Lawmakers are revising a proposal to create a new Statehouse human resources structure after legislative staff testified that their plan could still leave them vulnerable to harassment.
Policymakers began examining the organizational structure for legislative staff after a National Conference of State Legislatures report, commissioned by the Legislature, found that the General Assembly “has no central personnel office or authority” to manage employee concerns, such as grievance mediation and compensation planning. And in the aftermath of the cultural reckoning brought on by the #MeToo movement, it recommended Vermont’s Legislature create a human resources position quickly, a sentiment echoed through previous staff testimony.
While a committee of lawmakers has agreed that a human resources director is needed for Vermont’s Statehouse, the drafted organization of the office raised concerns last week among some employees that it would lack neutrality and authority.
The panel’s proposed organization structure includes the creation of a new division, called Shared Administrative Services, which would house a human resources director and accounting services. But some raised concerns that the HR director was not its own independent office with its own authority.
Peggy Delaney, the Committee Services Supervisor for Legislative Council, got choked up in the beginning of her testimony last Friday when she told lawmakers that it was particularly “critical” for the Legislature to have an independent human resources director “if they really want to make a change in the culture here.”
“We’ve done gender bias training, we’ve done sexual harassment training. And I want to commend the General Assembly for that,” Delaney said. “But it’s not enough.”
She said there have been many times during her tenure when she would have benefitted from the guidance of an independent human resources director. She worried that by lumping that position into one office with other services, it may lose the authority and independence to hold alleged harassers accountable throughout the Legislature.
“Last session … a lot of the assistants that we hired were recent grads and I can tell you that they are much more vocal about the workplace environment,” Delaney said. “They will not tolerate things that have not been tolerated in the past. Many of them looked to me and said, ‘Where’s the HR department?’”
Delaney declined to expand upon her testimony in a follow up interview.
Capitol Police Chief Matthew Romei also expressed concern that the HR director would not be an independent entity under the proposed model.
“HR has to be neutral,” Romei said. “But there’s no Switzerland here.”
Lawmakers agreed to amend their proposal in light of staff concerns before sending it on for further committee discussion.
Under their revised plan, the human resources director would lead the Shared Administrative Services office so that it’s clear the position would have the authority to investigate any figure in that office and the surrounding legislative branch.
They also agreed to change the office’s name to the Office of Human Resources and Administrative Services to signal to employees that human resources has authority over the division. They decided not to move human resources outside of this office to solidify its independence because they felt whoever was hired to take on the position would uphold the principle of neutrality themselves and that the placement of the office wouldn’t deter that from happening.
While lawmakers are following up on the NCSL’s recommendation to address human resources needs, the panel decided against a suggestion to create an executive director to oversee the daily operations of the Legislature, as recommended in the NCSL report. In the draft organizational chart, the Joint Legislative Management Committee would oversee all legislative operations.
Luke Martland, director and chief counsel of the Office of Legislative Council, said he thinks the Legislature needs a full-time director to make sure that day-to-day operations are running smoothly and that problems are solved promptly when they arise.
He doesn’t think that the Joint Legislative Management Committee, which meets infrequently, has the capacity to provide this leadership.
“You do need an executive director who is running the ship day in and day out,” Martland said. “I don’t think this is a good way to run a ship.”
House Speaker Mitzi Johnson, D-South Hero, who sits on the committee, said she disagrees. She said she trusts the directors of each division in the Legislature, who her committee would oversee in this model, to handle the day-to-day operations of their offices.
“We were concerned about too many bureaucratic levels,” Johnson said.
“This is a difficult and scary conversation for staff. It’s the biggest change of the legislative structure in 50 years,” Johnson said. “If in a few years we decide that an executive director is important, that decision can be made then. But at this point we’re not seeing it as the best use of Vermonters’ resources.”
