Bill Overview
Title: Ending Secrecy About Workplace Harassment Act
Description: This bill requires every employer that must submit to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) an Employer Information Report EEO-1 to separately report on an annual basis the number of settlements reached by the employer involving workplace harassment. The bill also requires the EEOC and the Government Accountability Office to report information relating to claims of discrimination.
Sponsors: Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-12]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals impacted by workplace harassment
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill targets employers who are required to submit Employer Information Report EEO-1, which generally includes employers with 100 or more employees and certain federal contractors.
- Workplace harassment is a significant global issue, affecting individuals across various industries and sectors.
- Harassment can happen to anyone in a workplace, but certain demographics, such as women and minorities, might be disproportionately affected.
- The bill indirectly affects employees who might be part of or witness to such settlements or harassment cases, as increased transparency might lead to a better work environment.
Reasoning
- The population targeted by the policy primarily includes employees at large firms (those with 100+ employees) as well as employees of federal contractors, as these companies submit the EEO-1 reports. There are about 50 million employees in such workplaces in the USA.
- Workplace harassment affects a wide range of industries. Therefore, the interviews simulate diverse perspectives, including those highly likely to be in impacted environments such as women, minorities, and individuals in roles with traditionally high harassment reports.
- The interviews also consider geographical diversity, urban versus rural settings, and varying socioeconomic backgrounds to provide a broad view of potential affected parties.
- Given the budget constraints, much of the funding may go toward the initial setup to gather and report data on workplace harassment settlements. The impact on personal wellbeing may be more noticeable from the increased sense of safety and transparency in these workplaces.
- The timeframe over which an increase in wellbeing might be noticeable differs; some may experience changes quickly, while others might feel them in the medium to long term as their working environment becomes more supportive.
- The policy's indirect impact could also change public perception, raising awareness about workplace harassment and potentially influencing future policies or corporate practices.
Simulated Interviews
Accountant (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy is long overdue. Transparency is key to accountability.
- If companies have to report settlements, they might take proactive measures to prevent harassment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Software Engineer (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could really help our team dynamics if handled well.
- I'm hoping this leads to more direct conversations about issues at work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Marketing Specialist (Dallas, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel isolated by the current lack of transparency.
- This policy might make it easier for others to come forward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
HR Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy adds more administrative work but will eventually lead to positive cultural changes.
- We need to be prepared for the consequences of increased reporting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retail Worker (Portland, OR)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might feel more comfortable speaking up if there is more accountability.
- Even part-timers deserve a harassment-free workplace.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Lawyer (Miami, FL)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is good progress and should extend beyond disclosures to corrective action requirements.
- Our firm might benefit by emphasizing our proactive approach to harassment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Film Producer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More transparency is positive, but we need cultural change too.
- The policy might encourage more training and preventive measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Industrial Worker (Rural Kansas)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm all for transparency, though I haven't been affected personally.
- As long as this doesn't add too much red tape, I'm okay with it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Grad Student / Teaching Assistant (Boston, MA)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopefully this leads to more transparent handling of harassment in academia.
- I'd like to see universities included as targets for this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
HR Consultant (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will drive better compliance efforts among my clients.
- I'm hopeful this will lead to fewer issues in the long term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of the bill in improving workplace conditions relies heavily on compliance from employers and enforcement by the EEOC.
- Additional costs to businesses for compliance could vary significantly depending on the size and nature of the workplace.
- Ongoing impacts on productivity and employee satisfaction should be monitored as qualitative measures of the bill's success.