THE INTEGRATION OF BANKING AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS: THE NEED FOR REGULATORY REFORM

(Jeff_L) #1
IS LITIGATION YOUR FINAL ANSWER? 699

former employer.^141 These critics argue that enacting the Healthy
Workplace Bill would essentially be a “job killer.”^142
Public officials are also concerned about the ramifications of
workplace-bullying legislation. In 2012, soon after the New
York Senate passed its version of the bill, New York City
Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration sided with business
owners and issued a statement opposing it.^143 Similarly, in
January 2012, during a public hearing before the Washington
Senate Labor, Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee,
the Office of the Attorney General adamantly opposed passage
of the bill, citing its vague definition of “abusive conduct” and
arguing that workplace conflicts should not be resolved in
courts.^144
Indeed, passage of the Healthy Workplace Bill may have
serious consequences for employers who have difficulties
instituting adequate policies to avoid liability. One method to
address these concerns is to incorporate more specific
characterizations of workplace bullying into the bill’s definitions
of “malice” and “abusive conduct.” For example, the bill could
further define workplace bullying as conduct that is “intentional,
repetitive, and escalates” over a specified period of time.


(^141) See id.
(^142) Id.
(^143) See R.M. Schneiderman, State Anti-Bully Law Would Let Workers Sue
for Nastiness, WALL ST. J. METROPOLIS BLOG (May 14, 2010, 6:18 PM),
http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2010/05/14/state-anti-bully-law-would-let-
workers-sue-for-nastiness/.
(^144) During that same hearing, Washington State Senator Janea Homquist
Newbry voiced concerns over the bill’s vague terms and definitions and the
subjective nature of allowing a plaintiff to sue an employer for refusing to
promote him or her for any reason. See 2012 Biz Lobby Opposition to
Healthy Workplace Bill, supra note 138. Similarly, in July 2012, lawmakers
of the West Virginia Joint Judiciary Committee also voiced concerns over the
“poorly-defined” terms that would “open doors to problems.” David Beard,
Lawmakers Question Legislation’s Proponents, DOMINION POST, July 25,
2012, at 2-A, available at http://www.workplacebullying.org/multi/pdf/
dompost072512.pdf. They were also concerned about how an employee’s
preexisting mental and physical health issues would factor into the lawsuit
and whether an employer should be liable for coworker bullying when the
employer had no knowledge of the problem. Id.

Free download pdf