Speaker of the House Robert DeLeo responded in a statement Tuesday to comments by Sen. Diana DiZoglio where she accused the speaker of attempting to block a bill she put forward that would end the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAS) in sexual harassment cases on Beacon Hill.
DiZoglio signed an NDA when she was a legislative aide in 2011 before breaking it in 2018.
"Senator DiZoglio’s former supervisor in the House — a Republican Member of the House — unilaterally terminated Senator DiZoglio without the knowledge of the Speaker, House Human Resources, or House Counsel," DeLeo said. "After Senator DiZoglio was terminated by her supervisor, the House was contacted by a private attorney who represented Senator DiZoglio. The House and Senator DiZoglio’s attorney then negotiated a mutually acceptable termination and severance agreement that provided Senator DiZoglio with six weeks of severance."
DeLeo added that House policy is that all terminated employees automatically get two weeks of severance payments upon termination.
"Over the past three years, the House took decisive action and immediately ordered an in-depth review of the House’s human resources function," the statement continued. "As a result of that study, the House adopted a set of comprehensive human resources reforms including the creation of a new, independent, Equal Employment Opportunity Officer (EEO) to ensure a professional working environment for all employees and visitors to the House."
DeLeo's comments came after an interview on with Greater Boston host Jim Braude aired Monday with DiZoglio and former FoxNews host Gretchen Carlson — who helped spark the #MeToo movement with allegations against then FoxNews CEO Roger Ailes in 2016. His statement, which follows in full below, does not specifically address the pending legislation.
More Politics
"The speaker wants to continue to be able to abuse these agreements in his chamber with his employees," DiZoglio said Jan. 27. "And the governor [Charlie Baker] has continued to be silent as well."
WGBH News reached out to DiZoglio for comment on DeLeo's statement but has not yet heard back.
Carlson signed an NDA in an out of court settlement in 2016 and said that she would have thought twice about it if she foresaw effects of her actions.
“Had I known I would have ignited a cultural revolution, I would have thought long and hard about not signing that NDA," she said. "I had no idea we would be at this place in time right now, and made so much progress."
In his response, DeLeo said that of 155 employees who were terminated by the House since 2010, 33 were asked to sign an NDA in exchange for severance packages and insisted that none of those agreements signed by the House prior to 2018 involved claims of sexual harassment, including DiZoglio's.
He added that House rules now only permit NDA's involving sexual harassment if: initiated by the claimant, the filer is given 15 days to review the agreement, any agreement is for a finite period agreed to by both parties, that no agreement prevent participation in investigations, and that there is approval from the EEO.
Gov. Charlie Baker said in comments to reporters Monday that his office's policy is to support the use of NDAs only if the claimant wants one.
When asked whether he supported the senator's bill, Baker said that he wanted victim's to have the ability to file for such an agreement. When a reporter clarified that DiZoglio's bill allowed for such measures, the governor waffled.
"I was under the impression that it didn't," he said after a pause. "But more importantly. ... I think from our point of view that is the key element of this. That's part of the reason why we put together a [Investigations] Center for Expertise so people would have a place to go" should they have complaints.
The state Senate prohibited non-disclosure agreements in February 2019.
Reporter Mike Deehan contributed to this report.
Read Speaker DeLeo's full statement:
Senator DiZoglio’s former supervisor in the House – a Republican Member of the House – unilaterally terminated Senator DiZoglio without the knowledge of the Speaker, House Human Resources, or House Counsel.
After Senator DiZoglio was terminated by her supervisor, the House was contacted by a private attorney who represented Senator DiZoglio. The House and Senator DiZoglio’s attorney then negotiated a mutually acceptable termination and severance agreement that provided Senator DiZoglio with six weeks of severance. It is the policy of the House to provide all terminated employees with two weeks of severance, so Senator DiZoglio received an additional four weeks of severance.
At no time did any House member or employee, involved in the negotiations, communicate directly with Senator DiZoglio about said negotiations. All communications were with her private attorney. As such, any pressure Senator DiZoglio felt to sign the termination and severance agreement did not—and could not have—come from any House member or employee involved in the negotiations.
It is also important to point out that at no time, either during her employment with the House or after her termination from the House, did Senator DiZoglio or her private attorney ever allege that she had been a victim of sexual harassment until March of 2018 when Sen. DiZoglio made her experience public.
Over the past three years, the House took decisive action and immediately ordered an in-depth review of the House’s human resources function. As a result of that study, the House adopted a set of comprehensive human resources reforms including the creation of a new, independent, Equal Employment Opportunity Officer (EEO) to ensure a professional working environment for all employees and visitors to the House.
House rules also now include a process for the executing any legal agreements by the House including a stringent process for executing “any agreement to settle any legal claim or potential legal claim of sexual harassment, or retaliation based on a legal claim or potential legal claim of sexual harassment, by any current or former member, officer or employee.” See House Rule 100. House Rule 100 states that “[n]o member, officer or employee shall execute any agreement to settle a legal claim or potential legal claim of sexual harassment, or retaliation based on a legal claim or potential legal claim of sexual harassment, by any current or former member, officer or employee unless:
- the request to negotiate said agreement was initiated, in writing, by the person filing or eligible to file the legal claim or potential legal claim or a person legally authorized to represent that person;
- the person filing the legal claim or eligible to file the legal claim is given 15 days to review and consider the agreement;
- the duration of any non-disclosure or non-disparagement provision of the agreement to settle the legal claim or potential legal claim is for a finite period of time as agreed to by the parties;
- the agreement to settle the legal claim or potential legal claim specifically provides that no provision of the agreement, including any non-disclosure or non-disparagement provision of the agreement, shall preclude any party from participating in an investigation by Counsel, the Director, the EEO Officer, a Committee on Professional Conduct or any law enforcement agency; and
- the agreement is approved in writing by Counsel, the Director and the EEO Officer.
The restrictions on the use of agreements to settle a legal claim or potential legal claim of sexual harassment, or retaliation are based on best practices informed by experts in the field including the National Association to End Sexual Violence (NAESV), Pathways to Change and the Boston Rape Crisis Center.
As for agreements executed by the House prior to the rules reform in 2018, none were to settle complaints of sexual harassment, but rather a formalized process for providing terminated employees with a modest severance benefit.
Currently, the House employs approximately 480 people (not including members). Since January 1, 2010 through today, more than 1,040 employees have concluded their employment with the House of Representatives. Of those, approximately 155 had their employment terminated by the House (or separated from employment in some way other than a voluntary resignation). Of those 155 employees, approximately 33 individuals (3 percent of all those concluding their employment with the House during this period) were offered a small severance payment in exchange for executing a written agreement containing a nondisclosure agreement. Of these 33 agreements, 15 agreements were executed with employees who were laid off as part of a reduction in force in December 2009. These agreements were included because, while the layoffs took effect in 2009, the severance for the affected employees continued until early January. The House has not executed an agreement with any current or former employee that contains a non-disclosure agreement since the adoption of House Rule 100.
