[JAZZ MUSIC PLAYING]
House will be in order.
Mr. Silvia of Fall River moves that the House stand in recess
until the hour of 2:15.
All those in favor, say aye; opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
House stands in recess until the hour of 2:30.
The House now stands in recess until the hour of 2:30.
[JAZZ MUSIC PLAYING]
House will come to order.
Chair has been informed that Senate 2251 comes--
being rightly and truly prepared, comes before us.
Under the Constitution, a separate vote is required.
House Senate 2251, an act establishing a sick leave bank
for Linda Thernize-Williams, an employee of the Department
of Transitional Assistance--
separate vote being required.
All those in favor of an emergency preamble will stand.
And the monitors will return the count.
First division--
10.
Second division--
12.
Third division-- 3.
Fourth division-- none.
All those opposed-- first division, 0;
second division, 0-- third division, 0;
fourth division, 0.
25 have indicated in the affirmative,
none in the negative.
The emergency preamble is adopted.
The House has been informed that House 4156 has changed
and amended an act designating a certain bridge
in the town of Lee as the Lou Drigrigoli Memorial
Bridge comes before us for final passage.
All those in favor, say aye; opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The bill is passed to be enacted.
The following bill, being rightly prepared,
comes before us for final passage.
Senate 2014, an act relative to veterans' housing in the city
known as the town of Agawam--
roll call being required, it will be called forthwith.
Court officers will please summons the members
and indicate to them that a roll call is in progress
and will remain open for four minutes.
Under Rule 49, a court officer will
vote for Representative Miceli of Wilmington.
And the clerk will make an announcement.
The voting stations for Representatives Donato, Galvin,
and Chris Walsh are locked.
Have all members voted who wish to do so?
Have all members voted?
Time for voting has expired.
152 members in the affirmative, 0 in the negative-- the bill
is passed to be enacted.
Ms. Decker from Cambridge, suspension of rule 47--
all those in favor, say aye; opposed, no.
To take up calendar 338 on page 1, all those in favor
say aye; opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
Rule is suspended.
Question comes on adoption of the order.
Members will please take their seats
and subdue their conversations.
The chair recognizes Mr. Decker of Cambridge.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to discuss the matters
before us, House 4291, which is a series of rules that,
hopefully adopted, will be game-changing for the state
of Massachusetts.
I first want to say thank you, Mr.
Speaker, for taking the initiative
and immediately understanding the breadth
and the impacts of the issue before us today.
Your leadership, once again, pioneers Massachusetts
to be on the forefront of changing and redefining
what it means for states to stand up and not
tolerate sexual harassment or retaliation.
You have created a number of pathways for us
to deal with this today.
The Speaker today brought in independent counsel
to work closely with House council, members, and staff
as we pioneer a new model of government which
takes responsibility for proactively creating
and ensuring safe environments for everyone in this building.
What's different now is that not that we're simply
dealing with what's right or wrong,
but we're removing any ambiguity by establishing
multiple opportunities for support and accountability.
I want to thank especially House counsel
for working so closely with advocates and independent law
firms in both creating a process that
was transparent and inclusive.
It both looked forward to where we need to go,
and it also examined the past, looking at documents
and records, and ensuring that they are preserved
if ever needed in the future.
Outside counsel took a deep look, as well as an audit,
of the HR department and offered recommendations
for going forward.
I really want to thank the members of our staff
and for you, my colleagues.
You really stepped up and weighed in on an issue that
is important to all of you.
And in weighing in through a process that
was accessible and transparent, you spoke volumes
about the values that are important to you
and to your district, and really, about what's
important in our House here, creating
an environment where people feel empowered and safe to do
their jobs.
We took an honest assessment.
And we reached out by listening to one another,
by inviting people to come in to speak their truth.
And today, we have the opportunity
to vote favorably on new rules and new changes that, again--
I think this is something we really need to take pride in--
will put Massachusetts on the forefront
of being a legislature that stands very
clearly in understanding there will be consequences
when members or staff violate the rules.
Rule 88, once adopted, clearly defines
discriminatory and sexual harassment.
It establishes a policy which prohibits such harassment
and members and employees from retaliating against each other
when employees have made a complaint about harassment.
Rule 89, once adopted, establishes a new position
of Equal Employment Opportunity officer,
referred to as the EEO officer.
This job will require reviewing and investigating
all complaints of harassment and retaliation
and provide harassment training for members, employees,
and interns.
It's important to note that the EEO officer and the HR director
will act autonomously.
Rule 90, once adopted, clearly defines
the duties and the authority of the Office of Human Resources.
It standardizes hiring practices, including
a standard application form, mandatory background
and reference checks, and a standard offered letter.
It requires the HR director to annually publish
an employee handbook, a supervisor handbook,
and an intern handbook.
Rule 91, once adopted, establishes an HR web portal
to provide information on human resource policies.
Rule 92, once adopted, establishes the position
of director of employee engagement.
This position will work to engage
a staff in professional development,
provide opportunities for ongoing dialogue
with one another, and will assist
the committee on personnel and administration with duties.
Rule 93, once adopted, creates a flexible reporting process
for formal and informal complaints.
It allows members, employees, and interns
to report harassments to multiple points of contact,
all of whom shall receive guidance and training
from the EEO officer.
It also allows third parties to report harassment
to the EEO officer.
All complaints of harassment referred to the EEO officer
will be assessed and investigated.
Rule 94, once adopted, outlines a series
of steps that must be taken in all complaints.
It establishes standard investigation procedures,
including multiple interviewers trained
in trauma-informed questions.
Persons interviewed will receive a clear explanation
of an investigatory process, including confidentiality,
and provided with information for external resources.
A summary report of findings and recommendations
will be created.
And the investigation will be confidential.
Rule 95, once adopted, will address
the issue of discipline.
For employees who violate the policy,
it authorizes the EEO officer to implement
all disciplinary and remedial action as
necessary and proportional under the circumstances.
It also allows the EEO officer to notify
the appointing authority of an employee
who is being disciplined.
For members who violate the policy,
it authorizes the EEO officer to make recommendations
of disciplinary and remedial action
directly to the member, who may request
that the Speaker and the minority leader
form a special commission on professional conduct
to review the recommended action.
The member has 10 days to make that request.
If the EEO officer's recommended discipline
involves reprimand, censure, removal
from chair and leadership, or expulsion,
the Speaker and the minority leader
are required to confidentiality and convene
a special committee on professional conduct
to review that recommendation.
Rule 96-- once adopted, the details of the Special
Committee on Professional Conduct--
the committee must be convened confidentially.
If the EEO officer recommends reprimand, censure,
removal from leadership, or expulsion,
or a member request a review of the EEO officer's
recommendations for private discipline or remedial action,
the committee has the authority to independently
investigate and recommend discipline of a member.
The recommendations and report of the special committee
remain confidential unless recommending
reprimand, censure, removal from the leadership, or expulsion,
in which case the committee is required
to file a public report with the clerk for consideration
by the full membership.
Rule 97, once adopted, ensures that all the information
be maintained confidentially to the fullest extent possible.
It requires that the EEO officer and members
of the Special Committee on Professional Conduct
maintain confidentiality throughout the investigation
process while authorizing sharing of information
with other House officers in limited circumstances.
Rule 98, once adopted, authorizes
the EEO officer and their director
to establish policies to implement these rules.
Rule 99, once adopted, addresses moments of transition
that provides the pending appointment of an EEO officer.
Harassment complaints against members
are to be referred to the Special Committee
on Professional Conduct.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I want to thank you
for the swift action you have taken
and really forging a path for this to be possible.
The immediate urgency that you brought to this issue
and to this matter is one to be commended, and quite frankly,
it's one that I feel really proud to stand here
as a member of this body.
And to my colleagues, again, I want to say to all of you,
it feels really good to be part of a body who
took this issue so seriously.
To all of you who took time to attend a listening session,
to offer your suggestions, your thoughts, who
met with our House counsel or reached out
to each other for additional support, you weighed in on this
heavily.
And you made it very clear how important
it was that not only would the rules be clear,
but the path to accountability was important to you,
to your staff, and to young people who intern in our House
every year.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you.
And I ask that when a roll be called,
it be called by a roll of the yeas and the nays.
Lady from Cambridge asked when a vote
be taken, it be taken by a call of the yeas and nays.
[INAUDIBLE], please rise.
First division-- 20.
There being sufficient number having
arisen when a vote is taken, it should be taken
by a call of the yeas and nays.
House will be in a brief recess.
Ms. Malia of Boston asks unanimous consent
to be reported on the previous roll call.
Does chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Roll call number 314, Elizabeth Malia-- yes.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
House will come to order.
The House will come to order.
The chair will announce that there
is a consolidated amendment available at the clerk's desk.
And it's a consolidated amendment
for amendments 1, 2, and 3.
The chair will allow 15 minutes for the members who
are interested to take a look at the consolidated amendment.
House will be in a brief recess.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
House will come to order.
Question comes on adoption of the order,
pending which the chair recognizes
Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Ms. DiZoglio offers an amendment in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 2--
Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen moves to amend the order by adding
the following rule, 100.
The House shall not include non-disparagement
and nondisclosure--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
Chair recognizes Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, and, through you, to the members.
Years ago, when I was a 26-year-old staffer working
in this very House, I had the misfortune
of having a conversation in this room one evening with a state
representative during a party that the House leadership
and staff were having.
Dozens of people were in the Speaker's office,
which is right back there through that door.
Many of you here in this room were there,
and many walking in and out of the Speaker's office
through that very door and into this room during the party
that I had attended that evening.
Even though this room was open to everybody--
the door was open and people were walking to and from during
the course of the entire evening--
a false rumor was started that implied something inappropriate
had happened.
A publicly announced investigation
was then launched, all because of a rumor.
The investigation took weeks and found
no wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior had occurred.
But by the time the findings of the investigation
were released, rumors had already
spread through the building.
And people were constantly talking about me, and not
in a good way.
I'm going to leave it at that.
Simply put, the rumors regarding my reputation
had created a very hostile work environment.
My boss at the time told me not to speak to the press
or talk to anyone in the building about the matter.
Needing to keep my job as a recent college grad
with lots of bills to pay, I did what I was told--
kept my head down, did my work, kept quiet, and listened.
And in my silence, there were jokes.
And in my silence, there were assumptions, false assumptions.
And in my silence, more and more false rumors occurred.
I tried to do my job, hoping it would eventually be over
and that some other story would come up
that was more interesting than mine and that--
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
Chair will be in a brief recess.
Chair recognizes Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm going to continue to tell my story because it does pertain
to the issue at hand.
It is an example of why we need to pass this amendment.
It directly does pertain to the use of nondisclosure agreements
in this building.
And it is imperative that I tell my story in order
to actively ask the members to support this amendment today,
and I will continue.
Thank you so much, Madam Speaker.
I wanted things to eventually go back to normal.
But it never went back to normal.
My boss told me that I needed to look for another job
because the rumors were too much for him to handle.
I informed the Speaker's staff of the situation
through a phone call and asked if they
were able to help maybe with a temporary employment position
until I could find a permanent position.
And unfortunately, they said there
was nothing they could do.
Again, with no money, rent to pay, and a broken down car,
I decided to settle and take the small severance
pay that was offered.
But on my way out the door, I was hit with another surprise.
The Speaker's office would not release my six-week severance
pay unless I signed a nondisclosure agreement,
including a non-disparagement agreement that legally bound me
from discussing what had happened
and from criticizing any past, present, or future elected
members of this House.
I hesitated for days because I did not
want to sign this document.
With my money running out quickly,
however, I didn't feel I had another option.
So I signed under duress.
Today, I decided to break this NDA not
to help myself move forward from the event.
I already did that a long time ago and came back to this House
despite my wrongful dismissal.
I moved on.
I'm back here doing what I love, fighting for my district.
I don't break this NDA to attack or accuse anyone.
I'm not asking for more money or threatening a lawsuit.
And I will even give the severance money back
if I am asked.
I just want this awful practice to stop.
Mr. Speaker, we might differ on our remembrance
of past occurrences.
But today, that is neither here, nor there.
I'm not here to argue about the past.
Today is about the future.
And today, I am breaking my NDA because I found out
that it's not just me who has been told to be quiet.
I'm not the only one with this type of agreement.
And my situation was nothing compared to what
others may have experienced.
I've recently heard that dozens of other people who
have worked in the House of Representatives
have signed NDAs and non-disparagements since 2009.
As a state legislator now and knowing this information,
and after having heard about all of the women and men
through the last several years who have been victims,
but who are afraid to come forward because of fear
of political retaliation, damage to their reputation,
inability to continue to work on Beacon
Hill, and legal retaliation, it's
my duty to come forward and say that this is wrong and will not
be tolerated.
Time's up.
I'm deeply disappointed, Madam Speaker, that these are--
that it's been said that these agreements don't exist.
It's clearly not true.
But the technical reason why that's allowed to be said
is because those responsible for requiring these NDAs
in the past have been very careful in choosing
not to document within the language of these agreements
why certain employees have had to sign them.
The process has been broken for a really long time.
And I'm glad that the proper protocol
is being examined in today's legislation before us today.
And I do want to say thank you to our leadership team
for their hard work on this bill.
But we still have a bill presented to us
that does not include adequate reforms
on our use of NDAs and non-disparagement agreements.
Apparently, the two amendments that I
filed regarding this issue were consolidated by the Speaker
with different language.
And while there are some really good provisions
that I'm thankful for in that consolidated amendment
regarding sexual harassment in his rewritten vision
of the amendment that I filed, I have
to say that I fundamentally disagree
with the language of the Speaker's version
because it does not prevent the use of NDA
and non-disparagements from continuing
to be used in this House as it pertains to issues
relative to general matters of harassment and discrimination
in the workplace.
This isn't just about sexual harassment today.
What about the LGBTQ community?
What about the disabled person?
What about gender discrimination?
And a lot of people said to me, well,
your issue wasn't just sexual harassment.
It was gender discrimination.
Well, what if it was just gender discrimination?
Would I be able to move on, or would I still receive an NDA?
That's not included in the Speaker's rewritten version
of the amendment that I filed.
Also, people of the past being released from their NDAs--
I commend to the Speaker for allowing that to occur.
I did file that amendment.
However, my amendment allows for anybody
who has an NDA for any reason regarding harassment
or discrimination to come forward and have
that NDA removed.
Speaker's version, unfortunately, only includes
sexual harassment.
And again, I'm very grateful for that.
I'm so grateful for that.
But it's not enough.
These silencing tactics have no place in this House.
They cover up misdeeds by politicians and others.
And they empower perpetrators to move from one victim
to the next.
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
Please speak on the amendment.
The use of NDAs, which my amendment
looks to remove from the House of Representatives
in this rules package today, is an abuse of power
to force public employees to sign away their right
to speak using taxpayer money.
We are a public institution.
I want to remind everybody of that.
These are public tax dollars that
are being used to silence people because they
might be critical of public elected
officials in this chamber.
We should not be in the business of silencing our critics
or covering up any harassing or discriminatory behavior,
or even giving the appearance of doing so with public funds.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I hope my amendment is adopted and respectfully request
that when a vote is taken, that it be taken
by a call of the yeas and nays.
Gentlelady asks that a--
that when the vote is taken, it be taken
by a call of the yeas and nays.
Those joining with her will stand.
Monitors will return the count.
First division-- 0.
Second division-- sufficient number having arisen,
when this matter is called, it will be
called with the yeas and nays.
Chair recognizes Ms. Peake of Provincetown.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I rise in opposition to this amendment.
I speak here after the gentlelady from Methuen,
sort of an inenviable task.
And I listen carefully to her words.
And I understand that for her, in her situation,
a nondisclosure agreement was not the best path.
However, what her amendment 2 seeks to do,
and I will read it because it's very brief--
the House shall not include a non-disparagement or
nondisclosure clause in any agreement.
And I would offer to the members today that as we sit here
on the 15th of March, the Ides of March, that we cannot,
through a crystal ball or best intentions, mental telepathy,
or any other way, presume to know what is going to be
in the best interest of aggrieved parties moving
forward.
What we do know--
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
[INAUDIBLE]
Does the gentlelady relinquish the floor?
At this time, I do not.
I feel the gentlelady--
Thank you.
The lady doesn't yield.
Chair recognizes Ms. Peake Of Provincetown.
Thank you.
We cannot begin to know and understand what is going to be
in the best interests of parties moving forward.
What we do know is when the team assembled
pursuant to the order passed by this body
to develop the policy, which is in the form of the order
before us today, 4291, when that team went on their listening
tour, reached out to experts, talked with victims,
advocacy groups, what consistently they
heard, whether it was from people inside this body,
people who work in this building,
or experts from outside, is that the need for confidentiality
and the availability of confidentiality
is perhaps the single most important piece
of having victims feel comfortable moving forward.
And for some victims, that confidentiality--
it is their wish to have it exist not only during
the investigation--
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
[INAUDIBLE]
I'll yield.
Chair recognizes Ms. Cronin of Easton.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and, through you, to the members.
I rise in opposition to the amendment.
I come here--
[INAUDIBLE]
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
[INAUDIBLE]
You asked for a yield.
And the gentlelady from Easton also wanted to speak.
And she has not had any opportunity.
When the lady yields, anyone can step into that spot.
Chair recognizes Ms. Cronin of Easton.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I rise today in support of-- in opposition
to the amendment before us.
I rise today as a member of this body,
as a mother of two daughters, and also as an attorney
who has represented and mediated not tens, not 20,
but hundreds of cases involving sexual abuse and harassment.
Every case is individual.
Every case is unique.
There is no one size fits all.
In my years of practicing law--
I have been a member of the bar since 1985--
the majority of my career has been spent representing
all types of victims.
It is their decision whether or not
to undertake to signing one of these agreements.
And for many of them, particularly
in cases of sexual abuse or harassment,
confidentiality is imperative.
It is the utmost of importance to them.
In our consolidated amendment, we have very carefully
set forth a process where if a nondisclosure agreement is
to be entered into, it is at the request of the alleged victim.
We must give victims an opportunity
to protect their own confidentiality.
By taking a one-size-fits-all approach,
although the gentlelady from Methuen may be very
well-intentioned, she may be causing devastating effects
to many victims out there.
And for that reason, I ask that the amendment be defeated.
[INAUDIBLE]
Chair recognizes Ms. Peake of Provincetown.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Chair apologizes.
For which purpose does the gentle--
[INAUDIBLE]
Will the gentlelady yield?
Not at this time, Madam Speaker.
Not at this time.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I, too, join the gentlelady from Easton in opposition
to amendment number 2.
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
Will the gentlelady yield?
No, I will not.
Sorry.
The lady does not yield.
Chair recognizes Ms. Peake of Provincetown.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I will try to finish my thought and my few brief sentences
here.
I think, for the reasons that I previously articulated prior
to the interruptions, that we cannot have
a one-size-fits-all, very strict,
very narrow constricture on when--
in fact, the amendment says not at all--
confidentiality can be kept.
That is not a path that I believe we want to go down.
It is contrary to what victims advocates
groups have talked about.
It's contrary to the feedback received
by the special group put together pursuant to our order.
And it is contrary to what we have heard from the gentlelady
from Easton, who is a esteemed member of the bar
and the chair lady of our judiciary committee.
So for all of those reasons, I ask the membership
to join me in defeating amendment 2 so we
can move forward and enact the consolidated amendment.
Thank you.
Roll call being required, roll call will be called forthwith.
Chair recognizes Mr. Scaccia of Boston.
Madam Speaker, I did not intend to speak on this issue.
But what a charade, what an absolute charade.
We have an audit before us that was approved last Friday.
How many people were here last Friday?
So we have a special order allowing
consolidated amendments to a bill that
only has a few amendments.
I never seen that before in my life.
But it gave somebody a chance to file the consolidated amendment
before we took up any amendments.
Mr. Speaker, where are you?
Come out.
Come out of your office and chair--
and chair this issue.
Chair apologizes to the gentleman at the microphone.
He is not speaking on the amendment.
Well, thank you, Madam Speaker, for telling me about that.
I appreciate it.
Madam Speaker, I don't--
Chair apologizes to the gentleman at the microphone.
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
Will the gentleman yield for a moment?
No, thank you.
Sorry.
The gentleman does not yield.
Chair recognizes Mr. Scaccia of Boston.
Madam Speaker, I just want to start off
by saying I'm for this order.
And I'm actually for the consolidated amendment.
But I wish, I wish, you had given that young lady a chance
to express her whole feelings on this issue
without interruption.
And Mr. Speaker, come on out.
But it's so nice, Mr. Speaker, to know that--
Chair apologizes to the gentleman at the microphone.
Once again, I will remind you, you
asked to speak on the amendment.
Madam Speaker, I hope you're not going to silence me.
However, again, this order was adopted last Friday,
when no one was here.
It's been giving special provisions
so that you can, in fact, limit the debate
by a consolidated amendment.
I'm not an expert in non-disparagement agreements.
They scare me.
But I can understand the need for them.
Madam Speaker, am I speaking on the amendment now?
OK.
But I am concerned that this is the first speaker in my life
that has used this vehicle.
I talked to three former speakers.
And they never used this vehicle.
The two before those three I couldn't
talk to because they are dead.
But this speaker has used this, and I
don't know the total facts, around 33 times.
And if he has used this vehicle, how much money, public monies,
has he spent to silence 33 people?
Mr. Speaker, there's a great song by Simon and Garfunkel.
And it's called "The Sound of Silence."
And that's what's been happening in this chamber for too long.
Silence dictates this chamber--
very difficult for a young lady who
had to experience what happened to her many years
to be onslaughted by a plethora of reps in this chamber.
She's not going to win her amendment.
She's not going to win her amendment at all.
But it's a vehicle she chose to speak out as to what personally
happened to her, and probably what has happened to many, many
more people in this House.
Now, I commend the committee that came up with this report.
They did a heck of a job.
But it took them seven years.
Madam Speaker, you are not going to tell me
that the Speaker of this House found out
about this issue a couple of days.
I've been around a while.
And I heard it many, many, many, many years ago.
And I think most of you, if you've
been here more than a couple of terms, have heard this issue,
too.
It's not new.
Mr. Speaker, you knew about this issue.
In fact, I'd like to find out, Madam Speaker, who
prepared the document.
Was it the chief counsel of this House?
And if it were, you're going to tell me
that the Speaker didn't know anything about it
until "a couple of days ago"?
Nonsense.
It's not believable.
"Hello, darkness, my dear friend.
I've come to talk to you again because a vision softly
creeping left its seeds while I was sleeping.
And the vision that was planted in my brain
still remains within the sound of silence."
Mr. Speaker, you've been getting away for too long in this House
with the sound of silence.
For what purpose does the gentleman rise?
Point of parliamentary procedure, as he's not
talking about the issue.
The gentleman's point is well-taken.
Please confine your remarks to the amendment.
I'll try to stay with the issue, Madam Speaker.
But I'll tell you what this House should do.
They should call up the Attorney General of this commonwealth
and let her find out and let her find out
what happened in the past to bring about the present
because this item didn't just pop up
in the last couple of weeks or months.
It's been here for a long, long time.
And the culmination is now before us today.
Once again, Madam Speaker, I'm going to vote for the bill.
I'm going to vote for the consolidated amendment.
But I'm gravely disappointed in the sound of silence
from the Speaker of this House.
I'm going to be up again because I
want to read the rest of Simon and Garfunkel's "Sound
of Silence."
In fact, I think in a while, when I come back,
I'll sing the whole thing for you.
Chair recognizes Ms. Farley-Bouvier of Pittsfield.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
This is a tough day in the House of Representative.
This is a tough subject to deal with.
And I think the issue around this particular amendment
could be the toughest of all.
I have to say that I'm really proud of this body
because we're not shying away from this subject,
the general subject matter, and around
this particular amendment.
And I'm grateful for the work that's
been done by the committee, by the working group that
did this.
I'm really grateful for the participation
of the staff of the House and the members of this House
because we made a better product because
of the collective participation of all the people involved.
And I have to say that I believe my colleague,
the lady from Methuen, is an exceptionally brave woman.
It's really hard to stand up here and know
that the people around you are made very, very
uncomfortable by your words.
At the same time, I want to say that as a member of this House,
I'm not just responsible for myself
and what's happening in the present day.
But as a member of this institution,
we're responsible for what happened in the past
and what happens in the future.
And because of my role in that, I
want to extend these words to my colleague
from Methuen with a very heartfelt apology.
I am very, very sorry for your experiences
here in the past as a staff member of this institution.
That being said, I do believe it's important for victims--
sexual harassment, sexual assault--
to have choices, to be able to be in control of what
happens in their future.
And for that reason, I will be voting against the underlying
amendment.
And I will be voting for the consolidated amendment.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Roll call having been audited will be called forthwith.
Court officers will please summon the members.
Indicate to them that a roll call is in progress
and will remain open for three minutes.
The clerk will call Ms. Atkins of Concord.
Ms. Atkins of Concord, answer as present.
Have all members voted who wish to do so?
Time for voting has expired.
In this matter, 21 have voted in the affirmative and 131
in the negative.
The amendment is not adopted.
Ms. Decker offers a consolidated amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Consolidated Amendment A-- amendments numbers 1 and 3
have been included in this amendment.
Ms. Decker of Cambridge moves to amend the bill and the order
by adding the following rule, 100.
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense of the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Chair recognizes Ms. Decker of Cambridge.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I rise here in support of the consolidated amendment.
And I'd like to highlight a few things here.
First, I want to say to my colleague, I hear your pain.
You are clearly having an impact on where we stand today.
You are fierce.
You are brave.
And I still believe that.
With due respect, I disagree with taking away
the option of a nondisclosure act for victims.
I say that a few highlights of the consolidated amendment
are important to take note of.
One, it is important, as we've heard from victims, advocates,
and organizations across the Commonwealth who
have weighed in--
and to remind folks today that's-- what's before us is
a bill on sexual harassment and retaliation.
And we pulled together experts in the field
of sexual harassment to weigh in on this
while we listen to staff and members also
share their concerns.
What we heard over and over is the importance
of giving victims the opportunity
to believe that if they should choose confidentiality,
that, in fact, that would be preserved for them.
What the consolidated amendment allows
is allows victims to choose a nondisclosure agreement.
And so I stand here firmly in support
of that right and empowering victims who
should choose to want a nondisclosure agreement that
allows them to come forward.
And I think it's important that we keep that in mind.
Few other things it does--
once this person chooses to want a nondisclosure agreement
and it is written up, that person
has 15 days to review that disclosure
and to make sure that, in fact, it
speaks to what they are comfortable with
and what they want.
There is a finite period on this nondisclosure.
And it must be agreed upon prior to being signed.
As is the law--
it is not change--
that a nondisclosure agreement does not
prevent or stop or prohibit further investigations
from occurring, whether that's internal to the House
or outside of the House.
This agreement, if chosen--
if the victim chooses to have this nondisclosure agreement,
reviews it, and after 15 days decides it, in fact, speaks
to what makes them feel comfortable and empowers them,
this agreement has to be put in writing
and signed and approved by both House counsel, the HR director,
and the new position of the Equal Employment Opportunity
office.
I want to say that I can't speak to the past.
What I can speak to is that the pain that we are seeing here
today and the lack of clarity for people in our building,
whether it's staff, members, or interns--
the lack of clarity as it relates to sexual harassment
is no longer unclear.
The Speaker has laid out a process that
allows us to stand here today, and hopefully ready to vote
on this, on House 4291.
It will never be unclear to anyone.
Time is up.
And those behaviors that are so egregious--
it's never been a matter of whether or not
it was understood to be egregious or not.
I don't think anyone believes that.
What is clear is that the House of Representatives
in Massachusetts is taking a stand
and says that anyone who feels that they have been harassed,
your claim will be taken seriously.
You will have multiple opportunities
and different places to decide where you feel most
comfortable in filing a claim.
It will be investigated.
There will be consequences.
And for that, I believe where we stand today, moving forward,
we should all feel really proud of.
There is no tolerance.
But there are now consequences.
And there are now very clear opportunities
to identify a path, to identify a path
and to be able to identify the person who
is inappropriately and egregiously harassing you
in the context of sexual harassment.
It is my strong hope that today, this consolidated amendment
will be adopted.
Thank you.
House Speaker?
--comes on adoption of the amendment.
A roll call is required and will be called.
House Speaker?
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
I would like to ask a question.
Will the lady yield for a question?
Yes.
Lady will yield.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
First and foremost, thank you so much to the gentlelady
from Cambridge for her hard work on this.
I very much value what you are doing.
And I agree with a lot of what you said.
I have a question regarding the use of NDAs
as it pertains to allowing perpetrators
to continue in their misdeeds.
By silencing both parties, does this
allow NDAs to be used to cover up the misdeeds of politicians
in this room who might be sexually harassing
employees in this House?
Does it allow their misdeed to be hidden?
Chair recognizes Ms. Decker of Cambridge.
So I think it's important to note
that the only time a nondisclosure agreement will
occur is when the person who has been victimized is--
asks for one.
And at this time, I think it is important
that we are focused on empowering the victim for what
it is that they want.
And I want to be clear that I am taking the guidelines of victim
advocates groups who have weighed heavily in on this.
And I understand that today, we may disagree on this.
But I don't believe we disagree about the pain
or the incredible desire for accountability to take place.
And so if a victim--
that is the only one who gets to choose the nondisclosure act--
if a victim chooses to want a nondisclosure act and feels
they need that to empower them to come forward, then that's--
upon agreed-upon time, they agree upon what's in there--
that is what is being put forward.
House Speaker?
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
Point of personal privilege.
The lady will state her point of personal privilege.
Thank you, again, to the gentlelady from Cambridge.
I'm glad you have spoken to victims--
The lady is not stating a point of personal privilege.
Please state your point of personal privilege.
And I'm glad that you spoke to those victims groups.
You are speaking to a victim.
We are not talking about--
The chair apologizes to the gentlelady.
But she is not stating a point of personal privilege.
Please state a point of personal privilege.
What purpose does the lady rise?
I'd like to speak to the amendment.
Does the lady at the microphone yield?
Thank you.
Chair recognizes Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Thank you very much to the gentlelady from Cambridge
for allowing me to speak on this amendment.
I'm taking a breath because I've been trying to speak
for a little while now.
And it's been a little bit difficult.
I want to point out that the chairwoman said
the victim has the choice.
I agree with that.
That is the point I have been trying to make today.
Forcing nondisclosures on any victim
of harassment or discrimination or any employee of this House
as a term that is mandatory to receive their severance package
is unconscionable!
I want to protect the victims, as well, Madam Chair.
I am with you on--
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
For what purpose?
[INAUDIBLE]
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
I rise because [INAUDIBLE].
Will the lady yield?
Will I be allowed to speak again if I yield the floor this time,
Madam Chair?
Does the lady yield?
No, I do not yield.
Sorry, the lady does not yield.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Chair recognizes Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Chair, I apologize.
I would normally yield to you.
But I'm not sure that I won't be silenced again
by Madam Speaker.
I am going to support this amendment.
Let me say that.
You have my vote because we are making tremendous progress
by including this amendment today.
And I am so grateful that we're doing it.
I'm grateful to the work of the chair, everybody
on the committee, everybody in this chamber.
We can respectfully agree to disagree
on some of the nuances.
I'm not demanding that everything I ask be passed.
I'm simply saying let's think about in this amendment,
if you will so kindly consider, at a bare minimum,
at least expanding this, which is
the purpose of the original amendment
that I put up on the floor.
And you know what?
I'm not a lawyer.
Maybe the intention of the amendment that I filed
wasn't exactly legally the way that it
was supposed to be written.
I had to go to Jim Kennedy to ask him to draft my amendment.
The Speaker's version that he drafted
was a little bit more detailed than the one that I got.
So I'm asking, is it possible that since we're
so against not forcing victims of discrimination
and harassment across the board based on gender, race,
disabilities, and all sorts of other issues
that don't pertain to sexual harassment--
we are debating the rules package today.
Is it possible that we--
Chair apologizes to the lady at the microphone.
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
[INAUDIBLE]
I apologize.
I will not yield at this time.
Sorry, the lady does not yield.
Chair recognizes Ms. DiZoglio of Methuen.
Is it possible that we can expand
the scope of this legislation?
Is it possible that we can take a brief recess
and discuss this like adults and stop
silencing the argument for people who might
have an opposing viewpoint?
I know that we're so used to that in this House.
Is it possible that we can take maybe a brief recess
and talk about expanding the scope of this amendment
to include other victims of harassment and discrimination
beyond sexual harassment, because there are
a lot of people, Madam Chair, in this building who have suffered
discrimination and been harassed,
that it wasn't sexual in nature, like mine was.
And again, mine wasn't even that bad.
I don't consider mine to be that bad,
not in comparison with some of the stories
that I've heard from people who are afraid to come forward
because they're probably going to be silenced
the way that I've been silenced this very day in this chamber.
This is the example we're setting
to victims who have experienced awful, unspeakable situations
by members and employees of this House.
I think we deserve the right to have a little bit more
of a discussion on this and not rush through this because we
don't want to talk about it anymore.
Time's up!
Let's have this conversation.
I am willing to have this discussion.
I'm not making demands.
I'm not saying it's awful, what you're trying to do.
It's a great step in the right direction.
But I would like to see a little bit more.
And after coming out and exposing that this is even
going on, I think you can afford me
at least that little privilege of having
this conversation with you and trying to expand some
of the scope of this amendment.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Chair recognizes Ms. Decker of Cambridge.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Again, I rise in support of the consolidated amendment.
I want to be clear that the rules before us
and the bill before us is explicit to sexual harassment
and retaliation.
I don't think anyone today has been silenced or not heard.
I believe what we are hearing is that request and changes that
are being made are not pertinent to what is before us.
I do believe there's a lot of opportunity for discussion
moving forward to look at employment
and to look at discrimination and harassment
in all of its forms, and I suspect that we will,
moving forward.
What we do have here today, Madam Speaker, is a very--
[INAUDIBLE]
Chair apologizes to the gentlelady at the microphone.
For what purpose does the lady rise?
I would like to [INAUDIBLE].
Does the lady yield?
I do not at this time.
Sorry.
Chair recognizes Ms. Decker of Cambridge.
I am speaking on the consolidated amendment.
And my hope is that it will be supported and voted
on today favorably.
I do believe that from today, moving forward,
there is a very clear agenda and there are very clear messages
being sent out.
Sexual harassment will not be tolerated
by anyone in this chamber or in this building.
There are incredible paths that have
been created that will allow people to file complaints.
We are empowering victims who have
been harassed who would like a nondisclosure agreement that
empowers them to come forward and allows them to believe they
do have the confidentiality to speak
about the claims and the harassment
that they have been-- they have experienced and been
victimized.
I stand here today feeling really good about the changes
that are moving forward.
And I think the message has been sent loud and clear.
I will say it again.
Time is up.
And we know it's up if you read what's in this bill
and you look at all the rules changes
that we are about to adopt.
Madam Chair, Madam Speaker, I ask
that we make favorable that we-- when there is a vote,
it be called with the roll of the yeas and the nays.
The yeas and nays are required on a consolidated amendment.
So thank you.
Chair recognizes Mr. Diehl of Whitman.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
And thank you to the gentlelady of Methuen.
If my daughters ever follow in my footsteps,
I want you to be the role model that they look to
for courage, integrity, and conviction in this chamber.
Thank you for your speaking today on this matter.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for allowing
me to speak on the important consolidated amendment
and for allowing the adopted language, which is partially
drawn from HR 4924, which Congress recently
passed with overwhelming bipartisan support
down in DC and the House, broadly
reforming congressional payouts for harassment
committed by members.
Within that bill, there was an elimination
of taxpayer-funded settlements to victims,
placing the burden correctly on the offending lawmaker.
This amendment goes a long way in restoring accountability
and integrity here at the State House.
It will hold taxpayers harmless when
there are potential sexual harassment settlements.
As we know, over the last five years,
taxpayers have had to fund the legal fees
for cases related to several members of the legislature.
During this time period, three different cases
have ultimately cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands
of dollars.
This amendment shows the people of Massachusetts
that we are going to hold the House and Senate
members accountable for their actions
and that sexual harassment is not acceptable in any way,
shape or form.
The goal of today's bill is to set new guidelines
to proactively prevent future sexual harassment of any kind
from happening here on Beacon Hill.
And by accepting this amendment, we
are showing our commitment and determination
to providing a harassment-free workplace.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you.
Roll call having been ordered and will be called forthwith,
court officers will please summons the members.
Indicate to them that a roll call is in progress
and will remain open for three minutes.
Have all members voted who wish to do so?
Time for voting has expired.
In this matter, 153 have indicated in the affirmative,
none in the negative.
The consolidated amendment is adopted.
The chair would like, to at this time,
congratulate one of our members, as tomorrow is his birthday
and we will not be here.
So join me in congratulating Representative Petrolati
on his birthday.
[APPLAUSE]
So a question comes on adoption of the order pending, which
Ms. Provost of Somerville offers an amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 4--
Ms. Provost of Somerville moves to amend the order in proposed
rule [? 94A(2) ?] to add after the last sentence of the first
paragraph, "Such assessment shall be"--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Ms. Provost of Somerville offers an amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 5--
Ms. Provost of Somerville moves to amend the order of proposed
rule [? 88B, ?] paragraph 4, [INAUDIBLE] amend to read--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading in the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Ms. Provost of Somerville offers an amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 6--
Ms. Provost of Somerville moves of the order in proposed rule
[? 94C ?] by adding the following.
If the EEO officer believes that interim measures
are warranted--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Ms. Provost of Somerville offers an amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 7-- Ms. Provost of Somerville moves to amend
the order in proposed rule [? 90D(4) ?] to delete
the period after employment and substitute the phrase--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading in the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
House will be in a brief recess.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
House will come to order.
Ms. Decker of Cambridge office a technical amendment
in the hands of the clerk.
Clerk will read the amendment.
Amendment number 8, as changed--
Ms. Decker of Cambridge moves to amend the order by striking out
in line five the word "definitions,"
by striking out in line 46--
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
House will be in a brief recess.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
House will come to order.
The clerk will reread the amendment submitted
by Ms. Decker with the change.
Amendment number 8, as changed in rule 100,
as amended in subsection E, and by striking out the words
"a party to an agreement," and inserting in place [INAUDIBLE]
the words, "the party described in paragraph number 1 above,
or the complaint."
Ms. Decker of Cambridge moves that the order be amended.
If there be no objection, the clerk
will dispense with the further reading of the amendment.
Does the chair hear objection?
Chair hears none.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Question comes on adoption of the order.
Roll call having been ordered, roll call
will be called forthwith and remain open for three minutes.
Chair would inform the members that we do not anticipate
any further roll calls.
Have all members voted who wish to do so?
Time for voting has expired.
The clerk will display the tally.
In this matter, 151 have voted in the affirmative and none
in the negative.
The order is adopted.
Chair has been informed that House 4298, an act designating
a certain park in the city of Quincy
as the Richard "Dick" Herbert Memorial Park,
comes before us for final passage.
Under the Constitution, a separate vote is required.
Those in favor of the emergency preamble will please stand.
And the monitors will return the count.
First division-- 4.
Second division-- 2.
Third division-- 6.
Fourth division-- 3.
Those opposed-- first division, 0; second division, 0;
third division, 0; fourth division, 0.
15 members having indicated in the affirmative,
the emergency preamble is adopted.
House has been-- the chair has been informed
that Senate 2251, an act establishing a sick leave
bank for Linda Thernize-Williams, an employee
of the Department of Transitional Assistance,
comes before us for final passage.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The bill is passed to be enacted.
House will be in a brief recess.
Ms. Benson of Lunenburg moves suspension of rule 47
to take up calendar item 275 on page 19.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
Rule 47 is suspended.
Third reading of the bill--
Act establishing the position of town manager
in the town of Ayer.
Question comes on passing the bill [INAUDIBLE]
pending, which Mr. Speliotis of Danvers
offers an amendment in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the amendment.
Mr. Speliotis of Danvers moves to amend the bill
by adding the following section, section 6.
This act shall take effect upon its passage.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Question now comes on passing the bill to be engrossed.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The bill is passed to be engrossed.
A message from His Excellency, the governor,
recommending legislation to enhance the background
record check procedures of the Department of Early
Education and Care, House number 4310,
was filed in the Office of the Clerk yesterday at 11:58 AM.
Message will be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary--
report of a committee.
The Committee on Rules reports recommending that the order
relative to authorizing the counsel to the House
of Representatives to contract with an outside third-party
vendor to conduct a series of comprehensive surveys
of appointed officers and employees of the House,
House number 4296--
the Committee on Rules requests recommending that the order
ought to be adopt--
Ms. Decker of Cambridge moves suspension of the rules.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The rules are suspended.
Question comes on adoption of the order.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The order is adopted.
Mr. DeLeo of Winthrop offers an order
in the hands of the clerk.
The clerk will read the order.
Order that when the House adjourns today,
it adjourned to meet on Monday next at 11:00 AM.
Question comes on adoption of the order.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The order is adopted.
Mr. Vieira of Sandwich, Falmouth--
Mr. Vieira of Falmouth moves that we now stand adjourned.
All those in favor, say aye-- opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The House now stands adjourned to meet Monday
next in an informal session.
[MUSIC PLAYING]