House Bill 707 has 56 cosponsors, including Republicans, Democrats, Progressives and independents. House Minority Leader Don Turner (R-Milton) and Senate Minority Leader Joe Benning (R-Caledonia) both attended an announcement about the bill in the Statehouse’s Cedar Creek Room.
The bill is designed to remove barriers to reporting sexual harassment and protect those who report offenses. It would prohibit employment agreements that bar victims from filing complaints or gaining redress, protect employees from being fired after making a complaint, and extend protections to people working as independent contractors.
“The #MeToo movement brought forward a critical and long-overdue conversation,” said Rep. Sarah Copeland Hanzas (D-Bradford), the bill’s lead sponsor. “Women and men have come forward in unprecedented numbers to confront lawless workplace sexual harassment.”
She noted that people in high-profile professions may get a measure of rough justice through public shaming, but “a few forced resignations will do very little to protect the average factory worker, restaurant server or store clerk.”
“We hear directly from women across the state with stories of how sexual harassment is making it difficult or even impossible to do their jobs,” said Cary Brown, executive director of the Vermont Commission on Women. “Every time a woman cuts back her hours or takes time off from work or is driven out of her job entirely, her family suffers financially, but our entire economy suffers as well.”
The bill would also require that settlements of sexual harassment complaints be filed with the state attorney general’s office. Assistant Attorney General Julio Thompson acknowledged that the AG’s office has never compiled data on sexual harassment — partly because it lacked the resources until recently, but also because most cases never reach the courts.
“If we want to be able to make a change, we need to know what the landscape is,” said Copeland Hanzas. “Are we seeing the tip of the iceberg, or the broad spectrum?”
Those filings would be exempt from the state’s public records law; Copeland Hanzas said that some of the claims would not have been adjudicated. “Simply because someone settled an allegation of sexual harassment doesn’t mean that sexual harassment occurred,” she said. “It could be that it was the expedient thing to do.” She said the purpose is not public exposure, but getting “a handle on the extent of sexual harassment in the workplace.”
The bill has been referred to the House General, Housing and Military Affairs Committee. Its chair, Rep. Helen Head (D-South Burlington) said hearings on H.707 may begin as soon as next week.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Cary Brown is the Boss.
How about removing the possibility of a “settlement” from these cases. If someone feels the need to file charges, they & their attorney should be required to follow through all the way to a court trial where criminal charges are sentenced. There should be no opportunity to “settle” a case i.e. “we’ll happily drop these very embarrassing charges if you pay us enough to do so”. Take away the payday, especially for the BAR association schlub and watch these accusations start to disappear.
Freedomtothink, that is not how a settlement in a criminal trial works.
Many cases involving domestic or sexual assault dont have witnesses and there isnt a lot of physical evidence. Often it boils down to victims word against defendants.
A settlement allows a defendant to plead to a lesser charge, maybe do community service instead of jail time. The victim never gets any money.
To suggest penalizing victims for for filing charges when the state later decides to drop those charges (as the victim often has little or no say in the decision, which will be made on the weight of the evidence and the law) shows a complete lack of understanding.
I suggest, that you excercise your right to think by researching and learning more about topics before voicing such strong opinions.