On April 17, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety held a hearing on domestic violence in the workplace. The hearing examined employers’ efforts to support domestic violence victims, and pending legislation, the Security and Financial Empowerment (SAFE) Act (S. 1136). The bill would allow victims to take time off from work, without penalty, to appear in court, seek legal assistance, and get help with safety planning; make victims who need to leave their jobs eligible for unemployment insurance; prohibit employers from discriminating against domestic violence victims; and address elements of the welfare system that penalize victims who are fleeing from abusive situations.
Chair Patty Murray (D-WA), author of the SAFE Act, said, “I’m frustrated that we have not made as much progress addressing the economic factors that allow abuse to continue. As I discuss domestic violence today, I’m referring to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Its victims can be men or women. When domestic violence follows victims into the workplace, it reveals a key connection between safety and economic independence. For many victims of domestic violence, a steady paycheck is the only thing that keeps them from relying on an abuser. In fact, economic security and independence is the most accurate indicator of whether a victim will be able to stay away from an abuser.” Sen. Murray continued, “But too often, victims are entirely dependent on their abuser for food and shelter for themselves and their families. And, too often, abusers try to undermine a victim’s ability to work, harass their victims, in the workplace or worse. If we want to end domestic violence in the workplace or anywhere else we need to address the economic barriers that trap victims in abusive relationships.”
While supportive of efforts to support domestic violence victims in the workplace, Ranking Member Johnny Isakson (R-GA) cautioned against the unforeseen consequences of federal legislation to address domestic violence on the job. “Well-intentioned legislative proposals in this area can easily have negative, unintended consequences, including discouraging employers from hiring workers who they suspect may have domestic violence issues. Indeed, some previous legislative attempts in this area have been riddled with overly-broad, confusing, and vague terms, language that allows unlimited damages with jury trials, and opportunities for abuse and fraud,” Sen. Isakson said. He continued, “Together, government officials, employers and employees can work to address this very important issue. Employers can establish sound workplace policies that take all disclosures of abuse whether in or out of the workplace seriously. Employers can train management, supervisors, and all employees how to respond when a coworker is a victim or a perpetrator of domestic violence. Supervisors can work with domestic violence victims to develop a personal safety plan for them while they are at work.”
Kathy Rodgers, president of Legal Momentum, said, “States and some businesses are very actively trying to support services [for victims of] intimate partner violence who are trying to achieve or maintain financial independence. Well over half of the states now have at least some explicit employment-related protections for victims of domestic or sexual violence…But the existing state laws have created an uneven patchwork of protection, where a victim’s access to the economic security she needs to separate from an abuser depends on the state in which she happens to live. For the true potential of these statutes to be realized, federal legislation is needed to ensure all survivors of sexual and domestic violence at least basic economic protections.” In her testimony, Ms. Rodgers advocated for the legislative provisions of the SAFE Act, saying that “Congress should continue its commitment to supporting the workplace needs of victims of sexual and domestic violence by building on the successful experience of states and businesses that have made protecting the economic security of victims and the safety of businesses a priority.”
Laura Fortman, commissioner of the Maine Department of Labor, stated that although Maine “consistently rates as one of the safest places to live in the country,” the state “also has a serious problem with domestic violence.” Ms. Fortman said, “Domestic abuse homicides account for over half of all homicides in Maine…Numerous studies have shown that although domestic abuse may occur behind closed doors it does not stay there. When either the victim or the perpetrator walks out their front door, domestic abuse follows them into their neighborhood the workplace. And it impacts the employer and other employees.” Ms. Fortman explained efforts to support state employees who are victims of domestic abuse, saying, “Maine has focused efforts in the following areas: developing safety plans at work and an environment that encourages victims/survivors to ask for help; providing a safety net, unemployment insurance for victims who need to leave their jobs; and providing leave to victims/survivors to receive treatment, attend court or access other necessary services.” Ms. Fortman added that, although initially reticent to support the legislation, Maine employers and human resource professionals are now supportive of the measures.
“What happened to me is extreme, but as the events of recent weeks suggest, it is by no means isolated,” said Yvette Cade of Maryland, a domestic violence survivor who was set on fire while at work by her estranged husband. Ms. Cade continued, “In the last month, three women from different parts of the country, one with a state employer, one with a national hotel chain employer, and one with a local business, were murdered in their workplaces by abusive former partners.” She said, “I think employers have a significant role to play in helping victims of domestic and sexual violence obtain and maintain their independence from abusive partners…Employers stand to benefit greatly from supporting many of their employee victims…Not only are they productive, and good for the bottom line, employers avoid recruiting and retraining costs when they support the employees they already have.” Ms. Cade applauded the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (P.L. 109-162) and its provisions that help “employers learn how to support their employees, and provide them with model policies and other materials.”
Sue Willman, an employment attorney who testified on behalf of the Society of Human Resource Management and also is a domestic violence survivor, said, “In 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that domestic/intimate partner violence cost employers $727.8 million in lost productivity.” She added that many employers are “extremely compassionate about the challenges facing victims. I have also found them to be more than willing to provide reasonable assistance to victims (including reasonable time off from work), without a government mandate, as long as the assistance did not jeopardize the safety of the rest of the workplace.” Ms. Willman added, “In fact, a new federal mandate, as proposed in the SAFE Act, could prevent an employer from properly assessing and reacting to the unique situation they are facing. I encourage employers and my clients to adopt voluntary policies to address domestic violence in the workplace, as employers need flexibility when providing any particular measures or benefits when domestic violence becomes a workplace issue…Because of the many factors that must be considered when domestic violence enters the workplace, Congress would be remiss in mandating any measures unless adequate research examining the total picture has been done.”
