Transcripts For CSPAN3 Sexual Harassment Congressional Workplace 20171208

I know called to order for purposes of todays hearing titled preventing Sexual Harassment in the congressional workplace, examining reforms and a crack Congressional Accountability Act. The record will remain open for five legislative days to include materials. Record is present we will proceed i ask for unanimous consent the committee on ethics chairwoman brooks, et never present tuesday appointed to sit and question the Witnesses Today. Without objection so ordered hour by to think theo witnesses for taking time of a busy schedules to be here. We are appreciative of that. First and foremost, let me reiterate there is no place for Sexual Harassment in our society especially in congress. Period. And one case of Sexual Harassment is one case to many. The speaker of the house, paul ryan task of this committee with extensive review and we take that responsibility very seriously to hold ourselves as a higher standard that we are worthy of the trust by the constituents since the last hearing on November November 14th it surfaced about the related settlements of the rising under the Congressional Accountability Act these issues not only is it is time with the appropriate for the committee to review the policy goals and what we need to do to evaluate with the bipartisan goal of zero tolerance the Congressional Accountability Act has not been reviewed since 1995 to update the policies and procedures it requires all house members including paid and unpaid it until it and turns to complete with antidiscrimination training every year as well as require to notice the employee rights and protections the next logical step is a close review to identify and evaluate what is needed to ensure we are looking at all congressional employees this hearing plays an Important Role of the extensive review with be insight from our Witnesses Today to help inform us puppis make those policy choices. , to take this opportunity to thank our Speaker Paul Ryan for tasking our committee with this important issue and also the Ranking Member bob brady for his commitment to this issue having the housework in a bipartisan manner natalie is citys central but what people expect. Aisle afford to hearing from each witness and with that i will yield to the Ranking Member. Thanks for calling this hearing today on this bipartisan matter the you are approaching this issue. Also our witness for the House Employment Council i appreciate the professional and nonpartisan way you approach your jobs and thank you for being here a second time. Since the last hearing of the with colleagues to better understand how we can approve this legislation but most importantly met with the survivors of Sexual Harassment and assault we need to improve the process and change the culture of this place and that must start with us and will be confined agreement on what we must do to better understand how we can in reform the of Congress Accountability act to give us more confidence in the process with justice for those terrible experiences they have endured we owe it to the employees and the American People to get it right now i look forward to hearing from the witnesses and i yield back the balance of my time. Does any other member wish to be recognized . I appreciate with the Ranking Member and of bipartisan by carol nature we are approaching this than there really do believe this is a watershed moment we need to take this opportunity to fundamentally change how we address this in congress will also be on. I think my colleagues for joining us today and the chairman of the Ethics Committee will be joining us also. The first victim of Sexual Harassment who brought this forward to highlight the issue against a member of congress and prevailed in her case. She is here today i want to welcome her and thank her for her courage and perseverance and how gratefully she handled a terribly difficult situation then and it is important that now, even though it is far too long that we do right by her and all others that were behind those headlines that we see right now about the sexual predators because we know that they Cross Party Lines that we want to make sure the of victims provided an advocate for them with the low level Playing Field so the victims feel we are protecting them but we make this a fair system and also in that arena how we address the nondisclosure agreement. But is often in preventing what is going on to allow people to come forth out any fear of violating nondisclosure agreements to think that is an important issue. Thank you for the opportunity to have expert witnesses in the court that i found about changing the culture and how we do that to permeate from the top down or the bottom of that there really needs to be where we are all engaged in the process. Now the gentleman for purposes of an Opening Statement. Thanks for convening this hearing and representative sabir in the forefront of the changes we are making representative brooks is coming or is on the way were in the middle of the dramatic Culture Shift attributed to the Womens Movement in the United States and political democracy it is part of the public uproar over Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assaults began in other places rocketing across america and this is to restate the comment at a zero tolerance for Sexual Harassment and is a fan dignified equal work place for everyone who comes to serve congress were doing this on a bipartisan basis with a comprehensive institutional basis this is a Culture Shift Like Congress has gone through before used to be lobbyists could give members gives and takes them out for dinner on fancy trips then the public uproar and scandal of past was a rule was passed notice of the bubble in this culture used to be members could pocket money when they would retire and there was the scandal with a public uproar now would is unthinkable anybody would do that today we simply need to make Sexual Harassment something that is unthinkable that needs to be done within these halls. That is the value but what we need is the process that implements the of value and the devil is in the details but we need rules to strongly deter Sexual Harassment and a process in place to swiftly and fairly punish Sexual Harassment to address that issue getting to the fact of those cases that are controverted until weve moved to a time when Sexual Harassment is no more in this body but i am glad we are part of this. Going through this process is painful for some members but we have to leave sexualharassment behind the way we have left other practices behind. And other colleagues that come to join his of the project. Anyone else have an Opening Statement . I applaud your efforts and the bipartisan manner you ever undertaken this issue to Ranking Member brady we are at a watershed moment weve been working on this issue for a very long time long before i came to congress as a matter of fact in the mid1990s and was chairwoman in the state legislature we had a hearing on this issue and we brought in dr. Frances conley who was the first tenured neurosurgeon in the United States and was a professor at stanford the of and she wrote a book of that talk about the horrific environment in which she had to work as a professional in academia and a medical professional. Of course the hearings of 1982 was also a watershed issue and a time when it was called the year of women. It was one year but frankly that was not enough so we have experienced there is a return to the status quo we all recognize now the office of compliance is mandated to do things of that hurts the victim of not by choice but that is just how it is mandated with the Congressional Accountability Act for grove h. R. 4396 has over 110 cosponsors with the acts that it tends to do the job of reforming the office of compliance. I dont think it goes far enough for gore as we continue to talk about this issue of, we need to recognize that probably the house Ethics Committee for House Administration committee is not the thin you to which investigations should be sent with a complaint is filed about sexualharassment. It needs to be an independent investigation. What about due process . I would say there is due process of we allow the independent entity to do the review to make a recommendation to the house that that would provide that. But i do think that we have to recognize behavior like this normally is not just one incident of. Normally it is a pattern of behavior. And i think we have got to make sure that no matter how we move forward that we are victims centric. We have to recognize one saddam office crying and said to me going through this process was worse than the Sexual Harassment. Shame on us for not addressing this sooner but i want us to remember a young woman who came into this building who worked in a number of. Sexualharassment. She is no longer here, her career was over she was told her career would be over she filed the complaint. Weve got to make sure the victims have the opportunity to stay here and work they have a right to work in these halls. This is because they called out a staff member or colleague is not a reason if they file a complaint to ostracize them. As we talk about this i hope we double our efforts to make sure we are protecting the victims making sure there is a soft landing so they can continue to pursue a career in Public Service. The gentleman from oregon for of carolina. I appreciate the opportunity to be a part of the of this and i think it says much the speaker has chosen the leadership to handle a sensitive and important matter for quite pain of the of bravery of the victims that have stepped forward and congresswoman spears says there is a pattern to this behavior much of the time it usually takes a champion to step forward and one of the of leaders in this movement and went to a knowledge that i yield back. Any other person wishing to be recognized . I will now introduce our witnesses, first acting chair of the u. S. Equal opportunity commission. Before becoming the acting chair to have extensive experience as the u. S. Assistant secretary of labor with a workforce policy council with the work force of the house of representatives. And as counsel to the firms with his wifes office we also welcome you. The executive director from office of compliance with the office of compliance that was established to insure the integrity of Congress Accountability act of 1995 through dispute resolution and enforcement. Also working with the office of compliance board of directors to revise congress on needed changes and amendments to the Congressional Accountability Act previously serving as the chairman of the protection board in forcing federal merit systems in the executive branch and confirmed of to that position in 2009. More than 20 years of professional experience and in Employment Matters she began the legal career as a law clerk will call. Currently serving as counsel to the House Employment Council a corporate dirty handling litigation for a Large Telecommunications company for also served as the assistant Corporation Counsel representing the District Of Columbia as the assistant United States attorney handling criminal prosecutions and as an attorney at attorney for the equal Opportunity Employment Commission. Then served as counsel for the washington d. C. Office since 2008 prior to joining over five years was chief Government Affairs officer at the Investment Company institute, National Association of the mutualfund industry. Previously Vice President and managing director of the office of Government Relations his earlier employment includes counsel to the committee on the House Administration and House Oversight and we welcome you. The committee has received each of your testimonies and you each will have five minutes to present a summary. Listed you have testified before so we have the clock in front of you that will help you keep track of her time. It will be green then turn yellow for the last minute and red means your time has expired. The chair recognizes the witnesses for the Opening Statement thanks for being here today. Good morning in thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today about this subject has consumed headlines that sexualharassment that we have known to be far too common only fully brought into the light. The issue of Sexual Harassment dominated the collective conversation and i am pleased to add my voice by way of introduction the acting chair of the equal Opportunity Employment Commission serving as the commissioner for the last seven and a half years in President Trump to the fate me acting chair of in january of that sheer bravado i was struck by the number of the cases we would litigate that we would have a conversation with of then chair speaking with every one of the district directors each of the regional attorneys astonished and deeply concerned that i was told the same thing that eeoc could have they got it nothing but harassment cases generally and Sexual Harassment specifically. This with the concern of the leadership level without pervasiveness we have continued to see led to the establishment of a select task force with the outside group of experts following a Public Commission meeting i was honored to cochair alongside my democratic colleagues who joins me today. The goal of creating a the task force to find new and innovative ways to want to speak to and reinforce prevention not just the Enforcement Agency liability issue to have organized labor and trade Association Academics and social scientist our work the release of the final cochairs report almost to the data United States Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision which it held for the first time the Sexual Harassment was a form of unlawful sexual discrimination we took away a number of Lessons Learned that i would take this opportunity to share but first workplace harassment is a persistent problem onethird of the 90,000 churches received fiscal year 2015 included the allegation of harassment on the basis of sex and race and National Origin workplace harassment particularly Sexual Harassment goes unreported a head in fact, Police Common response is for the employee to take a formal action to report that harassment internally or file a formal legal complaint not because they feared disbelief for an action or social or professional retaliation the effective effort must are at the top and leadership and accountability are crucial it cannot be overstated effective that is not tolerated to star at the highest level of management and less than systems in place to hold the place accountable for the expectation and finally trading must change much done over the last 30 years has not worked as a prevention tool to focused on avoiding legal liability effective training can replace workplace harassment but even that cannot occur in a vacuum it is most effective when tailored to the specific workplace is committing with the workplace harassment i am happy to offer the thoughts in the interest of giving my written testimony with a lengthy discussion of the procedures with respect to charges but also to the committee is set a promising practices preventing in combating workplace harassment we recently published is provided to Committee Staff and a closing i reiterate a key finding of the Task Force Report that no system of training and monitoring or reporting is likely to succeed in preventing harassment in the absence of genuine and public by yen from the top level of the organization you must do better by employees to answer any questions you may have im a former house staffer vice also i am familiar working in the legislative branch. You are now recognized for your Opening Statement for five minutes. Good morning. On behalf of the office of compliance in the entire board of directors fake you for the opportunity to discuss the process and our concerns we support the efforts of this committee and members of congress to mandate workplace rights for everyone over the last six weeks we have seen a triple digit percentage increase or in person prevention training within increase in the number of staffers and rolled twice as many visits how to report Sexual Harassment a full percent surge in the number of people subscribing to the social media platform to receive updates and i am happy to report that posters notifying employees are flying off the shelf with three orders arriving late last week. But they tell is that people are finally taking seriously the problem of sounding the alarm to combat through outreach and education however mandatory trading and posters are the floor, not the ceiling even as the chairman notes in her statement the trading has not worked as a prevention tool, we have over 20 years of non mandatory training and here we are today. To reach the here we are today. To reach the ceiling not only should our prosetsz change which we hoe we hope to discuss with you today. It includes not just clhanges t our process but a shift of a policy, a Sexual Harassment prevention policy that is currently not mandated under the law. P it should include standar standardsovstandards of conduct and accountability. It is proof that members of this committee we are focusing on an issue and validating to build a strong culture of respect. Let me note, media reports have portrayed us as oh page and while we understand these are not directed at our process and not to us as individuals these excelle comments nonetheless of those who faithfully report to our Office Every Day for work including saferining safety ins deputy executive director who trained over the last six weeks in ones and gotwos and tens and including our counselor that meets to hear their stories, to advise them of their rights and to comfort them in their distress. This is the process that congress designed in 1995, a process that not only demands confidentiality but strict confidentiality under the law. It is a change that we welcome and we hope we will play an integ ral role. Many call this a moment of reckoning. Sit it is a clairity of what we do. We ask that you bear in mind this is a new day not just for congress but for throughout the dmunty. It should and must apply to our entire legislative community. During this time our office stands ready and we will roll up our sleeves to assist you. Thank you. I look forward to your questions. Tlhank you for your testimon. Well reck cog fliognize counse. Thank you. I want to thank the committee for inviting me for a second time to give testimony on the issue of preventing Sexual Harassment in the work plaplacw. In this article she tells her story of how she was sexually harassed. She goes onto say question pmy story. She said by nature harassment are characterized by gray areas and few victims. I thought it was important to read her language because it captured better than i probably could ever do the challenges my office faces on these issues. I read her words to mean there has to be discussion and understanding around these issues. I also read victim blieming is counter productive to rooting out Sexual Harassment. I agree. On a personal note, like most women in this country i have experienced Sexual Harassment. My way of dealing with it was to lead a job that i liked. As a woman of color i experienced race discrimination in the workplace. I work for a private company which a manager brought there a whip. When questioned about it he said he wanted to quote unquote motivate the black employees. I believe these have made me more sense tifr, not less. Im probably a better lawyer because i understand the per specki speck dr perspective of the employee and employer. We are not in the businessov of covering up unlawful behavior but rather we cammen the gray areas by conducting thorough investigations and trying to figure out how to address it legally. Yes, Sexual Harassment occurred in the Congress Like it does in other places. Of course i recognize this kind of belaif yor dohavior does go. I wish there was an easy answer but there is not. Although it is not a panacea i believe inperson training is very helpful. I have trained quite a few people and the response has been encouraging. I hope it has meant members are talking directly with their employees and telling them they should come forward without fear of retaliation. This is still a positive step. It might help to change a perception held that these issues should not be reported. I will say that training does work effectively but it doesnt work effectively when members schedule it around or near votes. Cholosing i want to than members and welcome your questions. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is dan crowley. My views do not represent the firm, colleagues or any firm clients. I had the privilege of serving around congressman bill thomas through early 1998, a period that strike thatartled the repu refr lu revolution in 1994. They have institutional in nature. In fact the committees legislation began under the previous democratic majority. Congress will write better laws when it has to live on the same on the executive branch and three the separation of powers em bodied must be respected. At the time it was felt the procedures provided a means of grievances must take into consideration allegations can be career ending even if they prove to untrue. To constitutional provision is the speech or debate clause which has been interpreted of providing immunity but also for other matters that the constitution places within the jurisdiction of either house. Against this backdrop the committee sought to address violations. Forwards that end the caa provided for the creation of the off the of compliance and charged it with responsibility for conducting studies and carrying out a program for educating. The caa was carefully crafted to avoid speech or debate clause immunity. It provides it shall not be a violation of any employment provision to consider the Party Affiliation political compatibility. Such factors provide an affirmative defense. As described in the Committee Report the exemptions listed there in recognize by allowing member offices as well as member and leadership offices to incorporate these without prejudice to the legality of such decisions. The political compatibility exemption is provided to with more flexibility than is availab available. The jurisprudence makes clear that in employment cases it will be up to the courts to determine whether the privilege applies on a case by case basis. It note that not with standing the caa it has brought discretion which may spried another meaningful avenue to explore it has a Committee Considers in this area. Legislation attempted to reconcile members that subject themselves to the same laws they impose on others. After more than two decades it is important to review the caa as well as the standards of official conduct to determine if they are necessary or appropria appropriate. The steps the committee took more than two decades ago mean you have experts including my fellow panelists that are a vailable to ensure authorities are appropriately advised. I believe that a commitment to taking prompt corrective action must be unequivocal. I would be happy to respond to any questions you play have. Thank you. We now have time for Committee Members to ask questions of the witnesses. Each member will be allotted five minutes to question a witness or witnesses. I will now recognize myself for five minutes. Ill start with you. I certainly appreciate you being here today and the work you have done in this work of anti harassment generally. I want to focus on your work as cochair on the study of harassment in the workplace. They have created a document titled promising practices for identifying five core principals again, your task force was focused on information. At our very first meeting of our task force we all agreed that we all know what is legally actionable harassment. It is not working as a prevention tool. We focused on five things. One is there has to be committed and engaged leadership. There has to be consistent and demonstrated accountability within an organization. There has to be strong and comprehensive harassment policies in place. Trusted and accessible complaint procedures. Regular and interactive training that is tailored to the audience and organization. As i said earlier, we were very critical of the training and developed over the last 30 years as a prevention tool, but we do not by any means reject training as a tool. We believe that training is absolutely necessary and what she referred to in particular and she said in person training can make a big difference. We have a number of reck men dags that it has to be to that particular workplace. The leadership has to show up and show they are interested there it. It has to give examples to that particular workplace. It is very important there training that individuals in the workplace focus on training not even so much as what is harassment and what isnt, what are the procedures by which people can report, they know who to go to. They know what the consequences will be, what will happen. That is an important component of the training as welg. As well. So it wont be as effective. Yes. I have spoken on this many places. You will hear outside council who are called in to do trainings. The head of the Business Unit or organization will show up for the very beginning of the training and say i want you all to Pay Attention to this and then leveave. The leadership has to be as engaged there that training and send the measurage to the individuals who are receiving that training. Thank you very much. If i could now i would like to z you a couple of questions in the time i have left. Would you describe the role in the counseling or mediation phase, apha phases and are they when mediation begins or do they lurd have an Attorney Client relationship prior to being notified of a caa claim . I will give you a lawyerly response and that is it depends. In many instances we will know when a complaint is coming down the pike. That is because the Employee Office has contacted us. There has been an employee that is dissatisfied with something that is going on. We work with the office to try to address the situation. Some times an employee will have an employment performance issue. They have been put in a Performance Improvement plan. The employee is terminated. We have borworked with the offi and anticipate when they lose their job they will go to the office of compliance. We anticipate that. We deont know when they have gone for the counseling phase. When mediation is requested we would be notified automatically. We might now for the first time when we get the notice of mediation. At the mediation phase we have attempt to resolve the matter at that point. Thank you very much. The schar will recognize mr. Brady for five minutes. Thank you. Of all of the cases you handle how much of your work is focused on Sexual Harassment. I anticipated that question. I have a list here in the number of cot gategory. When employees file claims they always put in they routinely will include a retaliation claim. Followed by that is the americans be disabilities acts claims, age, family and medical leave act and sex discrimination and gender discrimination come at about the same rate. It is followed by pregnancy claims, National Origin and military discrimination claims commented about the same rate and then finally claims based on color. Do you support eliminating the cooling off period . I dont have strong position on that one way or another. My only thing is oftentimes we do settle cases during that period. It would take away another opportunity to possibly resolve a case before a party goes directly into litigation. In your Advocacy Firm do you find that just your engagement the engagement that you are engaged with changes office behavior in the future . I think its difficult for us to know to a certainty whether that is happening but it has been reported back to us that when there has been an incident of some kind or some allegation of discrimination and an Office Speaks with us and tries to take appropriate action we do after action items with the office. That might involve training for a particular individual. It might involve training for the entire staff. It might mean in some instances that not all have written policies. It might mean sitting with them, adopting those policies, rolling those policies out and having conversations Going Forward. So i do think that there is a lot of positive that comes out of some of these situations. Thank you. And for mr. Crowley thank you for your who was a real gift to members of the committee. Why did congress exclude the library of congress . Should we fix that and include now the library of congress . You know, i have to tell you that my recollection of these issues is now 22 years old. I dont remember every discussion we have. It can appreciate that, sir. I do recall a number of conversations including whether the Police Forces ought to be unified. I think the answer might be and i defer to my colleagues they were already covered to a certain extent under federal law if im not mistaken. Perhaps i can provide a little incite. The library of congress does have its internal personnel system. That system is entirely internal. There is a hearing process. The hearing officer must be forwarded to the librarian where she is either accept or reject that decision. Do you think we should include the libraryover congr o . We do. Thank you. In june 16th you write about the risk factors and mr. Acongress obviously a dramatic example. We focused on training recently. No one believes it is enough. It is about improving our laws and it is important but also not enough. We really need to clahange the culture. What other work can we do to change that culture . Thank you. One important point they think the committee should consider, as you are looking at particularly at revising the Congressional Accountability Act. And i would look to the testimony from congresswoman spear from your november hearing. There is a difference between what immediate action has to be taken when someone is concerned and complains that they are being sexually harassed versus what is all of the process that the office of compliance deals with when you are looking to is there liability. And so as representative spear said you have to be concerned about what is happening to that person who complained about it when she is still sitting there in that workplace. I would urge you to sort of the by fer kate your thinking on this and understand that immediate action and that investigation which has to take place which the how Employment Council does a lot of that. You should how can you instruct your work environmeenvironment. Think of harassment claims different from other types of discrimination claims. So it is one thing to aloej you did not get promoted. It is very different than a harassment claim c. I would urge you to what is that type of corrective action . It is very different all of the other process that is in place that determines is there liability here. So that is one thing that i would urge you to think about. Overall in your focus on culture is very much what our select task force spent a great deal of time on. There are a number of things that will influence a culture, again, including whats the message thats being sent from the top and is the leadership owning each individual workplace. Of course we are places in congress where you a lot of you mentioned the number of risk factors. You have people working in very close quarters. You have people working very long hours. I think theres a recommendation of maybe in one of the bills that you do a culture, a climate survey. Those are things you can also consider and make sure youre reviewing those on a regular basis. But culture and the message that is sent from the leadership and the engagement within each individual office to address that are very important factors and can do the most to act as a prevention tool. Thank you. I thank all of the witnesses for being here and for your testimony. Very important. I yield back. Thank you. Gentleman yields back. Chair will recognize mr. Davis for five minutes. Thank you to all of our pa l panelis panelists. Thank you all for your testimony. To begin i believe an important take away from our previous laering is the need to become more familiar with the policies and procedures of how the Ethics Committee works as well. I also encourage more outreach to the hill . General. So you have a sense of how best we can all Work Together to serve and improve this great institution. I want to focus my questions today on ms. Gru flrnman. How is the ooc currently reaching new employees are this new information . We have a very unique mandate. In fact, we are compelled to train on our statute by the law. It is a very Robust Program which is for a very small office that is administered largely by two people. 500 people have been trained online in the last six weeks. Here is an example. In september five people completed the online module. It talks about anti retaliation. In protection is an overview of the Congressional Accountability Act. We have a new module coming up as well that will focus on thousand report Sexual Harassment, how to respond to Sexual Harassment and behaviors that could lead to Sexual Harassment. We dont know who these new employees are. We would love to be notified as to when new people are on boarded so that we can kp communicate with them directly. So theres no contact between our officer our payroll officer here and your office when a new employee comes on board . Thats correct. You mentioned too you wanted to reach more younger staffers. Are you seeing the younger staffers taking these training modules or do you show how are you going to reach more younger staffers . We dont know exactly the age or the person that is taking the module. We just flow the hit know the hits that we are receiving. What we could do with the members of this panel is a particular module designed specifically for new employees and young every employeer emplo. They do face different issues. I think there needs to be more communication between our offices being run to make sure those modules are out there and the training is in. I also think its important we drop training for senior managers. They will be the first an employee will go to. I think senior plmanagers need know more about the process. There is one for anti real case. It actually meets the standards of managers. So it is there already. Well, exlen. You talked about how you hoped to strengthen ooc and your programs. We look forward to doing that. I want to point out our former colleague is in the audience today. Thank you for your work on this congressman, shaes. I notice that we have many of your annual reports that come out every couple of years, there wasnt a lot of focus in the 2016 report on Sexual Harassment in the workplace. I hope as we move forward those who make up the agency would help us help you identify how we can better serve all of our employees at all levels and understand how we can get anybody who may be a victim in front of you, in front of the officer and on the path to get the problem rectified. Thats the goal. I appreciate you being here. Thank you. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. The chairman will recognize for five minutes. Thank you very much. So i think i want to begin with a question, the less power women and equality women have in the workplace the more vulnerable they are to Sexual Harassment. I think we have to take it as a sign and cause of progress here that we have 84 women in the u. S. House today and 21 in the senate. One could only imagine the conditions of Sexual Harassment when they were all male or v virtually all male. I saw an interesting excellent by barbara who is noted as in the Sexual Harassment, lots of women who are there professional jobs. She said people are not talking about the form workers. Im wondering is there anything we can do, policies we can advocate that can make it clang for people across society . Thank you for that question. So in our work yoir absolutely right. We see harassment claims across income levels to the factory floor to the farmers fields. We have had horrendous cases of harassment for particularly vulnerable workers. Thats part of the reason why when we put our task force together we included representatives from worker advocacy groups. So certainly things that are more outreach along those lines and that recognize that worker advocacy groups can play and how individuals who are in vulnerable work situations can go to seek some redress. Certainly one thing to consider, and this is something that we have in the federal sector is require ments that information s provided in different languages so that youre reaching populations that particularly for vulnerable workers. English may not be their first language. Thats certainly one thing to consider. In terms of legislate ifr clangs, clang changes, in terms of title 7 im not sure there is anything i could recommend right now wait. Lets pursuit that if you could. Let me ask you, you began by mentioning this the interesting article which i saw too, questioned my story by a victim of Sexual Harassment. You invoked gray areas and lack of thirdparty witnesses and so forth. Everyone agrees we need zero tolerance and also need a process to the accused. The problem is people today think our process is so that the purpose is some how to bury the truth or complicate the truth. Thats at least the public perception. What do we do to make sure it is perceived as fair but also moves things quickly enough so people think we are taking the issue seriously . As i mentioned before, i dont have a practical reason to think that thats not a good idea. It is certainly not going change how we do business. Eliminating that piece of the process might be helpful. I know that off the compliance can speak more to this and youre saying that we dont need the cooling offer period . From my perspective i dont think its needed. As i said, the one reservation is it does provide an additional chance to resolve the matter before full blown litigation begins. I do think its important to communicate to employees their rights. Thats not my job, not our offices job. I know that there have been over the years efforts by the office of compliance. I remember there would be kplun case about our rights under the Congressional Accountability Act. So more efforts to train employees and make them aware i think would be helpful. I have to say the plaintiffs bar is very savvy about these rules and usually they dont have problems getting attorneys representing them. Most of the concerns i have heard is that the process is lengthy. Eliminating the cool off period would be helpful. The chair will now recognize the gent le lady for five minutes. Thank you. I wanted to focus on what you sited as one of the best prevention methods which is the trusted complaint procedures. We have the proceed yours that youre required to have. I appreciate as you laid out you have to deal with both sides, but we have been talking about the number of us talking about having some type of victims advocate, having a separate person for the victim, a Victims Council. Wouldnt that help if we had somebody where the victim can go and even if they have had the training, you know, when youre in that situation we have special people for rape victims. You go and youre walked through the process when youre there crisis. If we could have somebody they could go to in that type of situation wouldnt that improve the whole dynamicover putting them on a level Playing Field and helping them through this process . Ill start with you. Sure. I think thats a very valuable suggestion. One of the things i would tell you, when we were doing to work of the task force we actually invited people from the pentagon from the Defense Department because of what they have been dealing with for the last 14 years in their own internal proceed yours as to Sexual Assault in the military. So having a victims advocate is something i know they set up there and i would urge you to maybe consult with the generals there that have been dealing with that. They would have more experience with that. That is something that i think youre focused on addressing the immediate situation and for the person, what can help them in that immediate situation, how will they know whats going to happen and whats the corrective action needs to be a big focus. Thank you. And i do want to thank her again. When i asked her what could we do that would have helped . That was an advocate was a single thing that she identified. I do think its thinking about that experience. I think its very important that we get that legislation. And then also have that be, you know, also through the training also. Perhaps on the training process too, you though, when someone sets up a house account and a new employee we can have more in getting it to them in multiple methods. Lets make sure we are getting more information out that bay. And then i wanted to because i guess the office of complia e compliance. I know youre continuing to go through the records and to give us the nflinformation on the overall cases. But given the publics concern and sort of publics right to know what type of cases youre dealing with, and particularly do you estimate you will have that information soon so that we can have that available for the public and have a much more detailed accounting . A couple of things. Let me address the Victims Council because it was part of our statement. We understand that during the counseling stage and certainly in the mediation stage when the employeeing office is reppe represented the victim feels disadvantaged. We hope to beef up so the counselor participates in drafting a compliant. That coupled with investigatory to immediately investigate these claims as it immerges can be a form of advocacy. In response it duck tails into mrs. Brooks we quest to us. We provided a response this morning. Law as it is currently written is difficult for us to produce this kind of information. We know that it is strict confidentiality. That bind our office from discussing it. The employeeing office is not told. Specifically adheres to the products, the materials that are produced in mediation. That is against strictly confidential but not unusual in our process. Mediation is private throughout the industry. What our laws requires in terms of producing information in the rules is number and types of inquiries that come to our office, number and types of flis initial requests for counseling. We to our knowledge have not receivedfully requests up until this recent one. The law as it is currently written only allows us to disclose this type of information in a very narrow circumstance. It is under two conditions, when the case reaches a final decision and employee is consulted. We cannot release documents with respect to counseling, mediation, where there is in final decision and when the employee has not been consulted. Have been said that we would like to work to change that rule. A potential change goes forwards granting us the authority to investigate claims. It could be similar to what we have there ada and osha. The General Council could find if there is reason to believe the law had been violated a report could be generated. That report could be made available to you. Okay. Mr. Chairman, i would mention i hope we can get much more details information and if we need to make changes to allow you to do that. If we are going to correct the process we need to know where the complains have been. I noticed the committee got a report, a memo detailing from 1997 to 2007 where it laid out that 90 of the cases were with the architect and Capital Police probably a lot of safety things. I think we knead need to know we the type of cases and how we are going to do it Going Forward. I think the public has a right to know that going back and certainly Going Forward how we can improve that transparency. I hope you can work with us in getting more detail. Thank you. The chair will recognize mrs. Lot to lo lofton. Thank you. I had to be there for a bit and i think my colleague has the same conflict. This obviously is a very serious matter for us and we are i think very clearly going to clang the procedures and statute that we have. So the question is how to do that, to avoid pitfalls. One of the things im interested in is the information you have made on the additional powers for the General Council that you just referenced, specifically how the council would use investigative powers to get to the facts of the matter that you currently cant do. What conflicts might exist if it were assigned to you and could you more fully explain that to us . Absolutely. Rather than reinventing the wheel. The General Council does have authority in certain areas. How it really works is a claim can be filed anonymously, which is unusual. It is not the same in the labor forum. The Current Practice would be we would work with the employeeing office. Now, clearly thats not going to work in this particular circumstance, but in the investigation there is a move towards resolution. Theres a lot of dollars involved. There is significant negotiation and discussion. If the matter is not resolved it could result in a filing of cop plaint by the General Council. They actually represent them. That is the process we invisien putting into we if he can. They a putting into we if he caeff. The concern we have is lack of staffing. We dont know how great the volume will some of this and the issue i mean, if you have an employee employer dispute, for example, under the act that we adopted in 1995, certain employees are exempt from overtime and certain employees arent, just as in the private sector. You could have a dispute about that category and a fight about overtime. I dont know that that needs to be have the same level of disclosure as a Sexual Harassment thing. We want to stomp that out. Part of the way to do that is to have some daylight on this process. So one of the things i have been thinking a lot about, and certainly my colleague, miss speier, has done the work on this bill, but its the beginning point. How do we make this transparent in a way that protects the victims who want to maintain their privacy but some victims are bullied into a confidential agreement. So i am just wondering, in terms of what other people in an office where there is Sexual Harassment, what their role is, what their obligation is, and are they constrained by these agreements that are being undertaken right now. Part of our training in the future, coming soon, will cover bystander training. Specifically how do people who view this type of activity, what do they do. This is something representative speier has previously mentioned in terrells ms of our training. Its a hard area for us to deal in. The confidentiality currently in the rules prohibits us from having a conversation. We can change the rules. As you go about changing the rules, one of the communities you need to reach out to is the employee rights we are. Let me talk about what we hear at nondisclosure agreements. Its a confusing area but we have a simple answer. We dont require nondisclosure. Its a product of the parties. We dont provide standardized language and we dont require anybody to sign a nondisclosure agreement to come into our system. All right. That is important. But certainly the inherent power differential between, say, a member of congress who is harassing and a staffer who has been harassed is pretty extreme. I think i read an article recently about a young woman who stepped forward and has never been able to be employed again, even though she did the right thing. Certainly we need to get our heads about how to protect victims even beyond a Settlement Agreement. And i see my time has expired, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony. Gentle lady yields back. The chair will now recognize the gentleman from north carolina, mr. Walker, for five minutes. Thank you. I would like to thank you for the leadership not just on this committee but the example you set in our entire conference. I have a couple of questions for mr. Crowley. Its come to our attention that federal agencies are required to reimburse the Judgment Fund or judgments against agencies and settlements for discrimination in the workplace, yet, there is no comparable requirement for congress. So when we talk about liability, what discussions were held prior to or during consideration of the Congressional Accountability Act regarding personal liability for settlements and judgments awarded under the caa . My memory is two decades old. I understand. As i recall, there was a very clear discussion early on that would have simply prohibited personal liability for members as well as punitive damages. That changed as the process unfolded to limiting the ability to pay judgments out of the new fund that was created. And of course, those discussions occurred extensively with the subcommittee on legislative Branch Appropriations who had a significant input into that decision. But i think the general notion was that, first of all, its not the member personally, its the employing office of the member so that, for example, if a member leaves office there would still be the ability to get restitution from the office after the fact. So i think it would be aberrational to hold members personally responsible when, in fact, its an employing office of the congress for all other purposes including the federal tort claims act, et cetera. Okay. You covered actually the second part of the question. Let me, then, ask this. Is there any provision in the Congressional Accountability Act or in house rules that would forbid the us of mra you understand to pay for settlements reached during the resolution period . I am not sure there is a clear answer to that question. There is in the statute a limitation on what funds can be used to settle claims. But, of course, members have broad discretion over the use of the mra. And i imagine that, in certain circumstances, particularly when part of the settlement involves reinstatement to a position, that implicitly the mra would be used. I cant imagine that that wasnt part of the discussion, whether the authority that a member would have and even going back to those years, the budgets for staffing were much higher than they even exist today. Twoweek settlement or a month for conflict resolution or maybe an employee didnt fit. But the authority or the the ability to cover up such office behavior, wrong doing, harassment, leaves a lot of discretion in the members hands. Is that what you are telling me, that there can be a separate settlement or payment outside of the Congressional Accountability Act using the mra . I think members implicitly have that authority. But you have to remember that at the time the mra didnt exist until bill thomas created it. Before that we had the clerk hire allowance and roughly a dozen different allowances that were consolidated with the specific intention of giving members discretion on how to deploy those resources. To such an extent that the committee was actually renamed from the committee on House Administration to the committee on House Oversight to emphasize the fact that it was not going to be determined at the Committee Level but by the individual member. So i think that there is some conflict between the Congressional Accountability Act language and the Inherent Authority that members have over the mra. Your testimony highlights the speech and debate clause within the constitution. Can you explain to the committee how this clause has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in its applications within the context of the Congressional Accountability Act. Yes, sir. The lower courts i dont think the Supreme Court has ruled, but the lower courts, d. C. Circuit in particular, has ruled that the clause does not preclude suits under the Congressional Accountability Act but there still remains the immunity that is essentially an affirmative defense that members can assert. So weve created sort of a gray area. Stepping back to the original discussions around the act, there was case law saying that its unclear whether congress can waive its constitutional privileges, but any waiver would have to be explicit and unequivocal. I would have to say that in the Congressional Accountability Act we equivocated. Do you believe its wrong for members to use the mra to settle interpersonal Sexual Harassment . Claims . My personal opinion. Personal opinion. The taxpayers should not be on the hook for that. Thank you. With that i yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair will recognize the gentleman from nebraska, mr. Smith, for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Of thank you to the withinesses and interaction today on a very serious topic. Its interesting. I appreciate my colleague, miss comstocks recommendation for a victims advocate. And if each of you, starting with miss grundmann and miss lett could express how that might be able to be brought into the existing process, what changes might need to take place so that, if thats the decision to make changes, if that would work and how it might work and then miss lipnic, if you could perhaps express your knowledge of how thats been done elsewhere and how effective it has been. Go ahead, ms. Grundmann. Sure. What we propose really is beefing up what we already have rather than throwing out what we have and creating a separate office. We could take the counselors position and make it a much more interactive process with the empl employee whereby the counselor would help technically advise the employee on how to draft a charge or a complaint, coupled with using the general counsel and giving him the authority to investigate claims in the dispute resolution program. If the general counsel were to find that there is a reasonable cause to believe that the law were violated, he would actually represent the employee in further administrative processes. Thank you. Ms. Lett. I would have to think a little bit more about how it would work in terms of the specifics. But i can tell you that it would likely be a welcomed thing from my clients perspective in that i think an advocate would encourage employees to come forward sooner rather than later. That would be music to our ears, certainly, because the sooner an employer knows that there is an issue, the sooner they can address it. Its not a good model when things barrel way down the track and an individual feels that he or she has to go to the office of compliance for relief. So i think that that absolutely there could be some upside to that. Thank you. Ms. Lipnic. Mr. Smith, all i would add, by the time people are coming to the eeoc to file a charge of discrimination, they are at that point we are investigating for liability purposes. So there is no victims advocate advocacy role on the part of the eeoc itself. Thank you. Mr. Crowley, do you wish to comment . I think its an interesting idea. Its amazing to me the extent to which the issues have not fundamentally changed. The intent at the time was to create a process that would both encourage victims to come forward and allow for resolution in a way that didnt incentivize politically charged claims immediately before an election. So anything consistent with those objectives which this sounds like this might be, seem worth pursuing. Thank you. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes gentleman from georgia, mr. Loudermilk, for five minutes for questions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here. Of all the issues that i ever thought i would be dealing with when i ran for congress, this is not one of them. It sickens me that the idea that the most respected legislative body in the worlds reputation is being tainted by discussing this, but its extremely important and it boils down to character. In reality, there is nothing that we can do to affect someones character, but we can remove the bushes that allow the bad characters to hide behind. I think thats kind of the direction that we are looking. Miss grundmann, in your testimony you described in detail eocs process and makes several recommendation but you didnt address the role in administering the awards settlement fund. Can you take us through your role in the payment process once the tentative settlement is reached or final judgment is received . Absolutely. First if you will allow me to clarify. The statute refers to funds that are appropriated by the treasury. In actuality there is no fund. It is an account, and that account is empty. Until we requisition the funds for a particular award or settlement. Also, to be clear about the settlement the settlement account. The 17 million weve talked about, yes, it covers awards to settlements from our dispute resolution process. It also covers awards and settlements from District Court. It also covers settlements and awards that derive out of the arbitration process for various collective bargaining agreements in the legislative community such as the architect of the capital and of the capitol police. Can i ask one quick question. Its a zero dollar account. When something occurs like we are talking about here, where does the money come from . We requisition it. The account is empty until a settlement comes through, then we ask for the money through the vehicle of a warrant which should be familiar to this committee. Our role in settlements is purely ministerial. We dont the parties negotiate the terms. Its incumbent upon them to agree. It is incumbent upon ohec to secure the Proper Authority from this committee when settlements come out of the treasury for the house. Should congress desire to beef up our role by giving us a greater review for legality of these decisions, you would have to change the act. Currently we dont have the authority. The only thing we look for is whether its signed by the parties and its a written statement. Can you kind of walk me through this process. Say the zero dollar account. You receive notice of a settlement of x number of dollars. Then you request through warrant that much money. Can you start at that point, walk us through who sends the money to the account. Is it the treasury. From house i mean what and until the the individual who filed the complaint receives the check. What is the process . When the settlement is reached, the award comes to our office. We review it for two things. In writing and signed by the parties. That is it. Clarity, essentially. The Settlement Agreement then goes to our case administrator. She obtains Payment Information from the parties who will receive payment. Routing information, banking information. Then the document moves down the hall and goes to our budget officer. She actually requisitions the funds. This is the account we are talking about through the vehicle of the warrant. Once the funds are there, the Settlement Agreement actually goes to who do the funds come from . From treasury. Thank you. Sorry. Then it goes the final step that we have in this process is the agreement goes to a fourth person to check that all the information is correct, the routing information and then the funds are released. At that point our involvement with the fund ends. We do not determine when the person is paid. There could be an offset, for instance. But were done with the process. Is there any other process anyone in congress is notified of a settlement, has to sign off on it or just in your office . Other than rule ten where the chairman or Ranking Member has to sign off on particular settlements that come out of the account. Thats the only rule i know. In the process the chairman and Ranking Member do sign off on that . That would be a good question for miss lett. Miss lett. The answer is yes. If there is a settlement that comes out of the treasury that has to be approved by this committee. Thank you. I have some other questions. Ill yield back at this point. Gentleman yields back. The chair will now recognize miss speier for five minutes for questions. I just want to underscore the importance of having a plaintiffs bar appear before the committee as well to hear from them how the process has or has not been working so we can refine it moving forward. To the last question that mr. Loudermilk just raised, it was my understanding in one article that i read that the former chair of this committee declined to approve any Sexual Harassment cases and as a result the mra started to be used for that process. Is that your recollection, miss lett . Thats not exactly accurate. There were more than Sexual Harassment cases that were not approved. Maybe so. But were there Sexual Harassment cases in which the former chair declined to sign off on the Ranking Member was not made aware of . Thats how it was reported. I am just trying to get clarification. I dont remember the exact number. It may have been one or two, but it certainly was not more than that. So if it is not signed off by the chair, then there has to be another way in which the settlement is reached. And that, in my understanding, is how the mra has been used in some cases. Thats correct. I want to focus back on the victim. One of the problems and you made mention of it, miss lipnic, is that you have a victim who has come forward, is concerned about the fact that she has been sexually harassed, either by the member or someone in the office. But she has to continue to work in that office. In order for it to be resolved through the office of compliance. If she doesnt continue to work in the office, then the office of compliance has no role. Correct . I thought you were talking to miss lipnic. There is a concern we havent discussed today. That really is about retaliation. Thats what i am getting to. Perfect. Retaliation is covered countrury under the caa. An employee who comes to our office, experiences some type of retaliation would have some type of claim. The employee comes in, they seek counseling, they go to mediation. The Employee Office now knows of the claim. There is retaliation that occurs. Under the current process the employee would have to restart the process again, go back through counseling, go back through medication. This is why we propose the possibility of investigations for the general counsel and the possibility of amending the complaint so that the charge the charges all merge at one point in time rather than going back through the whole system again. I am also concerned, though, that we dont have a means yet, and possibly should consider this, to allow the employee to work remotely, to the extent that they can. In some offices you cant. If you work for the architect and you have got to be painting offices, you cant do that remotely. But in offices where you can, so that there is not the continued environment that is very uncomfortable for the victim. There actually is a way that that can happen. And it has happened in other cases. In the i think we just need to make it explicit is what i am suggesting. I dont think its always been the case for everybody. There was one of the complaints that was filed that went through the process. The employee had to be in the office. And i dont think thats right. Personally. I cant speak to specific cases. As i said, Employment Offices have a lot of flexibility in this area. I think that this is an area where employers have been very effective. Sunda as soon as we know that an employee has engaged in protected activity well counsel the Employment Office strongly that while the underlying case may not have merit, if the employee is retaliated against in any shape, form or fashion, if they even have a thought bubble, theyll face a difficult case. We have never lost a case in retaliation. My time is running out. I need to ask a few more questions. Soft landings. That one case that we all are familiar with where the employee, after the settlement, couldnt find a job in the capitol. I would be interested maybe we dont have time right now. But some kind of discussion about what we do for employees who have, through no fault of their own, have been sexually harassed, they have come forward. They now have a Scarlett Letter that they wear and cannot be employed elsewhere. Could i answer that question very quickly . Under the current law an employee who has left is still a covered employee up to 180 days from the violation. So if there was retaliation, if they had left, they could still file a claim for that 180 days. What happens if they still want to work in the building . Larger policy. Thank you. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. The chair will now recognize the chair of the Ethics Committee, miss brooks, for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you, again, for allowing me to participate. I would like to ask permission to admit for the record the letter that representative deutsche, my Ranking Member on ethics, and i submitted that miss grundmann has just referred to. The letter of december 1st. Thank you. I would also ask unanimous consent that we admit into the record the office of compliances response that was received this morning that i have been reading this morning. Without objection. Thank you. In our letter on december 1st, we asked that the committee and because this is a hearing about the process and examining reforms to Congressional Accountability Act thats what ill zero in on. We asked ooc to promptly provide the committee with all records in the possession of the Office Related to any claims of Sexual Harassment discrimination, retaliation and so forth. The response that we received today indicates that you refer and i quickly went to section 1416 of confidentiality. As i am reading your response, you cannot share, because of the strict confidentiality rules, any claims that you have been involved in, ooc, relative to referrals to sx. Youre correct. The way the law is written, the strict confidentiality not only binds the parties, it specifically binds our office from discussing those claims. You are talking about claims overall. The law currently prohibits us from releasing information regarding in the counselling period, the mediation period but allows for a narrow period when the case has gone to hearing and a final decision has been rendered. There was only one hearing in 2016, in fiscal year 2016. Is that correct . If thats whats in the letter. Its not in the letter. Its a screen shot on your website. Its possible the case settled. There was one hearing and you indicated you indicated in this letter that there have been no proceedings before a hearing officer, and the hearing officer comes after mediation. Its the end stage of your process. Correct. Correct . And you indicate that there have not been any proceedings before a hearing officer or a board relative to any members or employees. Correct. That doesnt cover District Court. Okay. That covers the court of appeals. Does not cover the court of appeals. It only covers our administrative hearing process. Before one of our hearing officers. Okay. And so are you saying that there are matters that have gone to District Court . There are matters that have gone to District Court. That you dont have possession of those records. We are not part of that process. Okay. So those people who decide to go to District Court, they pursue their own process in District Court. That is correct. And so, were not getting anything. Pardon me . Were not going to receive anything regarding any and we actually asked about any Employment Matters. We actually asked related to the claim of Sexual Harassment, discrimination, retaliation or any employment practice. That goes back to the law. The law doesnt allow us to release anything to your committee. But, if we were to change the law, then we could use the method through investigation by our general counsel any report thats generated where reasonable cause has been found that the law has been violated could be released to your committee. And so, let me ask you as well as miss lett, what are your opinions on mandatory reporting to the Ethics Committee . In harassment matters. I have to say its a very difficult question to answer. When we handle matters of discrimination and we talk with our clients, we tell our clients that its possible that we will resolve the case or the case may go forward, but there may also be some type of ethics matter that might arise out of those circumstances. So they will know that they may be fighting on two fronts, whatever the claim may be. Can i ask ms. Grundmann, in your letter you state to us that you have encouraged employees who have been the victim that may constitute an ethical violation to contact our committee. How do you do that . And to cooperate with our investigation. We do that through the counseling period. Is that just written . Its a written discussion . Or do you provide them that in writing . Its generally counseling is generally by phone or in person. Its a verbal discussion. Is there any discussion i am sorry, my time is up. My question was is there any discussion about the confidentiality of the ethics proceedings in many ways, not that initial investigations might not be reported but, in fact, very oftentimes the witnesses, the complaining witnesses, are often kept confidential . I believe there is. Okay. Thank you. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. The chair will now recognize gentleman from alabama, mr. Byrne, for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate you allowing me to participate in this hearing. Mr. Crowley, i want to clarify one thing with you. I dont think youre saying this but i want to make sure we get this very clear. You are not saying the speech or debate clause provides immunity to a member or Members Office if they engage in Sexual Harassment. Congressman, thats a very difficult question to answer. Clearly the conduct itself is not protected. The question becomes what happens when a member of congress asserts that the discriminatory action, which, of course, Sexual Harassment includes, was not motivated by what the victim says it was clearly Sexual Harassment under any circumstances it will not be Sexual Harassment then. Well, keep in mind that Sexual Harassment is a form of discrimination under the rights subset of discrimination based on gender but Sexual Harassment cannot be immunized by the United States constitution. Thats correct. Want to make sure we got that clear. Now, i want to move to what we do about it. And i think, with the where were really touching here is how we investigate and enforce this. Miss grundmann, you do not have the authority to investigate or enforce that today. In Sexual Harassment. That is correct. But if it was an osha case, you would. That is correct. Why would there be a distinction between osha cases and Sexual Harassment cases . We have those same questions. Mr. Crowley, you want to answer that question . You know, congressman, the honest answer is i dont recall. I do recall conversations around having the office of compliance play a particular role with respect to the ada and osha because it was a case of first impression. These are historic buildings. If there needed to be retrofitting of an elevator shaft, for example, it was a more involved discussion. So that was the reason that the o office of compliance was given responsibility in that area. But why it didnt go further, i cant tell you. I will say this. A lot of case law occurred in this area after 1995. We have the decisions from 1998. A lot happened after that time that you wouldnt have known about at the time you were writing it. Miss lipnic, let me turn to you. You do have the power whether regarding people in the private sector or employees who dont work for the congress you have the power with the eeoc to both investigate and enforce. Do you think the office of compliance should have similar powers when those sorts of things come up with regard to members of congress or people who work for us . The short answer is yes. Okay. I like short answers. Theyre the best. Again, as you well know and, you know, i thought your testimony from the november hearing was spot on, again, there is this point i keep making. There is the difference between that immediate investigation that has to take place and that corrective action and then, you know, the investigation that the eeoc when someone comes to us and we are investigating, essentially, was there an investigation, what happened internally, what was the corrective action taken by the company. But someone needs to be doing that. Now its my understanding from the testimony that i read that the House Employment Council plays that first role in terms of investigating Members Offices. But i think its certainly worth considering do you want to have, you know, a third party essentially who is not then representing the Members Offices later on in the process conducting that initial investigation. And then also making some determination in terms of liability. Here is a really sticky issue. And miss lett, im going to look at you for this one. Now, in the private sector we dont have Public Disclosure issues. When we engage in mediation or settlement discussions and we reach an agreement, its almost always confidential. Mediation rules require confidentiality and the Settlement Agreements, which are contracts, have Confidentiality Provisions in them because it helps foster negotiations. Helps to foster people coming to a meeting of the minds. How do we resolve the tension here in the Public Sector . I wish i had an easy answer for you on that one, congressman. There is a tension there. Oftentimes employees want that confidentiality because they want to go and they want to get other jobs. Certainly members of Congress Want that confidentiality because even if a member or the office has done absolutely nothing wrong, putting the information out into the public can certainly hurt. So i dont have an easy answer to that question. I certainly will give it some additional thought. But its a very difficult situation. Me either. Thank you, sir. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. I want to thank each of the witnesses for being here today. You have given us some very valuable testimony to consider as we go forward. And i particularly want to also thank miss comstock for her work on this. She has been invaluable to this committee and will be as we go forward. Also, again, want to thank representatives speier and byrne for your previous testimony here on november 14th and your participation along with miss brook today as ex officio members. Appreciate the insight that you have given. We have a great responsibility to get this right and to make sure that we continue with the message that one case of Sexual Harassment is one too many. How do we make sure that the victim, as miss speier has so eloquently stated how do we make sure that the victim is protected. With changes that we will consider when we balance transparency issues with making sure that a victim is not a victim a second time because of any changes that we make. We want to make sure, with your input, that we make this in the correct way. It doesnt seem that difficult for members to remember the golden rule and to treat people with respect. And that will solve a lot of our future problems as we try to clean this up. Want to remind everyone that members, we have five legislative days to submit to the chair additional questions in writing that would be passed on to the witnesses. If we do that, we would encourage you to answer those as quickly as possible so that those can be made a part of the record. Without objection, this hearing is adjourned. Tonight President Trump holds a rally in pensacola, florida. Live coverage scheduled for 8 00 eastern on cspan2. Watch online at cspan. Org or listen with the free cspan radio app. Tonight on cspan at 8 00 eastern, this weeks Supreme Court oral argument in the case of Masterpiece Cake shop on whether a baker can refuse to make a wedding cake for a samesex couple based on religious belief. At 9 30 an interview with counselor to the president , Kellyanne Conway. You have to subvert your ego to the greater good. I am not here to read about myself or think about myself. I am here for something bigger than me. I have often said publicly and certainly privately that there are only two people who work here who were elected to anything. And their names are donald j. Trump and michael r. Pence. If you are not on the list. Get with the program or get out. Watch at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. More on Kellyanne Conway from the hill yesterday. A former director of the office of government ethics announced that he is filing a second ethics complaint against white house counselor Kellyanne Conway over her repeated statements about the Alabama Senate race. He said he would file his second complaint against her in a month after he says she appeared to violate the hatch act with her statements against Democrat Doug Jones running against roy moore for alabamas senate seat. The election is thiscoming tuesday. Coming up next, a forum on private Sector Development in afghanistan, including access to capital, transportation issues, and Economic Opportunities for women entrepreneurs. The center for strategic and International Studies hosted this event last month. Lets get started. Im dan runde. I hold the chair here at csis. Were going to have a conversation about the private sector in afghanistan. We have been doing a series of events on afghanistan over the last year. We recently hosted Abdullah Abdullah about two weeks ago. We couldnt have done this without the partnership of ambassador tony weng, the Senior Adviser here. Thank you for everything. I think were going to have an interesting and constructive conversation today. When i think about people who are qualified for their jobs or the right people at the right time, i cant think of a better person than my friend greg uygur. Fz who served both in pakistan and afghanistan has served some of the toughest places in the world for the United States of america. Greg is a friend. Greg is a patriot. Greg is a really qualified individual. Thank god that greg uygur has raised his hand and agreed to do Public Service again. Thank you very much. Come on up here. Give him a round of applause. [ applause ] its very nice to see many of my old friends here in the audience. Particularly my friend from cairo who has done a lot of the things that have been done or might need to be done in afghanistan. Great to see all of you. Id like to say a few words about the south asia strategy then a few points. Three each