR ORGANIZATIONS YEAR.
USE OF.
I BEGAN TO TALK BACK.
WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT TYPES?
YOU KNOW WE'VE GOT EACH OTHER.
UP ALL.
BUT CLOSE BENCIC MUCH.
BRIGGS DOT. NOT SIR DIFFERENT
INTO UP.
PENALTY YES ASKS MIGHT BE OR.
SIX TALKING TO OUR WORK IT'S
APPLIED.
US VENTURE. IS VASTLY.
SO IF YOU ARE.
LOOK AT OUR AND WE HAVE TO
INTERRUPT YOU OF WHICH IT'S IT'S
NOT.
THE SOUND IS NOT COMING THROUGH
ADEQUATELY I THINK TO REALLY
HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.
SO IF YOU'LL EXCUSE US AYE I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR HAVING
SAT THROUGH ALL THIS WE'RE GONNA
TRY TO FIND ADDED UPCOMING
HEARING.
A WAY TO BRING YOU BACK IN.
THAT MAYBE IT'S EVEN PRE
RECORDING YOUR TESTIMONY AND
PLAYING IN ALLOWING US TO ASK
QUESTIONS.
UP BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE TO SAY
IS HEARD AND WERE NOT ABLE TO DO
THAT RIGHT NOW WITH THIS
TECHNOLOGY. SO I'M GOING TO.
YOU KNOW ASK YOUR PATIENCE AND
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING
HERE WITH US WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
A DISCUSSION OFFLINE I'M AFTER
THE HEARING ABOUT HOW TO THE THE
BEST WAY TO GET YOU BACK HERE.
TO TO GIVE US THE INFORMATION.
OKAY WELL ABOVE IT I AM SURE.
IT'S GOT A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE
SPECTRUM YOURSELF THAT.
YES AND IT'S FOR IT IS VERY
HELPFUL WE WILL LOOK AT THAT
AND.
YOU KNOW AGAIN WE WILL HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT WAYS THAT WE
CAN.
HAVE YOU.
TESTIFY WITH US BY VOICE BUT
RIGHT NOW IT'S IT'S JUST NOT
HAPPENING UP NONE NOW
APPROPRIATELY ADDED CHAIR.
RIGHT MERRILEES THANK HER FOR
HER SPECTRUM OF SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT AT WORK IS HIS HAND
OUT AND YET THE VERY HELPFUL
SIDES WHEN THE THANK YOU KNOW
THE.
AYE WELL YES. I DO WISH YOU WERE
ABLE SPOKE ABOUT IT DOES DOES IT
MIGHT BE OUT OF THERE AND. WELL
WE HAVE WE DO HAVE A SPECTRUM OF
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AT WORK AND
WILL TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
TO SEE
AND WE WILL HAVE A CONVERSATION
I THINK AT A FUTURE TIME ABOUT
THAT AS WELL AS WE START TO
INCORPORATE.
WHAT OUR POLICY IS AN AND TRYING
TO OUTLINE A LITTLE MORE
SPECIFICALLY WHAT?
THE WE FEEL DIFFERENT PENALTIES
WOULD BE FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF
TRANSGRESSIONS THIS WILL BE VERY
VERY HELPFUL SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR PROVIDING THAT TO US.
OKAY THANK YOU YEAR.
WITHOUT I'M GONNA GO TO MY
COLLEAGUES OF TO SEE IF THERE'S
ANY CLOSING COMMENTS FROM
ANYBODY. A COPY OF THE COMING.
AND PUBLIC COMMENT IS THERE ANY
MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC YES PLEASE
COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE.
ON HELLO I'M SABRINA BRENNAN A
HARBOR COMMISSIONER IN SAN MATEO
COUNTY. AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY
AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC I CAN
TELL YOU FROM PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE.
BACK COMPLAINTS AN
INVESTIGATIONS AT THE COUNTY
WIDE SPECIAL DISTRICT.
BUT I'M ELECTED TO REPRESENT OUR
SEVERELY MISHANDLED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE
FOLLOWING REMARKS.
THERE SHOULD BE UNIFORM ANTI
HARASSMENT ANTI DISCRIMINATION
AND ANTI RETALIATION POLICIES.
LAWS WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING ACROSS
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES.
IN DEPTH ANTI HARASSMENT ANTI
DOES DISCRIMINATION AND ANTI
RETALIATION EDUCATION AND
TRAINING SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT
FOR ALL ELECTED AND APPOINTED
REPRESENTATIVES.
AND GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
CURRENTLY TRAINING LACKS
INFORMATION ABOUT BEST PRACTICES
FOR CONDUCTING INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATIONS ONCE THE
COMPLAINT IS MADE.
ALL HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION OR
RETALIATION COMPLAINT SHOULD BE
INVESTIGATED AND THE FINING
SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT THAT'S NOT
CURRENTLY THE CASE.
TYPES OF INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR
SHOULD BE CLEARLY DESCRIBED AND
CONSEQUENCES SHOULD BE. WELL
DEFINED.
DOING THIS WOULD HELP MOVE
CULTURAL NORMS IN A POSITIVE
DIRECTION.
INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE SELECTED
ARTS SORRY INVESTIGATORS SHOULD
BE SELECTED BY A PANEL OF THREE
OR MORE PEOPLE.
AND THE PANEL MUST INCLUDE BOTH
WOMEN AND MEN. THIS IS NOT
CURRENTLY THE CASE FOR SPECIAL
DISTRICT CITY COUNCILS AND OTHER
LOCAL AGENCIES.
IN MANY CASES.
A COMPLAINT AND COME THE
COMPLAINT T. AND THE COMPLAINT
AND THE COMPLAINT TENT SHOULD BE
PROVIDED WITH COPIES OF ALL
INVESTIGATION REPORTS THIS IS
ALSO NOT THE CASE CURRENTLY.
RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT
DISCIPLINARY ACTION SHOULD BE
MADE BY A PANEL OR A REVIEW
BOARD THAT INCLUDES BOTH WOMEN
AND MEN.
BUT COMMISSION OR STATEWIDE
ELECTED BOARD MIGHT BE A LOGICAL
OPTION FOR REVIEWING
INVESTIGATIONS. AND DETERMINING
OUTCOMES.
HOWEVER MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE
F. PPC.
WHAT NOT LEAD ME TO BELIEVE THAT
THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THIS IN
A TIMELY WAY I'M ADDING THAT
JUST BASED ON THE TESTIMONY THAT
HAPPENED TODAY?
AN APPEAL BOARD COULD REVIEW
DECISIONS IN THE EVENT THAT A
COMPLAINT TEN OR COMPLAIN TO YOU
WAS DISSATISFIED WITH AN
INVESTIGATION OR AN OUT CON. OF
AN INVESTIGATION. OF AN
INVESTIGATION.
RECENTLY I'VE BEEN IN
CONVERSATION WITH NEIL MCCORMICK
DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION.
ABOUT THE NEED FOR ANTI
HARASSMENT ANTI DISCRIMINATION.
AND ANTI RETALIATION TRAINING.
AND I THINK BIAS TRAINING IS
ALSO EQUALLY IMPORTANT. THAT
INCLUDES BEST PRACTICES FOR
CONDUCTING UNBIASED AND
INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATIONS THERE
IS NO TRAINING LIKE THAT
CURRENTLY.
HOWEVER I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT
THAT IT'S NOT REASONABLE TO
EXPECT THAT LOCAL AGENCY
ASSOCIATIONS. LIKE CSTA AND THE
LEAGUE OF CITIES OR AN
OVERBURDENED STATE OVERSIGHT
AGENCY WILL BE ABLE TO CORRECT
THE LONG HISTORY OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT. GENDER
DISCRIMINATION AND SEXUAL
ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION IN
THE WORKPLACE.
AND IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT MANY
OF THE OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS
LACK.
GENDER DIVERSITY RACIAL
DIVERSITY AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION
DIVERSITY IN MANAGEMENT
POSITIONS ORGANIZATIONAL
GOVERNANCE.
CONSULTANTS HIRED TO GO UP TO
PROVIDE TRAINING. AND
NEWSLETTERS WEBSITES AND SOCIAL
MEDIA CONTENT.
THIS PANDEMIC HAS BEEN%
OVERLOOKED FOR FAR TOO LONG A
COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE PLAN FOR
ADDRESSING THESE COMPLEX
PROBLEMS MUST BE THOUGHTFULLY
DEVELOPED. AND FUNDED.
IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT
WORK PLACES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA BE SAFE. AND FREE
FROM HARASSMENT DISCRIMINATION
AND RETALIATION. I APPLAUD YOUR
EFFORT TO SEARCH FOR CREATIVE
SOLUTIONS.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I
TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE SPEAKER
THAT ALL THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE
DEALING WITH HERE.
AND MANY OF THE ISSUES APPLY
EQUALLY TO CITY COUNCILS AND
SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND OTHER
GOVERNMENTS BOARDS.
AND I'M HOPING THAT THE WORK
THAT WE DO HERE HOPES UP GIVE
IDEAS TO. THOSE ORGANIZATIONS
ABOUT BETTER WAYS OF DEALING
WITH SEXUAL HARASSMENT WITH
ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS
I'M IN THEIR ORGANIZATIONS.
WITH FAT I THINK THE OF MEMBERS
FOR BEING HERE ON THE PANEL I
THINK IT WAS A ANOTHER VERY.
LAMINATING HAND ALL AND
SOMETHING THAT I KNOW IS GOING
TO BE VERY VALUABLE TIME AS WE
MOVE TOWARDS SHAPING A NEW
POLICY.
FOR THE LEGISLATURE AND US
SOLVING OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE
KNOW THAT WE HAVE A SEXUAL
HARASSMENT THANKS SO MUCH
EVERYBODY