Good evening, everybody. Thanks for coming this Today is OCTOBER. 28 06:00pm in the city County building. This is a meeting of the rules committee. We're first going to start off by introductions. Start in the far left with counselor Delaney. Good evening, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'm Brianda leaning from District 2. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Jessica McCormack District 16. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'm a guest this evening. My name is Michael Paul Hart representing District 20. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Mike do district 24. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Josh Spain district 21. Thank you. MISTER Chair Brian Mowery District. 25. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Ali Brown District 10. Good evening CHAIRMAN. You
know, district, 14 east side. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, Good, even all DR. Carlos Perkins District 6. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Leroy Robinson District Good evening, Maggie List district 5. Good evening about those Sully district wealth. Thank you, everybody. And I'm Vice Chair Butte's lab, the honor of chairing the meeting this evening. Tonight we have a combination of the working group, members of our council. In addition to the rules Committee. So I like to call this meeting to order and thank you all for being here tonight. As we hear about the steps, the city county has taken to update its harassment policies and procedures consider any appropriate legislative action. I particularly want to thank the working group that consists of
council Delaney, counselor Nielsen counsel Nicole make counselor Harden counselor Bain and also a great things to council Pearson, Greg's towers for all the effort they put in heretofore leading up to this meeting. So this is important sensitive topic and we appreciate your engagement as we work toward a safer, more accountable workplace for all city County employees. As we know our most important asset for the city is its people, its not our dump trucks. It's not our snow plows. It's our people. So before we begin, I want to clearly outline the purpose and structure of tonight's meeting. This meeting is focused solely on reviewing steps already taking and discussing future policy changes. We are here to evaluate options here. Public
input. The consider improvements moving forward. With all due respect, this is not the appropriate venue to raise individual complaints past incidents or personnel matters. We understand that some MAY have strong feelings on these issues or have personal troubling experiences. But this meeting is not designed to adjudicate a revisit specific cases. To ensure respect orderly process. All public comments should be directed to me as the chair and not to any individual staff members, committee members or presenters. Representatives from the city's human resources are here to present steps already taken and future options in to answer general procedural questions posed by our counselors. They will not
be responding to any questions or comments about specific incidents, investigations or personnel decisions. It would be inappropriate for them to do so in a public forum, such as tonight's meeting. Excuse me, we asked that everyone maintain a respectful tone, stay focused on constructive feedback about tonight's presentations. If you have concerns about individual matters, please use appropriate internal channels outside of this meeting to raise those individual concerns. Again, please note this meeting is intended to intended to foster constructive discussion in public their problem solving. It is not a forum for public criticism or blame to ensure respectful and focused environment. Only counselors will be asking questions
during the session. Additionally that conversation will not center on specific cases individuals as previously mentioned. Well, Lester, examples MAY be used to highlight systemic challenges are potential solutions. The discussion will remain policy focused and forward looking. On more personal note, we realize this topic in an emotionally-charged one. And we sympathize with what many of you in this room this evening or elsewhere MAY have experienced. We sincerely apologize for what you've been through. We want to ensure that nothing like what has happened in the past ever
happens again in the future. Once again, we thank you for your participation and commitment in improving our city's workplace culture. With that, we'll begin with the discussion of the current hr recommendations that hour working group have compiled. And if the clerk would turn to the next slide. There are 7 listed. And I'm sorry they MAY not have major paper. Group that got distributed. But these are the ones. Temporary appointment of an ad-hoc inspector general. Creation of an independent human resources board. Consideration of an independent office of equal opportunity. Promoting awareness and access to reporting tools. Audits of hr investigations. Creating a universal harassment, free work environment. Yearly
aggregate reporting of harassment statistics. Those are the 7 that we are studying tonight and going forward in any others that are worthy that come to our attention. Having said that will now invite council beeler forward. To give us summary of current policies and what has happened the last several months from the a churn occ perspective. Feel free to sit up front or even up front. If you'd like. We could throw stuff at you closer. If you're sitting okay, let be in charge of the slides as you move forward and the floor is yours. Great. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN and members of the committee. My name is Brandon Buehler. I serve as the corporation counsel for the city of Indianapolis. And I thank you
for having the year here tonight to give you an update on on the actions, the city county enterprise has taken the last 15 months. The first category of a highlight to focus on are the trainings. I first want to note that harassment training was made mandatory in the city code back in 2019 and then in AUGUST of 2024, the mayor signed an executive order has to be clear the mandatory training that was passed and is still an ordinance is for supervisors only and is something that's required to do every 2 years back last year in AUGUST of 2024, the mayor signed an executive order that requires mandatory harassment training for all employees every year. The strain is sent to employees employees via this offer less and we employees are notified multiple times but e-mails that the training is available to him to complete with the
deadlines and something I want to highlight this committee is that because we have employees the enterprise that you not have email or computers, human resources is coordinated to make sure that those trains are available to workers who don't have those resources just last year, the human resources Department conducted 10 in-person trainings to cover make sure every employee was trained as well as hr plans to continue that again this year with all of our city County employees. And this year on SEPTEMBER 9th, the harassment training for supervisors and non supervisors want out. And the due date to complete that for all employees is NOVEMBER. 30th. Supervisors also receive a weekly report from human resources so they keep track of their employees to make sure that the training is
done. Timely. Thank you. The next category will talk about is the anonymous reporting system. So last AUGUST, we begin demonstrations of 6 different third-party anonymous reporting system vendors for the city county enterprise to consider this is a coordinated effort between h r if and risk management. The office of 100 and performance. I sa and the City County Council but personally thanked accounts. There's currently no McCormick Wilson who are engaged in this process with us. The vendors were scored based on 6 different categories and aggregated average to get a quantitative ranking speak fully was selected and work began right away on implementation. While the we're continue to get speak fully set up. I say launched an anonymous reporting tool that we use temporarily within the system
within the city county to allows employees to have that option to anonymously report until we get speak. We under contract and get the infrastructure so it can function properly. We're proud to officially launch. We are proud to officially launch speak, believe the beginning of this year. I do apologize for your handouts. That's a 2024 and should say JANUARY 2025. His credit on the slide. No, it's not. So that was actually the of this year. Since then, the many ways to access be fully has been featured in hr newsletters and fires have been distributed to all offices and a link to the system is also available on the city. Counties can turn at. And now to some of the employee resources. We have that have been around. But we also made some enhancements to a few of them. So employees here in city county do have access to mental health
support and resources through several different channels. The employee assistance program will be called the eap provides free counseling as well as guidance for legal financial work-life balance needs for all employees and their families. It offers 24 7 confidential support, accessible in person by phone video chat. Behavioral health services are also available through marathon, which is the city county's health provider. This free resource offers coach Gene therapy treatment for stress, anxiety, grief, depression, and more. The service is available for all employees and covered dependents, 12 and older are accessible through it. In person, phone or video, visit options. This past year we expanded marathon service and now we allowed employees can make up appointment with a therapist without first requiring a referral from
their provider. And in this last year, we continue to expand available resources for the city County employees, which includes adoption of the new anonymous reporting system that previously discussed as well as a new hand out for employees that provides detailed information on what to expect from the reporting investigation process. Should they have a workplace related concern or complaint? The 3 pieces of information on this handout for employees. First of all, provides the list employee resource is there that employees are aware? Second describes investigative process. So there's less surprising less questions or confusion about how each our investigates complaints. And finally, includes what employees appeal rights are. I'm next unattended to our
internal working groups. So in early AUGUST of last year, planning groups convened a cabinet members, members of h r occ to start working to address the company. Culture concerns. This group to help procure speak fully created the harassment and company culture, working groups and to pick a vendor for the Cultural Assessment survey. This planning group continues to meet on a regular basis to move initiatives forward. The advisory group consists of a subset of cabinet members and county officials who provided strategic advising and will provide final approval recommendations. This group has met 8 times this year. I want to thank all the staff taken time out of their busy schedules to participate in this internal working groups to ensure that employee voices are heard. The talk these 2 subset groups that I
previously mentioned. The first one is the harassment policy working group. This group is led by our chief diversity officer been Tapper and this group is mad about half a dozen times. This group spearheaded the updating of the city county enterprises, harassment policy, which included adding definitions. More details on the reporting procedures and ensuring that the updated policy reflects best practices. This group spearheaded r this fall an updated version of the harassment policy was approved by the intern by this internal advisory group. And that policy is now being incorporated into the city County Agers manual and required acknowledgment for. Context of that. Any time a major update happens to the employee, the Human Resources Manual acknowledgement form is required to be signed by all city county employees to show
that they are aware of the new policy, understand the new policy. And this update. We anticipate an intend to have done by the end of the year. The next working group we have is the company culture working group. So this working group is led by the director of office and director of the Office didn't perform at West Jones as well as the chief diversity officer been Tapper. This group is a total of 8 times this year and plans to meet next year. So far the group has reviewed and edited the Cultural Assessment survey and develop the rollout process aimed at ensuring aimed at ensuring that employees had by an engagement leading into the AUGUST 11 survey opening the bulk of this group's work will begin. Once we receive results from the Cultural Assessment survey. You can. Thank you. Now let's talk a little bit about the employee survey MAY
have heard this one out and to give you some information about this is that in spring this year that the playing group selected tell us to assist us in the development execution analysis of the Cultural Assessment survey tell selected due to their vast experience working with government entities. The company culture Working Group. An advisory group helped draft to approve the survey questions. To ensure trust and participation in the anonymous survey, a webinar was conducted and recorded by Rick. Tell us to answer questions for any interested employees. Supervisors were also asked to encourage their employees to participate. The survey was open for 3 weeks to ensure plenty of time for participation. We received about a 30 per 3% participation rate from
eligible employees. Once the survey closed rep tell us came in car came in person to perform 9 focus groups to collect more data and to green deeper insights. We're still waiting on the final results and recommendations which we hope to receive by the end of the year. And we are committed to working with the company Culture Working Group, advisory group to review and implement pilot programs to continue to improve our city county and U.S. And that will conclude the updates. I think you all for your work on this important effort and we are committed to continuing to work alongside you. Thank you for your time tonight. Thank you. Counsel Any questions from any member of group yes MADAM Leader. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, thank you so much for your presentation. Just a little clarification. So on
the harassment policy working group, it's led by the chief diversity officer been taper food. This to put to. So Ben Tapper is cabinet level official. So same of course, directly the mayor, the mayor, the chief of staff of the mayor, steps and okay. Just want to make sure that there's like a direct. Line to Any issues that makes his way up to that, the 25th floor? Yes. So he so you believe these reporting records, Parker to chief of staff. Okay. Any additional questions? Just council Nielsen. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Council Beeler for update. Could you if someone my son, could you kind of walk through? This is a technical question on the speak. Fully peace, that it is an anonymous reporting tool. And so how are? How How are complaints or allegations handled and then disaggregated so that it
preserves. Confidentiality. But also, you know, like could you MAY walk through how that is handled, if you can on on point where to submit submit a ticket. Sure. Guess obviously is very case-by-case. And what what how much information and employee provides initially and all that. So let's take it through. Employer wants to remain anonymous but but report bad workplace behavior that they've really rises to a level that violent city county policy. So that complete is gone. It goes in It's monitored by the professionals and human resources. The few people who do investigations I've seen just there's and demonstrations how the interface works or not overly familiar with it because as attorneys we don't get involved at that, that's a Tory state. Typically. If a person was raining on then it's kind of like a chat. It's almost as if so the the there standard operating procedures for hr and they're continuing
to affect those. But they can ask questions and ok, can you tell us what department here in can you tell us any more information or we try to be specific or they try to be specific as possible and what information can help them get started. An investigation which isn't always to be someone's name. So they true. They have, you know, different things in their arsenal of tools. They can start trying to get more information from the employee that remains open and implications and thinking about it. Don't close my ticket yet when and so essentially it's a sort of a private interface that the employee can access from personal devices from their home devices. There were
computers as well. So it essentially goes to the point where it was enough information that it's does rise to what a complaint is meeting, that it's a violation of says someone violated city county policy in the workplace and workplace procedures and policies. Then it'll start to invest story process as best they can with the need to pull. Data documents, information where they need to start interviewing other ones would be like concerns were. Those are words questions. And that's another city. Flea can be used for that. If you just have a general question, don't want to identify yourself about a question. Our policies. You can do that this week. Leigh as well. Ultimately, it's still it's the avenue for hr to get as much information as they protecting that employees right to remain anonymous to investigate. And if bad behaviors found to stop that.
Sure continue. Thank you, CHAIRMAN. So then was a as as submitted. His case is submitted is being investigated. I know one of the as as you know, from following this, something that was brought up during the investigative committee process. And I wasn't the only one. Was what happens at the point with some things that brought up about elected official, either county executive member of this body. How has How does Gore will speak fully process inform that decision or in format process going forward. Hey, to get that really answer that depends that it really does depend on just kind of the nature of what is known. It's hard put that. I mean, I say that. If that's the case, I think it's something that it
would be treated the same as ever. The complaint, we want information. We want to know if there's bad if there's bad behavior happening, we try to ensure that employee and reassured him her them that. They're they're they have a right. They have a protected right to complain about that behavior. But it isn't anything trigger. The sense the standard operating procedures and investigating a complaint about behavior, whether it's elected official or not, it's still investigated as independently as they can be. Thank you. Councilor Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, thank you, MR. Miller for the presentation being here tonight. I think anything that the city does to try to rebuild trust and create a better working environment is a step in the right direction. That being said about these working groups, the harassment policy
working group that and company culture working group. I see there being led by director Tapper and record Jones. Outside of their current city government role. Qualified them to leave that working group? I can't speak both very qualified individuals generally speaking, but I think I know it it was a goal of at least administration forming these to get a diversity of opinion, a diversity of not only background that of where we all we all work in different departments. We all have different needs. We have, you know, different subcultures in our department's. I think. To conjecture, conjecture a bit was that these folks could help identify members of that group or should the PRESIDENT Have different voices and help us come together to have comprehensive policy that
would benefit all departments? So is there outside h r Consulting going on throughout processing. You know, when the council decided to look into this whole situation that we without hr professionals while that process ultimately have some falls, I believe the intent was there, too. Make sure you're talking to the appropriate individuals and working with hr experts. Do know for those 2 policy working groups are doing and you better. They working with hr experts because I don't exactly know the full employment history and qualifications of director Tapper and Jones. I don't. Recall off the top of my head seeing that as a part of that work history. I think for that, I think that that the interest were different there. I think one was to look into a specific situation or situations that occurred. This one I think was focused on. Let's hear employees Lake. And
so I think they reflecting more is having a better tap on the diversity of work workers we have within the enterprise and to hear from employees what they felt was lacking where they felt unsupported, where they felt there were gaps in the system and that and they think so. The goals are just different. Know, no outsized human resource experts at this have been identified for this work at this point. All right. I've got a couple questions to a threat to the rest of the counselors sprinkle my mind in as we go. Is there currently any annual? Reporting, an aggregate basis of the statistics from the hr department as complaints filed. The nature of those filings from complaints and the disposition of those
cases. I don't know. Report has been compiled for even internal publication. The fire in my preparations this is rough. Know this is not official, but I believe when I was looking in to this day. So since speak fully went live. We've roughly had about 123 submissions. And I know we talked about complaints and concerns of the difference between them. They're about half and half so half Bean concerns. Many questions about what the policy is the other half being roughly about what complaints are of those of those 1, 223, only 4 were complaints of harassment. And after investigation, only one resulted in a finding that city county policy harassment
policy was in fact violated I do. Context and for full transparency, disclosure. Their 5 county offices that have their own hr department. So if they can't, then so part of the one 23 is coming in. So it's a the Marion County courts that it would be a pro police shipped off to them to also use on a system that they were not the city county charter handle those. But that's kind of a rough numbers. Okay. Well, as the disposition of the one case where harassment was found, I do not know. Truly do not know. You can credit report back. Another quick question during the process or the complainants routinely updated on the stage or the phase of the investigation. I believes I know that they've been working with the soapy is on
trying to keep keep keep the the complaint and a prize. It's moving and I know it's difficult. I think that some concern we certainly have heard. So I know that that that is happening and should that happen more? We're and try to work towards that. So people know and those who have made complaints. Are aware that it's still the investments. And I was just a matter. Time is a document. Is tense of thing? You can take time to go through emails. Also scheduled interviews and things. But it is important for us to let them play. No, that they are and we are investigating actively in. We do try to always make sure that employees feel safe if we need to move workplaces, do something that of that nature we are willing and we do actively do that within our investigations as well. Okay. Thank Council Brown. Thank
you, CHAIRMAN I want kind of jump back to what counts are being was talking about earlier and answer to a question when we talk about the we've lost trust, people have lost trust in what's going on. Frankly, lost my trust. Some of the stuff. And so the idea of just going straight to the 25th floor and reporting it makes me uneasy, right? Because things are reported to the 25th floor before and we're here. So is there a way that we because when things get center counselors, they become public record, right? So we have to be careful to protect people. But is there a way we can get an itemized report directors, Tapper and Jones about the what is happening in these harassment group rescued policy working group in the Cultural working group. So that we can be responsive to
the people who are coming to us to saying what the heck is going on. You know, any of that kind of stuff. I know I want to protect people and they're what they're saying and make sure they're protected in their workplace. When stuff comes to us. But I would feel much more comfortable exposing making sure everyone's exposed to what has a chance to know what's going on because no one. The trust just isn't there. I appreciate that. I and to the extent we can do that, I'll certainly take that internal happy to work with you on on getting some of the search is develop its breed bill, that you counselor. Thank you, MR. Kind of people backing off of people around there. I agree. I think. There should be a better way than to go straight to the 25th floor with this. Because what we've seen in this investigation is that there's been a lot of
trust Lawson. Having all these issues roll right up to the person that caused all this doesn't seem like it's going to be beneficial to the people. To me, it would people wouldn't be is trust. We're trusting of this process because they know where it's going to end up in. If there's a way for us to figure that out, I'm not sure who that would roll up to. I think, you know, you could probably work on something like that where figure out a way to try to take 24 out of it. What we've seen is. Things were handled I are handled legally, not necessarily ethically. And I think that's going to create create a lot of has a to has a station people's mind to really want to go come forward and say something we've seen what's happened so far. So. I would hope we can find a way to get that done. So thank you. The counselor. Yes,
council council apart. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN it, I guess what? Keep that conversation going. And thought alive, you know, comes to mind for me is that there was a lot of a lot of working groups. We mentioned, right. We mentioned. Policy advisory company culture. And there's a documentation here that there was an additional. 9 focus groups conducted to collect more data and more information, including deeper insights during that time were alternative reporting methodologies consider brought up denied for any particular reason that they wouldn't be feasible that ultimately led to the decision to take it to the 25th floor. So quickly to separate out the 9 working groups. Those were put together by rep tell us the company that did the survey
to. Greene because they after I I don't know what they did. I'm not a statistician. Are I do have I think they got information and what a difference. A different one. Additional information and found different groups to that was not necessary related to the working groups. As far as policy goes, that was to get more information as they prepared the survey results from the Cup. The company survey on the other groups, the advisory groups and the harassment at the company Culture Group don't exactly know how their I again, my understanding it was all to be inclusive of pick, folks that maybe we're a bit disconnected or just the least who knew the enterprise the employees better. But I think these points well taken. Okay. I'm sure have my my thought being is that, you know, we've gone through as as part of our working group. We went through
a lot of ideas from a lot of different folks and we were able to that some of those through various legal counsels and we have explanations of why particular things. You know, we're going to work. And so. As we continue to look forward to policy recommendations from our side, I just think it would be helpful to see what y'all considered and any particular reason that it wasn't considered in your your policy recommendations. Council beeler, if I MAY ask, is the current means of appealing in hr decision that the complainant disagrees with. The it it's a pretty standard. Is that after the end of the investigatory process. If the complainant disagrees with the result, which in case would be that either a violation of
policy did not occur or a violation occurred. But the discipline isn't severe enough. They disagree that the discipline wasn't severe enough they can go is that at this point ceo see an independent investigatory agency, a workplace of workplace conduct or the Indiana Civil Rights Commission. The icrc does that do similar work in both avenues and that's what we put on our information sheet. So employees are aware that's a possibility because we did here then please do not know that was an option to them at the end of the process. Council Perkins. Thank you, MR. I want to just bring some clarity around a couple of things that we're throwing I think we're confused and a bit. The difference between the working groups. The
Culture Assessment survey. The deeper questions to the focus group. And you're anonymous reporting systems. So I think we asking questions that seem to be conflating those things together. My understanding is your working groups works established internally to further look at policies and practices. The survey focus group came on board as a result off the culture survey and wanted to know more and asking people questions. Those things are separate from your anonymous reporting structure that's in place, correct? That is correct. I will just clarify that the cultural, the cultural. Working that the company culture working Group charged with doing the survey resulted in so they were part because that is the group that
went together into it. Employee feedback, not just from members of the group employs in their department. The questions that would be relevant to really getting answers on company culture. Thank So my question then becomes for your arrest. Mont policy working group so that in fall of 2024, 5 that the policy was approved by the advisory group. The final policy or whatever the policy looks like. Can you share that with us? Is that anywhere in terms of what was recommended by the working group? Yes, I do believe we did have a brief and was shared with some council vote to install the counselors, but it can go. Yes, we can share that with Yes, Council, thank you. This counselor Delaney. Thank you, MR. Chair we Hadar 7 recommendations that we presented end part of the recommendations included
appointment of a temporary ad hoc inspector general and our creation of an independent human resources board. Both of as part of their formulation. Talk about truly be independent of the current reporting systems that are there. And I know we had a couple questions about. Well, what happens when you're reporting to the number one person or an elected official? How do we make sure that those complaints are also remain fairly adjudicated? And I think that some of the concerns that I heard from over here and I think these recommendations that we're putting forward that came from pressure, Phillips. That was that the truly independent part was it has had to address that. But part of going through all this, there MAY be some problems with having things truly independent
because of the public records portion and things that if you have a truly independent board, you know, the things that the board has would have to become public. So I was hoping that maybe you could talk a little bit about that is our recommendations seemed to be a little In contradiction to what MAY be possible and was hoping you could talk about that as to why we can't. Maybe we can say we need something truly independent. But if you could talk a little bit about that. Thank all so clear. Yet that as do, at least from our perspective. He's tried to evaluate all recommendations from the counsel for Fisher Phillips from others who worked here. Still work here. Don't work here. I think. There lies the problem. We've I've looked at several different inspector general models. It's hard to see what would work for the city at this point. That doesn't mean the doors closed on any of
those ideas. But it really is the independents. I think that would be the fundamental hard part of disclosing because the heart of where everyone's in just a liar that witnesses survivors complains have the right not to be identified. Should they not want to be identified and to turn something to to another board would make investigatory material public record. So it seemed to not strike that balance. And we haven't figure out a way at this to do that. I think independent oversight has certainly been. The idea in our head. I think it's just challenging to get there with frankly, the limitations of in government. Thank you. And I do have one additional question, but I can wait combat ground. Sure. We'll have plenty of opportunities go around. Counselor. Perkins. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN just wanted to close the loop on what I was asking before there was some question about the qualification of individuals
that are run and the working group. And I think that those individuals have stepped up to do the difficult work in the midst of all that we were doing. So we want highlight and applaud them by nature of the work that they do for the enterprise allows. And that gives him the credibility and the credentials to be able to run the working group. The question that I want to ask, though, is I wonder if what we can learn from the climate survey. And the deeper questions that might help us. And then former decision around move into an independent human resource board. This is my challenge. If the discovery is the current climate and culture that exists. Is brought on by this administration. That will change after the next
election. Then do we make a decision now? That is a decision for the future. In fact, in the Enterprise. If the issue is is a culture and climate that exists now that needs to change. I believe it is. There's a culture. The climate that exists now that needs to change. Is the decision. Future decision for us to have an independent board or this something that needs to be done now with the current. Administration and the climate that exists. And I think we can learn some of that from the climate culture here from current employees and knowing what we know now. council Brown. Just speaking back in a little bit off of what council
Delaney said. Everyone just keeps giving thoughts. And it just brings me back to this because hr is created to protect the enterprise, right? That's what it's for. We have union employees have grieved hers. If we don't have ig or anything like that, is there a way we can create an office that is effectively agree Ver for our city employees because who is going to advocate for them when hr is? To protect the enterprise. That's what it does. Right? It's not to protect the employees. It's to protect Enterprise. In a way it protects employees by protecting the enterprise. But no one is there the hand of somebody who's now going against the deputy mayor of the city of Indianapolis, when the deputy mayor of the city of Minneapolis is a big part of price right? 2 requests. So how do we get? How do we get grieve or or something? And I
g something that is actually there for the victims for the employee, whether they're employee anymore or not. If your union, you have that. But we have quite a deal of non-union employees that don't have that kind of protection. And this MAY be a question to for the Society Human Resources. Side of human resources management. That's coming up later. But that's something that's really important because no one's there to advocate. And as someone who's been a victim of assault, it's taken me. 20 are speaking of advocate for myself on this. So I want to make sure that people feel protected and have that support. And if that support is somebody who's appointed and then it comes I mean,
where's that protection? Did you have any comment on that council beeler over? No. I mean, point is taking. I from from my perch. I do think hr serves both roles and are staying here. I think in my view that more MAY be a perception issue because I kind of a ccs is to protect the enterprise from, you know, legal challenges a chart doesn't believe take their role seriously. And providing employee support, making sure employees who complained feel safe or feel that. They can complain freely without consequence and that their complaints will be taken seriously and believed. So I think that. I I hear that I think continue to remind us as we think through different whether its policies or changes of ordinance or what it is. I think that's very
important point. Question for me. Council beeler. When was the last time the employee manual was substantially revised? I believe. And I'm going from what litigated. I believe it was. 22 is the last of Stan Shull. Was 22 or 21 that stamp on the front of it. That 22. So do you foresee all these recommendations that are coming from these, you know, the culture group and the harassment policy group. Are these just going to be tweaks and additions or deletions to the current policy as you move forward? As far as the workplace harassment policy. That's what a pretty big overhaul. That's that's again, that is definitions. Be more clear in the manual itself about all of the procedures that hr will go through. So that employees understand with the investigatory process, looks like because I think that we MAY kind of thing many of the council discuss that a lot of employees of a play
that they have no idea what's going on. They have no idea if their complaints will be heard. So I think to put that out there and to be as transparent upfront as possible, what investigation looks like, but they're still going work to do But I think as far as updating the manual, this is the this is a big upgrade compared to I don't know how what it's done in the past. Any final question is yes. Counselor Delaney, thank you, MR. Chair. Our recommendation. Number 3. Well, consideration but not recommendation. But I want to talk about the independent office of Equal Opportunity. From my understanding would allow complains from individuals outside of key enterprises. That correct? That's correct. Okay. And so that one of the initial complaint that site here before us did never worked for
the city County enterprise. And I wanted to just talk a little bit about are there things that we can do that would allow because we're such a big organization. We have. We interact with campaigns and unions and vendors and all sorts of folks. Citizens that come into the city. And so it's. I think that this could be a good avenue if we promote it effectively. In the Fisher Phillips report talks about it being, I guess sort of like under promoted. And I want I just wanted to give you the opportunity to talk about how that office could be used more effectively. Thank you, counselor. This process, learned a lot about the history that office so well that is house currently and occ. It is sort of like local
ios e so. Often times. And I think they for the most part, it's a it is employee or former employee or something, frankly, to meet the goals and the ideas of independence. Since it does the same work as the e e o c or the icrc we will for Oz free. It doesn't cost money for them to do that or anything. But in the interest of having that end of it best, a, should we say, well, maybe we shouldn't investigate this. Some of the history back forward. I think was like in its prime, as I understand from again, history of the city in that office is there was a time not enough. Our recent past where gender identity and orientation or not recognized by state or local laws. Protections. The city of Minneapolis did so we would take those in because we did. Authorities say you cannot discriminate on those bases. And so I think that's what we do is really at its
height. But I think we get into problems with kind of that independence that we're all trying to strike a balance between protecting our employees have means, you know, some systems internally, but also being independents. That's kind of where. My analysis looking at, where are can be beneficial has been challenging. The additional questions. Seeing none counsel Mueller. Thank you so much, MISTER CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Counselors in for purposes of the public. If anybody wishes to speak later after our 3rd presentation, please come forward and sign up on the sign-up sheet. Now we're going next. Hear a presentation from. Emma Davidson. Trips. Co-founder and director of the National Women's Defense League. She is going to speak with us from Upper State, New York. And we're going to pull
her up here on the screen. Shortly. Yes. We can hear you. Yes, Leslie, you MAY have sound from your spot so she can hear you. Okay. Order. In a and will all come Thank you so much. I asked this question earlier and you MAY have some recommendations in this space because you talked about advocacy for employees. Our county, union employees have greeters. They have somebody that can advocate for them even against the union in that space weather seen, you know, the enterprise. Generally hr protects the enterprise. How
could we create agree Ver style position protection? How can you ensure that confidence back into our employees that they have the advocate for them that his number one responsibility is that not the enterprise. Around. Is that all right. Yeah. Tesla Dart. Thank you, MR. Chair and thank you for the presentation and where I want to. Continue. This conversation is, you know, the concept in the working group independent board came up frequently. We talked about it a multiple occasions and kept coming back to win. It sound like even counselor Buehler was even coming back to is that as soon as these documents leave hr, they become public record. And I'm curious from a prisoner recommendations on. How we can where if there's other examples in the past where you MAY have worked with where? We're able to keep those records private and still have
a 3rd party. Thank you. The additional questions Council McCormick. Thank you, MR. Chair thank you as tips for that presentation. I kind of want to ask about butts. Versus like this centralized intake system that you talk about. With the ombudsman is that someone who is at is when we say farmed, our third-party were just talking about h r versus another entity within the city, correct? We're not talking about an independent law firm or another company doing something. Is that correct? And so and so we're looking at this isn't right that an external outside of the party, somebody this is just someone who is independent of the the
mayor, the executive level. Any additional questions. I have misses Trib's. We talk about not making reporting mandatory. Not having a time limit on it and not to forced to complain it to do something. They're not comfortable doing. I'm sure you can appreciate that. That might have some legal ramifications for the city as an employer. Particularly if a supervisor knows of such a situation and does not raise it because the complainant. Fields or choose not to raise it. That could expose the city to possible legal jeopardy. So how do you use suggests are or what are ways to handle that,
particularly if the this is something that the report comes up, 3, 5, 10 years later when that person MAY not even long any longer be an employee of the enterprise, there's a lot of legal issues there that I think difficult to navigate. Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions councilor Nielsen? Thank you, CHAIRMAN Thank you. Mistress for all year work. Support of our efforts here. Not just tonight, but in the past is why we really appreciate it. As we talked about this process, it was kind of brought up a little bit. We're hearing from counselor at Beale Air, as we look to explore what the appeals process looks like. What? Do you have any good examples in our you know, we continue to review best practices and what's working well, what's not working? Well and other municipalities, do you have
any examples or example, cities or government entities that have done this? Well? Sure, MISTER Nelson. Yeah. Just following up. Thank you for that. So is it your recommendation that? That any at any point, right, that a complaint or accusation would could go through the appeals process. Right. And I think sometimes whereas were grappling with, you know, building out the policy and the procedures for a robust anonymous reporting system. Right? There's obviously chance, right? We're doing with lawn while large numbers that there will be some that are just either errors or whatever it be. So I think as
as mask for you and your continued to that analysis, just how well that how well that spelled out. So that obviously nothing slips through the cracks and that every determination is is. Given it the proper notification of an appeal. I think that that's as I'm kind of thinking about Can very supportive of an anonymous reporting tool? We have a situation where there's a number and a plane's how we are able to tease that out in this unsure both due process and good communication with those who have made those those complaints. So I would appreciate that. So thank you. Additional questions. Yes,
counselor Delaney. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN and thank mistress for coming before us today. One of our recommendations number 5, the was creating universal harassment, free work environment and something similar appeared the written. Document that you gave to us. Outside of entities that we contract with or fall under direct supervision of the enterprise. How can we? Any kind of reach over organizations that we don't necessarily have a contractual relationship with. I to hear your ideas or thoughts on that. Thank you that that does that help will thank you. Any additional questions. Seeing? None misses trips. Thank you
so very much. Appreciate your time. And hopefully will be able to continue working with you as we move forward. Thank you. Next, in a final presentation last but not least. Tracie Justice from Society for Human Resource Management. We'll give a presentation. If we need a five-minute break. Please take it. All right. We're going to started here. If this just if you introduce yourself and the floor is yours. All right. Good evening, CHAIRMAN And committee. Thank you for having me here. My name is Tracy. Just this. I am director of government affairs for indeed Sherm. And I want to make sure that I provide this clear loud clear that I'm providing hr perspectives for educational purposes. So
everything that I talk about today, it's recommended to speak with your legal counsel to confirm if these perspectives make sense for your organization. And I'm sorry to tell you to go to the next slide. Our mission within the sure up in the serves in advance is the human resource profession in central Indiana by developing strategic business partners through comprehensive programming and collaborative development opportunities and our vision is transforming human resources throughout central Indiana as a premier provider of human capital management resources. Next slide. So in regards to the summary of recommendation for structural and procedural reforms in Indianapolis, Marin County City County, human resources, investigations and he sure is neutral on the recommendations. We respect the taxpayers decisions as
well as the council to make of the decisions. But however, the question here is to consider for everyone to consider as you're forming your policies is what structural safeguards are necessary to ensure hr independence from political influence. I've heard you all talk about that today. But that is a consideration for the council. What charged you give to your hr to park it. It's it's really what defiance that. So we're going to talk about the hr charts role in an organization employee and Labor relations strategy. So when you look at the role of hr, it moves from tactical Stu to strategic partnership. So hr isn't just about the
transactions about payroll benefits, hiring share of the sizes that insurance stance for the society for Human Resources Management. Just in case. Okay. I apologize for that. So sure that the sizes that hr must elevate its role to stick to a strategic one. That means a line. People practices with organizational strategy, contributing to the business or local government outcomes. So I also provided here on the power point slides to different different topics that you can look at. If you go to sure Google because of course I was in and give you a full a full, you know, 100 page report like giving you a place where you can start to do a little bit of research or at least your hr department to
do that. Next. Slide driving change and transformation. A chart is central in leading organizational change because people are the asset. So check and change involves capabilities which are skills, culture systems and behaviors. And so hr is part of of driving that change and transformation. Next slide linking workforce and business strategy. Hr must ensure the workforce is aligned with the organization's strategic goals, not just fulfilling current roles, but enabling future direction. And then also hr is responsible for building culture capability and employee experience or however, I should say charts role is is important in shaping that work for a work environment. Fostering culture, enabling learning and development and creating the conditions for employees to
thrive. So we think about hr. This is what a charge role in an organization is. Now with local government. There is a bit of a nuance because public chart does differ from private private Sector h r so public. So its ultimate duty is to balance compassion with compliance. Compliance is the floor writes with responsibility, making sure that everybody within the organization understand their different right because every role has has have rights and then trust with transparency. We'll talk about the constitutional protection. So when hr in public sector is thinking about considering
that strategy. Unlike private sector, hr public sector hr operate under constitutional law because government employers are state actors because local government, our arms is an arm of the of the state of the state government. This means every employment policy must respect the following protected rights for all U.S. Employees. First Amendment Freedom of Association and expression. So understanding that public employees retained the right to form personal romantic and social relationships and to speak freely outside the scope of their official duties. Another constitutional right, the 14th Amendment prime right to privacy and due process. Government cannot intrude arbitrarily into employees. Private lives, north discipline them without fair process and a legitimate
governmental interest. And then the equal protection clause policies must be applied equally. So it must be applied uniformly for everyone within the organization. So you MAY regulate the conduct that affects operations, but you can't police their private life without don't let them on struggle. Connection to the work itself. So public sector, hr professionals as they're going through their process is the things that that they're responsible of considering is evaluating whether action could implicate constitutional rights. Provide process, safeguards and notice an opportunity to respond before imposing discipline ensure policies like nonfat knows ation social media rules or off-duty conduct coat are narrowly tailored to legitimate business or
governmental interest. And then document those decisions served as an operational necessity. So when the policies being created, you're not simply saying we don't want, you know, you can't make a blanket statement. You have to make sure that if if if it's something like not fret is a shunt, social media rules are off-duty conduct. You're giving a reason why year why you don't want you know, the employees to do certain gauges. Certain activities. Now key key, sure guidance highlights for building a respectful and inclusive work policy. Number one thing is a policy architecture sure does offer a sample of a policy on their Web site. When you're a member of sure you have access to 2 policies, all the
template for hr professionals. Course, you tweak it to the organization's needs. It emphasized that employee handbook should be reviewed and updated to reflect harassment anti-discrimination laws and the training requirements. They suggest policies clearly define harassment. Define what discrimination looks like. Defy retaliation and make sure you're protecting individuals who report in good faith. So the policy as as as your employees are reading the policies, they should feel that they're going to be protected through that handbook. You want to make sure that it's clear least stipulated what's allowed and what's not allowed and then make sure that there's whistleblower protections. For the complaint and investigation processes within the policy. They outlined sure outlines that the best
practices for how to strengthen come complaint procedures. So you want to make sure that there's multiple channels for reporting that there's confidentiality avoids of retaliation. So that employees trust the system. And they also share also covers investigation. How investigation should be handled? They have a full process code of conduct and forsman and not to scream it up. Just not discriminatory discipline as key elements of your policy. So you want to make sure that that's clearly understood what the inventions investigation is going to look like with the Code of conduct enforcement is what the discipline is. You want to ensure that the policy is preventing hostile
environments and bullying Sharm stresses that prevention goes beyond. What? What's legally required, right? So You want to make sure that you that hr has the ability to not just say what's not allowed, but what the culture, you trade a culture that. That prevents hostile environment and prevents a bullying. They advise organizations explicitly it staff of employer's policy against discrimination, harassment and bullying and that the requirement to act if they experience or witness it. So that has to be something that's within your policy, making sure everyone knows that it's their responsibility everybody has a role and responsibility to making sure that environment workplace stays universal universally free of harassment is that everybody has a role. Some policies I have seen have
included. If you don't report or if you don't act on what you see or if you experience it, that that can actually lead to disciplinary actions leading up to grounds for termination because organization the responsibility to ensure that they're doing everything that they can. But of course, the organization has to know what's happening. What's going on? The training and communication. Sure underscores need for ongoing training. It can't be just the one and done. It has to be tailored to different roles. Understand the dynamics of your organization and making sure that you consider all the different rules and that you apply. You apply the policy to those different rules. So people under so your employees understand it from a full perspective, they recommend
clear accessible communication of policy rights and procedures and that leadership visibly supports it. So they have to see examples of leadership. Showing that they respect the policies as well. Alignment with strategy in culture. Implicitly and explicitly links that anti harassment and non-discrimination efforts are part of risk management. They're part of employee engagement. It's part of creating inclusive culture. And it also includes leadership, accountability. So what I thought would be really interesting for us to really look at what a public employment law case that actually went through process that it be easy that to
dissect this case. It's a healthy can from the 10th Circuit Court in 2011. So the facts of this case is that the plaintiff Chrissy Helm worked as an administrative assistant for 2 Kansas District Court judges. One of the judges allegedly one of the judges allegedly sexually harassed her overt nearly 10 years, including not consensual, touching, fond fondling, forced kissing Helm, sued the state of Kansas for harassment under title 7. The legal issues in holding the case depended on 2 principal issues. First the court had to look at was the it was a person, an employee because that matters whether that how it's processed under title 7 and then of the second, a principal issue with the employer liability for so
supervisor harassment, whether the state could be held vicariously liable for the judges, harassment under the supervisory harassment standard or whether the affirmative defense under the fire Garver City of Boca Burlington Industries. Thank you. L hers applied. I'll talk about that and hearing a little bit. So the holding is that up. So what ended up happening in that case is that the 10th Circuit did not decide on whether the employee fulfilled. The definition of what an employee is. However, the second issue was found the state was states successfully invoked the Elmhurst, affirmative defense. So the state was not found liable for the judges. Harassment and the court, therefore affirmed summary judgment for the state. So what were the legal questions before the court
when you think about this case was held even covered by Title vi title 7. So so being able to define what employees, what employee would an employee is for the city council is important within your handbook as well. Defining what those rules are. The state was able to argue that the judge was a personal staff, me that that that a legend. That the plaintiff was a a personal staff and therefore did not was not protected. However, that wasn't really fully worked through because number 2 was found. The question turns on employer liability under title 7 Ce Faragher l Earth Framework. Now Elf Earth Framework. If you if you're not familiar with that is the underpinning of the harassment
policies here, our modernize harassment policies. Anyone familiar with with the with the framework with the those 2 cases, ok? So then just share real quick. What for what those case studies, what it found. So for the fair go for city of Boca Raton, but the Supreme Court ruled in 1998, the facts this case was that lifeguard, Beth and farther allege her supervisors created a sexually hostile environment through pervasive comments and touching the city had a harassment policy but didn't effectively disseminated or enforce it within her department. Ruling was at the Supreme Court found the city liable because it failed to exercise reasonable care. So the supervisors trained and the employees didn't know how to report it. So therefore, the Supreme Court found them
liable. So the key point here is that just if you have a policy, you want to make sure you're doing more than just that floor. For the Burlington industry. Thank first Ehlers the facts there was that Kimberly Ellis allege her supervisor made repeated advances and implied that her job to plant depended on compliance. However, she was never demoted or fired the ruling. The court held that since there was no tangible employment action and tangible employment action is whether you lose your job, you're fired something that is tangible that can really impact the person. However, she was. She was never demoted or fired. So say the court held that since there was no tangible employment action. The company could assert an affirmative defense. It could show both prongs of the framework. So the affirmative defense is how an organization
can Protect itself. So going back to the ferger Ellsworth Framework. Yes, okay. We're on that. So these 2 cases set out rules for when employers automatically liable. And this is helpful to understand as you're putting your policies together. All right. So for harassment and when it can defend itself. So if a harassment result in a tangible job action like fire into motion, a pay cut, the employer is automatically liable. If the harassment does not result in a tangible job action, then the employer can avoid liability. If it proves it took reasonable care to prevent and correct. Asked harassment. And number 2, the employee unreasonably failed to report. We're used those procedures. So when we look at
what the court decided in the can says the 10th Circuit sided with the state of Kansas in this particular situation. Not because the harassment didn't happen, but because the state met the fair Darrelle, defense requirements. So number one, the state had policies and procedures in place to report harassment. There was anti-harassment policy and they're also mechanisms to complain or report misconduct. Number 2 health did not report the harassment for many years. She under the conduct for almost a decade before taking action. The court found her to her delay to be unreasonable, which satisfied the second part of the defense. So therefore, the state was not
found liable. Why is this case significant when you're thinking about putting your hr putting your up anti harassment, non-discrimination policy together? Because even one and harassment is egregious and up lawyer, including a state or public entity. Kenneth Escape liability. If it can prove both parts of that fired or l her defense, they acted reasonably to prevent correct to prevent and correct harassment had a policy train staff and the employee failed to use those procedures. What am I emphasize here? This emphasizes that employers should have strong reporting policies and regular training to meet their legal obligation. What does this also mean? This also means that if a public employee sexually harass us, someone, the individual, not the government, not the employer
can be personally liable in tort, not under title 7 but under tort law because they harassment is outside their job duties. So we talk about affirmative defense. What is affirmative defense? But a city up a public entity must be able to prevent have prevention and correction in place. That means clear, accessible anti-harassment policy, multiple avenues for complaint, not just the chain of command prompts well documented investigation. Well documented investigation and then consistent corrective action. And then number 2, the employees unreasonable failure to report. So making it like is if the employee failed to use the reporting system
despite having a reasonable opportunity, that's how an employer safeguard itself and no retaliation or intimidation was is happening to discourage reporting. But of course, that has to be part of the policy. No retaliation or intimidation. So the takeaways for the practices that for employers have clear well communicated harassment reporting procedures, train all levels of staff, including managers and supervisors on what to do. Investigate all complaints properly and thoroughly keep records showing that employee were informed of their rights and how to report misconduct. And then for employees know the policy. Read your employer's anti-harassment procedures. Ask questions if you need to report or document incident early. Even if you fear
retaliation. And that's why retaliation and whistleblower protections need to be emphasized. So that that can happen. And then, of course, support if you need to go outside of the chain of command for any reason to what needs to for the employees. Thank you so much for reaching out to in the sure. And I'm ready if you have any questions. Thank you so much. Is just as that very informative. Any questions from the panel there? Yes, Council Brown. Okay. That was a lot and I am obviously not in hr person or a lawyer. So for clarification, I'm going to use myself as an example here. So because I technically have the ability to hire fire anybody by myself. And I am not a hired appointee higher
person elected. If I. News media, I swear to GOD, I've not done this please don't use that if Grab employees or say terrible things to counsel employees. They have no legal repercussions against the city. It would just be against me. But harassment itself isn't necessary. Just saying things to them. They have no legal repercussions against the city and there's no legal protections against be saying bad things about somebody in criminal court. What kind of protections to they have? They do have protections under the anti harassment policy, but I can't be removed or fired. I have to be what finish my term resign. That's why I'm like so as elected officials, could do what we want. If we don't directly appoint higher fire,
threatened. And there's nothing that can be done until we actually physically touch somebody which could become assault. I'm just trying to grasp because there's like 200 elected officials in this county and basically by this. And this is not Obviously, you're not the Supreme Court here that made these decisions, but basically by this, as long as we never higher higher fire actually physically touch somebody, we're can do what we want. No, I mean this the way that this is being described as that this woman was an appointed position, they never threatened to fire her. But she was sexually harassed and assaulted, says he tried to kiss her and all these kinds things for 10 years. And there's no legal ramifications. I mean, there could be political
ramifications, but there's no legal ramifications. So it are you referring to the helm, Kiev and ok, so in that situation? She was protected because she didn't report it. She didn't report it. She waited 10 years later to report. She said going on for 10 years. So went on for 10 years. But she never reported a report at the first instance, then they're out a lot. Everybody's responsibility to report. So if that happens to you within the workplace, you have to report it. You have to report it properly. You can't wait 10 years. It took me 18 years to be able to tell my family that I was sexually assaulted in college. And the only reason I did because it was forced out
of me here. So. And I get that at that. Their son, Jayden topics. But when we're talking about employment law and that looks like everybody like employees have that responsibility. They must report it. They must disclose it has to happen because then the organization doesn't doesn't have an opportunity to do its responsibility. So you know what? So when you think about that, you know, when you think about Trump MAY including trauma, informed trauma, informed therapists or trauma informed investigations, maybe having some sort of saying to help with that. However, it is. It is employment. You have to report it. You have to disclose it and because she did not for 10 years, then, you know, maybe she can look
under constitutional laws. And see whether the state well, a play there. But it's it's just it's it. And this is like want to make sure this is not this just makes me in general have less faith in hr systems at all. Because if I have to purport exactly when it happens that it happened. That's not the world. We live in mess. It takes time for somebody to process trauma process what's going on or even realize sometimes that they're being taken advantage of that in that way. Like was not you. This is just this is now elevated. My concern, even higher because it just seems like there's very few if any protections for city employees from any elected official. And then let alone if you with if we don't threaten the higher
fire, somebody demote them not vote to appoint them than theirs like. It. Just. Especially like that it's this is like I this is not you. This is more concerning just hr law in general being. Super. Poli. To get out of actually protecting people. Just to be char's role is to to protect the employees as well is is is making sure that everyone within the organization understand their rights and responsibilities. So. If you're having trainings consistently. Giving people an opportunity to act out and scenario so they know or have an idea of or maybe talk about different what it looks like. Then it gives, you know, everyone, an opportunity to speak out. I mean, to share.
But because, you know, hr can't do their job. You know, the organization can't do its job if they don't know about it. So it has to be disclosed. That. But I do feel understand your question clearly. So so, you know, I know there's a lot of layers to being government right there. We have appointed employees. We have 10 years we have players. We have all sorts of different levels, employees and then we're all different because we're elected rights awareness and to take us out as the state house issues. So there's a whole level in there. I'm just concerned. Like is what is what is their official a statute of limitations. So I got assault. And on Friday after reported on Monday, do I have month to I have a year to? I have. Is what's the reasonable like there's so
much to this? That seems so much to put the onus on on somebody who's been. Victimized and then go, oh, you didn't do it in a reasonable amount of What's the reason amount of time if the person is employed is? You know, the enterprises who they're like that. It's just creating more. This is creating more questions for me. And I know I'm not for me correct Lee, but I'm just I'm a little more freaked out now to be honest with on this in the black and the lack of protections. It feels like our employees have it. They don't feel they're not instantly there to report. So this like I said this this is this is just learning hr law, which I don't know this. I've never been in that position. So I want I want to thank you for answering his questions. And now I'm just kind of thinking out loud for my other
councilors. If you can pull that into a question because I'm just frankly kind of shock because I want to make it clear that age hr does protect the employees what I'm saying here is that, you know, when you look at the employees, the employer and then the of the survivor and then the complaint and then the respondent. Hr has a responsibility to ensure that the employer is compliant. Hr has a responsibility to make sure that the employees understand their rights. And if that's happening. I guess in my opinion, if that's happening, then the hra, then the employee should start to feel comfortable if. Policies if that the policy if the policies being updated and shared annually and if there's training done annually. Then the employee will realize their protections because employee is protected, but it?
But when it goes to the Supreme Court law, the Supreme Court was the one that came up with that defense yet and said that, you know, that's how you work through it. So if the employers not found liable now the individual becomes liable. So so it doesn't mean that the victim doesn't have. Other things that they can do. But it just means that the employers no longer liable because they did what they needed to do now they can for that in another Okay. Hopefully that helps. Is there a way to reconcile this point of a duty to report to what? We would just learn from the prior presentation when they said we should not force anybody to report that the mandatory reporting. Puts the complainant in an odd situation is or is there a way to reconcile those 2 points? Honestly, I I don't know if
there is, you know. Because there is a responsibility. Everybody has a responsibility to ensure that workplace is it's harassment free. In order to do that. You know, the person who sees it or experience, it has to disclose it like. Let's use the anonymous reporting and then you're able to create programming or trainings around that. However, how organization do what they need to do if they don't know something is happening. So it does become checkey. And then, you know, really the what I presented today was just to give you an idea of how the courts process it right? You know, so you understand those different nuances when you're putting that policy together. Yeah, it it's mandatory to report But I see where she's
coming from And all right, Matt Councilor Perkins. I think you MR. CHAIRMAN, just going try to expand a little bit on the discussion that's happening. I think our desires to have a workplace where? No form of harassment discrimination happens. I think to my colleagues question it underscores for me the need off offering multiple ways reported. Not only multiple ways of report creating that culture and the climate with that is acceptable. And if something happens since we cannot always legislate human behavior. Then the culture and climate is created where you have multiple ways in which you can have your concerns reported.
So I from my colleagues of colleague, think the issue then becomes how do we work perspective as the council to ensure that we offer in multiple ways. 4 reported to happen within the Enterprise. My question is, I appreciate your really not for us. The role of hr within organization, especially in the public sector. That it's more than just compliance. It is billed in a culture. I wonder what your position the is. If he were to pull the hr out off the enterprise and make it into independent organization or independent entity. What then becomes off the enterprise in helping to build that culture within the organization. I can't really speak to, you know, weather or
at night, you know, hr has moved into a separate agency, cause eye nose, tax dollars. And, you know, I you know that. But I it what is the charge that you all have given to hr? What's a charge role? You know, what have they been empowered to do? What authority do they have? If they haven't been giving in if they haven't been given the power or authority or charge to be able to do the full job of what hr, you know, requires. Then its hard for hr to do their job. You know, I know that currently hr rolls up to the comptroller. Think that's, you know, so. I think it goes back to what charging you giving to your hr department. What authority have you given them? What can they do? So that it can be? Clearly understood what their role is so that they can act
within the charges been given to them. Does that answer your question? It does. It does. It speaks to the broader. I think the big issue in which were wrestling with and we've been wrestling with this now forward feels like forever for least the last year and a half, which is the is a broader culture issue within the organization. And we have gotten to the point after doing this now for a year, we're still wrestling with trust within the organization. And how do address the culture issue is that internal address internal are we to the place now? We need to be only address to fix some internal issues. So I think really, but the question is not necessarily. But what's the
charge to hr because of the problem? The problem that we've discovered is that whatever the charge was. That there was a point where the reported stop. When whatever influence. The report it because we are in the situation we're in right now. And so whatever the charge was clear that something didn't work. Because we've had to address us over the last year. So we're coming in now to say, okay, how do we address this to relax a bit trust within the enterprise to make sure that our employees feel like it's a comfortable place for them to work and that we can help to move the city forward. That's a challenge. What we have right now and the question is how do we do that? Address in the 7 points that the recommendation from the working group or something
else. Was that a rhetorical question? I mean, just want to make sure I you know, I'm at answering she was going to help out of them. Was help Thank you, sir. A role that statement because because culture is the culture is a hard thing for at every organization really to be totally honest I mean. In my opinion, it starts internally. Because sometimes employees within the organization don't trust people coming from the outside either it's it's really repairing a it's really working with your workforce and trying to find out, you know, the it looks like there's some studies that are being done from from those studies. That's a great first place to start there and then kind of see what comes out of those studies and have conversations with the with
your employees. I up because this is a public sector of because this is the public. It MAY be thinking of the strategy of including the employees a lot more. And in some of the, you know, creating town halls for employees. I am. But honestly, culture such a tough For private prefer private entities as well and has a what Sherman's putsch of pushing for improving culture is, you know, learning how to talk to each other, learning how to have conversations learning how to, you know. How to be human again with each other that, you know, that saw some sorry. There's not an easy answer. I apologize for that. That's it's a tough, the fun. Thank counselor McCormick. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, I sort of wanted to jump on tech to this. I think maybe though my last 2 colleagues. As an equal part
of government. As a council. We are trying to see what we can do and practiced law and policy to ensure that hr who reports to the executive branch through the executive branch is doing what it needs to do. And so we don't charge hr with anything card minute like the administration does. The mayor does right. So that executive branch does and we're trying to figure out how we can make the policy to ensure that things go. Sort of the way that. We feel need to get. Saying that right. Colleagues Nader know yes. So I think that's maybe where the question where that where we're like articulation of what we're trying to ask is. How are how can we do that from our standpoint, right? Because it's a little different. I think as we don't charge with anything. And maybe there's not answer that right now. Maybe that's something think about. Talks
and colleagues get back to us because I think that's maybe where are where we are is because we don't oversee a juror. Okay. Good point. That maybe statement I do have sort of, I guess a second statement, a question to the people around So being this mandatory reporter Ray. And that's what you're suggesting that we've heard MR. Tribes and others have said we shouldn't. I work in higher a title 9 mandatory reporters. So we were just talking about title 7. So I think goes up at least a title 9. I don't how many we have, but being a mandatory reporter and there's positive and negative how we can do that and is the inspector general that sort of person we go to reporter who can be. The advocate for the employee who's reporting
something versus. Being there to cover for the enterprise or be more there for the enterprise to so. Knowing like knowing any comments on those 2 sort of things, I guess. The first the you all don't have the charge over h r, Okay. That's that. That's tricky. So, you know, definitely want reach out to my colleagues and see what. Know from that. And then the second question about mandatory reporting in. Asked that question, a gun. So I guess my thought is is we have some pros and cons on mandatory reporting. And I think part of it is the confidentiality. And that not being ready for it to come out. We talked about the timeline. But being amended like you're suggesting being mandate reporter. I know I am under top title 9 and the difference and why. I guess if you can highlight again, wiring. Need to be like why you suggest having the mandatory reporting. I work in higher education. I tell students like I can't help you
with the problem. I don't know exists. I wish our mind reader I were a probably wouldn't be here at b on some beach or traveling all the time. Right? So because I the lottery. But so it gets that thing. Where like we need to have information attorneys to have that information to make the best decisions and to support the employees in that employer. But then how do we keep the confidentiality message like and that privacy of the reporters as well? Maybe it goes back to the multiple reporting avenues. Because at some point. Something could come out, right. You know, as the investigation is getting de Pere. Some of the things that you can think about or what are some of those resources that you probably, you know, could have in place for that,
you know, above for the victim who MAY be going through this and want some more help. I know earlier was talking about the eap providing services like that. However, you know, going back to, you know, a charge responsibility in making sure that the organization is compliant and that they're able to deal with issues within the organization. It mandatory reporting is just necessary. It's part of that it's just part of that. You know, there's no way to really get around that because you can never guarantee full confidentiality. Of course, you know, teachers responsibility is to make sure that they maintain that at as much as they possibly can. But eventually that's going eventually it can come out some sort of way. It. That's where the emphasis really is on making sure when people come in onboarding, they're doing that. You know, part of
the onboarding is the training for anti harassment, anti harassment, non-discrimination policy, making sure that they know what that is and then continuing that continuing, making sure that they understand how that works. You know, and and that's part of the stipulation of working with the organization that, you know, they have to understand the what the employer is supposed to do and if they're going to take that job and they realize they have a responsibility as well. They have to report. There's you know. And just back to that culture, right? Yeah, it really is building that culture because the compliance is just the floor. But you've got to build so much more than that. It's just the compliance policy. Compliance culture will then yeah, people are
going to be scared they're not going to report. They're not going to feel like they're supported. But if there's ongoing training, there's different ways that you can report it you know, employees understand all of their rights obligation leaders, people in high positions understand their responsibility and understand that they are considered agents of the organization and understanding that if the employers doing all that they can do, but then you have, you know, some leaders that are going rogue, then they understand that they can be personally liable. So just making sure that everybody knows what their rights are making sure that training is happening.
Communication yeah, because you know, the employer has a responsibility to make sure that the workplace is harassment, free. And in order to do that reporting in disclosure, has to happen. You know, and that's what's important to have these trainings. Everybody knows understands. All right. Thank you. Council Bain. Thank you, MISTER Chair and thank you for the presentation this evening. When we talk about this Helms case, an going through your talks about title 7 protects them 40's but not personal employees. Of elected officials. What the fines personal employee of an elected official personal staff. In that particular
case. That's, you know, with for Kansas, that's their law. You know, so I'm not sure about Kansas. Kansas law state laws. However, you would look at Indiana state laws and say will you know what this Indiana State say about employees with who's considered employee and who's not considered an employee? And then make sure that those rules are defined in the employee handbook. But that that would be case that would be state law that decided that. So it seems like in this Holmes was. Suing for damages and this case, I have to assume she was what's going on here. Because also doing for damages. She was suing under title 7. Okay. So it seems so. Does that case affect Indiana? It's it's a case law that you can look at to say, ok, what questions that we have for Indiana now that happened in
Kansas. But what can we look at here in the state of Indiana? What are some things that we need to consider here? So I didn't I intentionally didn't pull Indiana state law because that, you know, I didn't want to get too close you know, to what happened? You know, I didn't want you know, get into that. But I I intentionally chose a case law that looked at the different nuances of some of the things that hr will probably look at when you're putting a policy because we just don't take a policy and just create the policy and say, ok, here it is. But you look at the policy, you look at different case laws that could impact what could happen in your place. And you start thinking strategically, you say, ok, maybe we should come up with a training program that talks about these different things. I didn't too deep into Kansas State law really understand the that I get it. I mean, wasn't a criticism. It's more
just. I kind of feel like sometimes we're comparing apples and oranges where or a municipal local government and we're trying to craft what our city level policy will be on hr, at least. Try to beef it up more than what it is now. An added additional protections. So I think that's kind of what I'm struggling with. Here is. You know, I kind of the same Vice PRESIDENT Brown had where it seems like that there's maybe no protections when obviously that cannot be a case like practically speaking. That cannot be the case. But what are the protections if we pass protections here? Is that contrary to what? Ruled I would think it would be. But I feel like we're you know, there's so many. So much is being said right now. It's hard to rationalize and come
up with what a coherent hr policy could be. Adequately protects like city employees. I know trying to avoid particular cases here. At the end of the day, when everything goes up to the 25th floor and goes up to the mayor's office. And there's a track record. There were a has made recommendations in the past. Somehow the news media gets a hold of it. When council doesn't get a hold of it. And hr recommendations are not followed in the past. I think that's where we're trying to rationalize and figure out in our head. How do we create that independent? Accountability. That is void of the political. Process. And I don't even know if there's a question and I'm just sitting here trying to rationalize all and have it make sense in my
brain. That we have to have protections for employees would have to have the independent accountability. Marion inject here for a minute MAY. I ask Council beeler to step forward again. Some simple questions not asked for a legal opinion in the public forum, but just to see if the the question that's been raised is does this Helms case apply in Indiana and the nuance of law? Is this the 10th Circuit? We're in the 7th circuit so it doesn't automatically apply. But the question is, what is the 7th circuit holding on that issue? I don't know for homes How far helps with Helms has the 10th Circuit. So its not applicable here, the 7th circuit, but the general principles as as you described a crack to mean. As we lie his own star told reported so report has to be
made and there are time for a to that. It wasn't within which to them or civil liability. Now that's different criminal as a whole different ballgame. But yeah, there there. Report has to be made to initiate a complaint civil liability. But there a statute of limitations Indiana for such claims? He's 2 years? Yes, from a currents or knowledge of. From occurrence. And the you know, and this is maybe a question pose to both of you. Being a public employer. It is different, obviously. And our employees not only have rights as a complainant, but also as an accused. You have enhanced rights as well because your employer's, a state actor. As a criminal defendant, has Miranda rights and I know just enough about employment law to get in trouble here. So correct me if I'm wrong, that does And accused person also have. Miranda like rights. When they're accused by the employer to that the state
action and you can fire me or discipline me. So that's a state action against me personally. And therefore, I have enhance rights like Miranda were. I can question your evidence. I want representation. You can't force me on the spot to do something. Does that come into play and no discussion tonight. It does. I want to careful because they're very different rights like the Miranda rights being the criminal side of things is because individuals, liberty is that state for to jail time. Things like that. So there are different higher protections when individuals liberty can be taken away from him. Her them. But yes, I mean, there there is the interest in protecting, especially during the course of an investigation. All parties involved, of course, again, going to the game. What
a complaints made. What we say believe in the complaint is that we asked them to make sure that they feel safe for the environment while it's being investigated because the accused does have a right for a thorough investigation to see what's happened here. That includes and really that what I would say impacts mostly it for practical assistance not necessarily a legal, a legal perspective. Is a lot of this is critical in witnesses who are in the workplace who see these things. And if they think that these are going to be, they could be drugged out and they want to be the witnesses of all people should be in on this as well. So we have a really, really have an interest protecting them because that's how is really our best evidence and how we can figure out what has occurred in the workplace. So that's where all this into
yes, the of course, has a right for us internally to figure out what's happened. We had to determine if a violation has occurred in, therefore, if so, what discipline appropriate. So visit that will hire doctrine applied to a public employee. Yes. Mean, I mean, every play at the city is that will employ okay. Thank you. Thank you. The Council hurt. You had your hand up. I didn't encounter vein was alluding to it at the end of his comment questions there. I guess to summarize it in another way, is that just asking recommendations even printed recommendation that you mentioned. You have a larger handbook or recommendations guy that you can bring with them. It's okay. To direct us to look at situations where hr is making recommendations to leadership. Pollution is not taking those recommendations.
Women. Ultimately the truth comes out that there there was wrongdoing to the individual. Guess that's the part that I still seeing that gap here is that in cases that we've had with that being the specifics that were reported to the highest level and then they were just disregarded. And that's the policy component that. We don't have answer for now. Are you all part the trainings anti? Ok? So then. Leader that we're talking about is also part of the trainings as well. Everybody is under center as part of that range. I mean, you know, that. It's it's it's it's it's it's it's really It's a tough situation to really try figure out. I don't know if you all can do something, but, you
know, on behalf of Indy? Sure, I you know, I can't really. Say, you know, I can't really look at the recommendations and say yea or nay just because, you know, you of our where we are. However. That that that's a great questions that you all are asking. How do you go about that? How do you go about that? I was an hr director for local for local government at one point. And one of the things that we did for the elected official is that if the elected official was considered doing something wrong, then they can take it up to the ball and they can take it up to the board. But you know, Washington Township is smaller. So it's not this many people. But, you know, a person can take it up. Employee can take it up to the
board. End to go over that person's head I wonder what can you all do you know, legally or, you know, you know because because you're asking a very great question. How do you go around that? And that's something that you'll probably have really think about. What can you do if it's not something you can do internally internally? Is this something legally to change how that works? Because the employee as an employee, you do have a responsibility to make sure that everyone that comes to work feel safe and they don't feel like they are. Are at risk for any kind of harm. And that's the responsibility for every employer and h r is the one that would lead that charged with the culture, building the culture and making sure it's not just compliance. But if
that can't then I would have to throw the question back to What can you do legally? Because, you know, there's really nothing I And that's what makes it tough. You know? Yeah, and this is a continuing discussion We appreciate that. MISS Justice as offered to continue being engaged with us as we move forward because as we it's obvious, these are some of these are unanswerable questions at this stage. So as we all learned, more hopefully we'll see. Get a little more guidance. Any final questions for justice. I see your hand up at one time. Council Delaney. It's just it's thank you so much for your time. We appreciate it very much. Thank you. Now we're going to turn to the public speaking part tonight to take a few comments. If there are any and we're gonna have Let that there's a statement to be
read. First. As we move to the public comment portion of debate for. There's no proposals before this presentations. We would like to remind council members and the public of the few ground rules in order for everyone to have a fair chance to speak and be heard. It is important that we each observe the following rules. First, each speaker will be limited to 2 minutes. Second, it any public comments most reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration. 3rd speakers who stray from the items under consideration or become unduly repetitious MAY be asked to move on to their next point or conclude their comments. Finally attendees who cause disruptions that prevent the council from proceeding through today's agenda in a reasonably
effective manner will be removed. Please remember that some types of threatening speech for enticement to violence. We're not protected by the First Amendment at And we will deal with those issues if they come But we do not think they will. Because lineal MR. I'd like make a motion to amend rules this evening. I move that speakers time limit for comment for this meeting before minutes instead of 2 minutes. Second. Any discussion? Hearing? None. All those in favor of amending the rules of 4 minutes per speaker say Aye. I opposed. Hearing none. The chair 4 minutes with a timer. You use your. IPhone. What have you?
And for speaker, please introduce yourself and provide zip code. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN Man's the clarifying question regarding this evening. The discussion this evening before becoming sure you all have this evening discuss recommendations. Are those recommendations to go back to the administration for them to implement were will you the Rules Committee be writing ordinance to the impasse for self. All explain the next steps after conclusion of tonight's meeting. Okay. Appreciate Good evening. Members of the committee, my name is Morgan Mickelson and I'm a former employee of the Hogs said administration, I come before you tonight to offer you a perspective from staff. I lead the office of Sustainability from MARCH 2021. To SEPTEMBER 2024. I managed a team of 3 I regularly and in communication with multiple current staff
members as well. I want to speak to you first Hansen that I want to speak to tonight because I've seen firsthand how deeply firsthand how deeply broken the culture inside dogs that most administration students, real reform is desperately needed, not just in hr or how reports are handled across the entire working environment. Much as much of what's been reported in the news has focused on the past air hogs set and former members of his leadership team. But I can tell you from experience. That the same culture that allowed that harassment and abuse to happen hasn't gone away. Just still alive and well. And the city County building. When first stories came to light back in 2024, raised concerns about
the lack of systems to protect current staff from happening again. Remind you, I left. I managed 3 people. The same leaders who remain in place. Brush off those concerns. When I pushed back on that, it became clear that their focus was not on control. It was on controlling the situation rather than fixing the This is why I'm concerned with many of these recommendations discuss tonight and I urge you to adamantly pursue and independent third-party selection. I know it's really complicated. It can be done even more. This conversation here this last conversation happening just really reinforce the right? Like so many of you had have danced around this that like hr doesn't actually protect the people. I reported my own instances of experience,
inappropriate behavior to hr. This was before the speak. Fully system in place because was leaving very pregnant at the time. I had too much going on to even trying go through that route. One set up an open reported. Hr eventually reached out to me and asked me to share visit story. After gone. The kind of just forgot about me. I reached back out. I followed up asked for what, hey, what's happened over just getting around to it. And then nothing. I've heard. That's not I want often sense. And I also want reiterate little bit must recommend Asians from the National Women's Defense League, because what it really come ability behind these recommendations, the council should require that measures are put in place to make sure they're implemented. And 2
full to commit to full transparency. You know, we've heard a lot about like, oh, we can't talk about this because we would jeopardize the individual and then and then the minute that word I can try say right now that's just. That's bs. Let's be real. There are ways to provide transparency instill with the public finally, I also want to add that more robust public engagement needs to done on this effort. I'm really disappointed with the turnout tonight. And but I know it. It's really hard to engage with members of the public, whether it be like these employees or others. I've done not job before, but it is your responsibility to make sure people are here to tell you how they feel. It is not their responsibility to take time other day to figure out when
going down. But whatever, you know. People care about it. And I am very involves and I almost missed that this meeting was happening. It was not publicize white. The I would urge you to reconsider how this public engagement going and also not to rely on these working groups. The report outs from them, the survey, whatever it is because it's coming from. People. That report to the major report to 25. Know you all know what that means. You're not getting transparent information, speak to the employees directly like figure out how to make that happen because but they're not ok. I really appreciate all of this work you've on this. That's it. Thanks. Thank you, Morgan. Any additional? Members of the public wish to speak. All right, hearing
none. Obviously what I this is my opinion. But as I foresee our future steps here, Weve digest a lot of information this evening. We have a lot we've compiled and studied ourselves and I think we're going to have to distill all of this information and refiner recommendations keep publicizing them to get public engagement. As we've seen, there are very complicated legal issues involved in this. So we're going to be working with hr and legal department. On how to set things up. Also, a big 800 pound gorilla or the fiscal issues raised by all of this. Creating certain agencies are independent boards. There's a dollar figure assigned to that. Not
that this is a work, want to find things with dollars, but that as a steward of taxpayer money, that is an issue that comes into the calculus so in the with regard to the increased publication, information will will will increase that. We, too, are at least personally. I am very surprised at the thin attendance this evening. I expected a full room and even put notice about having additional sheriff's this evening. Obviously, that was uncalled So we hope to increase exposure and get more input and we do take input from anybody and everybody from every direction we will be talking to the working groups. We all will be talking in the professional organizations like Sherman, the National Women's Defense
League. Because we do not want to just work here the logical bubble within the enterprise. So that's kind of where we're going from here. Any further closing comments by anybody in the U.S. Counselor. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN, just a quick question for are turning from the city in terms of end of the year. Final report from the employee survey do you anticipate when that will be made available? What the council have access to that and I think really echoing the present or the speaker share. But it's important for us to hear from the employees. And I think that's a way that we could hear from the employees. Will be public document. You said end of the year. That's DECEMBER. 25th or for it require today. They said to be done by the end of the year. I can try to find more specificity. I'm not charge of the contract with ref. Tell
us, but I can ask them. Any other comments. Hearing. None.