Russell Deborah; McKelvie IanEMPLOYMENT RELATIONS (EXTENDED TIME FOR PERSONAL GRIEVANCE FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn): I move That the Employment Relations (Extended Time for Personal Grievance for Sexual Harassment) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Education and Workforce Committee to consider the bill.This is a simple bill but it deals with a complex and difficult matter of sexual harassment. The bill itself extends the time during which a person can make a personal grievance claim from 90 days to 12 months in cases of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is an invidious and difficult issue to talk about let alone take action to try to prevent or to seek redress when it is found to have taken place. Our law does try to deal with it but it could be better.Let me set out the problem. First of all we have a definition of sexual harassment in workplace settings in the Employment Relations Act (ERA). Section 108 says that in workplace settings sexual harassment occurs when an employer or representative of an employer (a) directly or indirectly makes a request of that employee for sexual intercourse sexual contact or other form of sexual activity that contains an implied or overt promise of preferential treatment; or an implied or overt threat of detrimental treatment; or an implied or overt threat about the present or future employment status of that employee; or by the use of language either written or spoken of a sexual nature; or the use of visual material of a sexual nature; or physical behaviour of a sexual nature that directly or indirectly subjects the employee to behaviour that is unwelcome or offensive to that employee whether or not that is conveyed to the employer or representative and that either by its nature or through repetition has a detrimental effect on that employee's employment job performance or job satisfaction. That's how we define sexual harassment in workplaces.It can also occur when a customer or client engages in similar behaviour. If an employer takes action to ensure that sexual harassment doesn't happen and prevents it from occurring again—ensures that employees are safe and comfortable in their places of work—then of course no personal grievance to sexual harassment can arise. So far so good.The difficulty arises with the nature of sexual harassment. People are often reticent about sexual matters; it's not something we discuss particularly openly and we can be embarrassed to admit that something of a sexual nature has happened. Sometimes we may not even understand what is going on. Add to that the power dynamic in a workplace. If a senior worker or an important client or even just an older employee makes life difficult for someone then all too often it is hard to speak out. Our cultural norms of shame and fear can hold us back. The power that another person holds over us can hold us back. We can be so upset and traumatised by the experience that for a while all that can be done is to retreat. And that can hold us back. The fear of retaliation can hold us back. Of course there's still the narrative out there that she must have done something to cause this which can hold us back.Therein lies the problem that this bill addresses. Ninety days may just not be enough time to raise a complaint in cases of sexual harassment. This is not just a theoretical problem we know that sexual harassment is a common work problem. In 2018 the New Zealand Law Society commissioned Colmar Brunton to investigate the realities of bullying and harassment within the legal profession: When asked if they had been sexually harassed in a legal environment at some time in their working life 31 percent of women and 5 percent of men said they had."Lawyer Zoë Lawton started a blog collecting examples from within the New Zealand legal profession of what went on. Here's an example from that blog. It's quite long but I've chosen it because it illustrates the range of problems that people deal with."I am grateful to have the opportunity to share my experiences in an anonymous forum. I wish I were courageous enough to make my comments publicly. I worked at one of the large commercial law firms in Auckland for about four years. During my time there I experienced the following: the male solicitors ranked all of the female solicitors on a three-tier ranking system. They openly discussed women's rankings in the office. When a young female lawyer travelled up to the Auckland office to assist on a case several male solicitors took turns to walk past the office where she was sitting and then indicated whether she was worth sleeping with by giving a thumbs up or a thumbs down. The women in the team were given nicknames that corresponded with their physical attributes. When a young woman was frustrated about a legal issue she was asked if she was on period. A partner was talking on the phone to a client and assured the client that there were 'plenty of good looking sheilas in the office' and he would make sure he sent one down to deliver the documents. Many many loud conversations in the office during work hours where the men discussed their Tinder exploits in graphic detail. Men who would walk past women and make gestures as if they were 'motor-boating' them. They thought the women didn't realise what they were doing. A partner with a creepy reputation who always found a way to end up going home in a taxi with a particularly drunk female solicitor 'just to make sure she got home ok'. This happened several times. I don't know what happened after they left the function.Many of these are not offensive enough to warrant a complaint to HR [on their own]. However looking back on the experience I now realise that this was a toxic environment that was rife with sexual harassment."That is just one entry in Zoë Lawton's blog. There are pages and pages and pages of them. Sexual harassment is commonplace despite all the work we've done in past decades.But when the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment took an in-depth look at bullying and harassment in a report in 2020 it found that between 2015 and 2019 the ERA considered just 14 cases where sexual harassment was the main basis of a personal grievance and the Employment Court considered none. That seems odd. We know that people experience sexual harassment at work. We know it is far from uncommon. We know it causes people to leave their jobs.In that Colmar Brunton survey of lawyers that I referred to earlier of those who said they had been sexually harassed 39 percent said it affected their emotional or mental wellbeing and 32 percent said it affected their job or career prospects. People are badly affected by sexual harassment at work and yet the ERA hears very few cases about it. That suggests that something is wrong in our settings.Employment lawyer Susan Hornsby-Geluk says that one of the issues is that three months is just not long enough when it comes to sexual harassment. Although there is an exceptional circumstances clause in the law which means that a case can sometimes be heard even if it's raised after the three month deadline in practise none have been because the ERA has interpreted exceptional circumstances very narrowly. So there is a problem in respect of raising personal grievances with respect to sexual harassment—it's just not happening.Of course the same might be said about bullying in the workplace and other causes of personal grievance. Three months is just not long enough to consider and then lay a claim. However that is a matter that the select committee might examine. As is indeed the issue of when the 90 days—or if this bill is passed—the 12 months begins. Is it at the first instance of sexual harassment or the second or the last? What if there is a pattern of low-level events how does that affect the time during which a personal grievance claim can be made? I hope that the select committee will examine these issues and I look forward to hearing what they think might be done in this regard.Finally I wish to acknowledge the woman who did much of the work that lies behind this bill—from assembling the evidence to meeting with the Minister for workplace relations and with my Green Party colleague Marama Davidson and meeting with me. Zoë Lawton thank you for your work. If this bill in due course becomes law it will be in large part because you made it happen. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the motion be agreed to."