By Shira Schoenberg, sschoenberg@repub.com
Posted March 01, 2018 at 05:00 PM • Updated March 01, 2018 at 05:00 PM
Attorneys Jim Kennedy, Paul Holtzman and Martha Coakley talk to the press on March 1, 2018, on a proposed overhaul to the House’s sexual harassment policy
Massachusetts House Counsel Jim Kennedy and outside attorneys, including former Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, released a 40-page report on Thursday recommending an overhaul of the House’s procedures related to sexual harassment.
The attorneys did a comprehensive review of the House’s human resources policies and identified problems relating to the confidentiality of complaints and the proportionality of punishments.
“We take (sexual harassment) seriously,” Kennedy said. “And we will thoroughly investigate any complaint of sexual harassment in the House of Representatives.”
Attorneys recommend overhaul of sexual harassment policies in Massachusetts House
House Speaker Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, said the review was “very comprehensive” and “handled extremely well.”
DeLeo said he hopes the changes will help the House respond to concerns that complaints are not confidential and that people will be retaliated against for complaining.
“Those concerns that were expressed by staff and members and outsiders, I think are addressed in this report,” DeLeo said. “I’m hopeful that people will see it that way and feel more comfortable in terms of whether they come forward and that their complaints will be kept confidential.”
Here is a closer look at what the report says and what it means going forward:
Why was this review done?
The review was prompted by a Boston Globe column that detailed numerous instances of sexual harassment on Beacon Hill. It comes amid a national reckoning with the prevalence of sexual harassment in politics, media, entertainment and private corporations.
What problems did the report find with current policies?
The biggest issues identified relate to confidentiality of complaints and proportionality of punishments.
“Victims, members and staff have told us that if they had a complaint, they are not confident that that complaint would be kept confidential,” Kennedy said.
Today, the only venue to file a complaint against a House member is in the House Ethics Committee, which is made up of other representatives and primarily investigates conflict of interest issues. The subject of an Ethics Committee investigation has the right to request that the committee make its meetings public, so the complainant could be forced to tell their story publicly.
“We believe the lack of confidentiality has actually been a barrier to people bringing forward complaints, and the House being able to act on them,” Coakley said. “So part of what we’ve tried to do with this process … is getting the right balance between confidentiality and fairness for people against whom complaints are laid.”
Additionally, the Ethics Committee can only recommend public punishments for House members — such as censure, reprimand, suspension or expulsion. These punishments may be too harsh for a minor offense and would make an offense public. Coakley said there is currently no way to work with a member to prevent inappropriate behavior from escalating.
At listening sessions, House staff told attorneys that the power dynamic in the House discourages staff from reporting harassment due to the fear of retaliation and jeopardizing their careers.
Current House policies related to sexual harassment are “insufficient and ineffective” in encouraging the reporting of sexual harassment, training staff and preventing sexual harassment, the report writes.
What procedure did the report recommend for investigating complaints?
The report recommends hiring a new, independent Equal Employment Opportunity Officer who would be in charge of investigating complaints from members, staff and any third party, such as a lobbyist or member of the public, against a House member or staffer.
A complainant could approach the EEO officer, their supervisor, the human resources director or House counsel. All complaints would be referred to the EEO officer.
If the EEO officer deems the complaint plausible, the officer will investigate it confidentially and make a confidential recommendation.
Investigations should be completed within 90 days.
In the case of a House member, if the member accepts the recommendation, the process ends. If not, the member can request a confidential review by a special Committee on Professional Conduct.
This committee will be made up of House members appointed by the speaker and minority leader. The speaker and minority leader would not be told the complainant’s name. That committee could recommend no action, private discipline or public reprimand.
For a staff member, disciplinary action would be taken by the EEO officer in conjunction with the House Counsel and the person’s supervisor. Discipline could include termination, a warning, a mandatory apology, mandatory training, redefined roles or schedules or unpaid leave.
Why do House members need to be involved in the disciplinary process?
Under the state Constitution, only House members can discipline another House member.
Would the process be confidential?
Yes. All records would be confidential. All recommendations would remain confidential, unless a House member faces public punishment – reprimand, censure, removal from leadership or expulsion – which must be voted on by the full House.
Records of prior complaints will be saved, in case they are needed for future investigations.
Can a complainant also file a complaint elsewhere?
Yes. Nothing would stop a complainant from filing a civil or criminal complaint or going to the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. The report says complainants should be advised of their rights to report a complaint externally.
The Republican file photo
What other policy changes are recommended?
The report recommends mandatory, in-person sexual harassment training for members, staff and interns, orientation for all new members and staff and ongoing professional development.
It recommends standardizing employment procedures, such as hiring practices, background checks, performance reviews and exit interviews.
It recommends commissioning a confidential, anonymous, multi-year survey to gather data on sexual harassment in the House and on whether people feel comfortable reporting harassment.
The report recommends revising the sexual harassment policy to include training, social media, gender identity issues, reporting procedures and policies for employees working outside the State House.
It recommends expanding sexual harassment policies to cover unpaid interns, who are not covered by Massachusetts anti-discrimination laws.
What changes to staff would be recommended?
In addition to hiring the EEO officer, the human resources officer would have expanded responsibilities, and a new director of employee engagement would be hired to provide professional development and employee training.
What would be covered?
Complaints alleging sexual harassment, workplace bullying and any discrimination based on sex, race, religion, disability, national origin or another protected class would be covered.
Is there any provision for financial settlements?
Kennedy said in his six years as House counsel, he is not aware of any financial settlements for sexual misconduct. Coakley said any financial settlement would have to come out of a civil court complaint.
Who conducted the review?
In addition to Kennedy and Coakley, outside attorneys Paul Holtzman, Jennifer Kirby and Jill Brenner Meixel reviewed the human resources policies. They met with House members, looked at other states’ policies and met with outside experts.
What's next?
Some recommendations can be implemented by a House committee, but most require a vote by the House to change House rules.
Representatives can revise the proposal through the committee process or on the House floor.
Kennedy said he hopes the new staff could be hired by Aug. 1, 2018, and new procedures could be in place by Jan. 1, 2019.
“By the beginning of next year, if the House adopts recommendations, we should see a significant change in structure, which we believe will lead to change in the culture,” Kennedy said
DeLeo said he would like to see the House take up the recommendations before representatives considers the budget in April. “I want it done quickly,” DeLeo said.
