NY Lawmakers Seek Changes to Strengthen Sexual Harassment Laws
State lawmakers in New York held their second hearing in nearly three decades on the topic of workplace sexual harassment, which the Legislature could address through policy changes over the next four weeks.
May 24, 2019 at 03:45 PM
6 minute read
State lawmakers in New York held just their second hearing in nearly three decades Friday on the topic of workplace sexual harassment, which the Legislature could address through policy changes over the next four weeks.
The issue has increasingly come to the forefront of public discussion in New York, where the state's Division of Human Rights testified on Friday that the number of sexual harassment complaints with the agency has increased by 62 percent since 2016.
And that number is expected to rise, representatives from the agency said during their testimony at the hearing. Deputy Commissioner Gina Martinez said they're gearing up to launch an extensive outreach campaign about the state's laws and enforcement power, which she said will likely increase the number of complaints they receive.
They annually review more than 6,000 discrimination complaints, including those involving sexual harassment, according to the agency. Another uptick could create a need for more investigators at each of their 12 regional offices, Martinez said.
“The more outreach and education we do, I have a feeling that our 6,000 is going to skyrocket,” Martinez said. “We are, right now, planning robust outreach and education throughout the state.”
But what was missing at the hearing, lawmakers said, was input from the agency's representatives on what changes to the state's laws would best help curb the problem.
When asked on several different occasions about specific policy proposals that are being considered by the Legislature, two deputy commissioners from the agency declined to take a position and said they had to stay neutral because of the nature of their work. The agency handles complaints of sexual harassment administratively from victims statewide.
After a few instances of being told the agency wasn't going to take a position on any of their legislative proposals, lawmakers began to criticize those officials for holding back.
“I would really encourage you, because we would like to be your partners in this fight. It's an incredibly important effort, to please weigh in on the package of legislation we've put forward, because we can't wait any longer,” said state Sen. Alessandra Biaggi, D-Westchester.
Biaggi chairs the Senate Ethics and Internal Governance Committee and has been a leader among her colleagues in pushing for hearings on sexual harassment this year. She replaced former state Sen. Jeffrey Klein, D-Bronx, who was accused of sexually harassing a staffer before he was voted out of office last year.
There are a host of legislative recommendations intended to address the problem of workplace sexual harassment that have been proposed by state lawmakers this year, particularly after the first hearing on the issue in February.
Democrats have largely worked on those ideas with the Sexual Harassment Working Group, an advocacy group formed in recent years by former state government staffers who claim to have faced sexual harassment from lawmakers or other employees. They rallied with Democrats before Friday's hearing and earlier this week in Albany.
Lawmakers who have partnered with the group are seeking to change both the threshold under which someone could bring litigation over sexual harassment and eliminate a commonly used defense by attorneys to dismiss those claims. Lawmakers have yet to make progress on either proposal this year.
New York currently has a “severe or pervasive” standard for sexual harassment, meaning that the alleged behavior has to be one of the two to merit litigation. Advocates have argued that the standard holds those cases to a threshold that's, sometimes, impossible to meet, even if a victim feels the behavior is inappropriate or predatory.
State law also currently allows what's called the Faragher-Ellerth defense, which is commonly used by employers to dismiss claims of sexual harassment.
The defense was created from two different U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Those rulings found an employer is not liable for sexual harassment if it can show the employee didn't follow the employer's policy for addressing inappropriate behavior, take the directed steps during an investigation, or comply with other standards established by that procedure.
Lawmakers currently have a bill that would address both of those provisions. The legislation would allow claims of sexual harassment to be brought “regardless of whether such harassment or hostile work environment is severe or pervasive,” according to the bill.
It would also lessen the power of the Faragher-Ellerth defense by making it clear that employees would not be precluded from bringing sexual harassment claims if they didn't follow their employer's procedure for handling such matters. Assemblywoman Aravella Simotas, D-Queens, sponsors the bill with Biaggi.
“This is not only unfair, it completely takes advantage of a power balance in a work environment by allowing employers who are aware of harassment to avoid taking meaningful actions to improve the environment,” Simotas said this week.
Lawmakers are pushing for a series of other bills on the issue as well, including one that would limit the reach of nondisclosure agreements and another that would extend the amount of time victims would be able to file sexual harassment complaints with the state.
Those complaints can currently be filed within one year of an incident; lawmakers want that extended to three. That's the same amount of time victims currently have to bring sexual harassment claims in state court, where they can choose to resolve matters through litigation rather than administratively.
Biaggi said earlier this week she was confident the bills would move before lawmakers leave Albany for the year next month, but that more legislation or amendments could be forthcoming as they continue to hear from stakeholders on the issue.
“I'm not making any promises, but I'm going to do my damned best to push them through,” Biaggi said.
This year's legislative session is scheduled to end on June 19.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
Court System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250