What the New Landmark #MeToo Law Means for Business

Transcribed by https://otter.ai Unknown Speaker 0:44 let's get underway. Gretchen if you don't mind, I'd like to start with you. You know, this law marks the first major piece of federal legislation to come out of the me to movement, and it's a giant step forward in fostering a workplace culture that protects and uplifts victims of sexual harassment. Can you talk about those specifically, what this law does, what forced arbitration is and how this law addresses it? Unknown Speaker 4:54 Yeah, well, thank you so much for having me, Paul. It's a it's a complicated topic and what I have found out Since my lawsuit against Roger Ailes at Fox News five and a half years ago is that most people have no idea what it means. And that includes not only the millions of employees across the country, but also people who run companies quite honestly, when I talk to companies every single day, many times C suite executives have to say to me, I need to check my contract, I have no idea. And so this is, you know, for the most part, when we used to say forced arbitration, people would sort of have a glazed over look in their eyes. When I used to speak to 1000s of people before COVID, I would say raise your hand if you know whether or not you have a forced arbitration clause in your contract, and nobody would raise their hand. So this has been a huge educational journey for me. And what happened was that after my lawsuit, I started hearing from 1000s of women around the country, I realized harassment was an epidemic. And then I realized forced arbitration to keep them quiet was an epidemic. So here's the problem in my mind with it, it's a secret chamber. It was never the purpose of arbitration was supposed to be for small business disputes, not for human rights violations. But unfortunately, over the last four decades, this has been used to cover up problems in the workplace, you don't get the same amount of witnesses or depositions. There's no rule of law, the arbitrator is oftentimes picked by the company, and they come back for repeat business, the arbitrator is usually not a jury of your peers, because they tend to be retired judges and lawyers who, you know, let's be honest, are older white men who may be are not a 25 year old African American woman who may be coming before them. And there are no appeals. So it is what it is not to mention the fact that a very small percentage of the time does the employee actually win. And without the idea of being able to have it out in the open. And with all of those things stacked against you from the beginning. The problem is we continue the vicious cycle of harassment and assault in the workplace, because the perpetrator oftentimes gets to stay on the job because nobody knows about it. You can't warn other people. It's just what's promulgated this vicious cycle of the epidemic of harassment in the workplace. Unknown Speaker 7:09 It's really interesting. So what you've talked about there is, is two impacts one is on the individual, right, because they may not get a fair shake in arbitration. The second is more systemic, which is because this is all done in arbitration and not in the courts. People aren't aware of what's going on. So this law has a double impact those were most affected on their individual such circumstances, and then overall, bringing something to light. And so I think it's really interesting in that regard. Senator Gillibrand and Congressman buck, and I'll call you again, thanks. You know, you both played leading roles in the passage of this, of this new law. Can you tell me from your perspective, maybe, Senator, if you'd begin, you know, what prompted the need for this legislation in your view, and what caused you to take a leading role in it? Unknown Speaker 8:08 So the reason why I got involved was because Gretchen asked me to get involved. She came to me and shared her story about what happened to her in general terms, and I understood immediately how important this was for all workers. I hadn't realized that most employment contracts have a mandatory arbitration clauses for cases of sexual harassment and sexual assault, and, and companion non disclosure agreements. And the combination of those two things means that if you're being assaulted or harassed, you can't call out your perpetrator, you can't sue them in the court of law, you can't, you just can't get justice. And then when I looked into all the data about arbitration, an arbitration award typically is much smaller than a jury trial. I think median sexual harassment settlement is $30,000 in arbitration, but it's $217,000. In court cases. We also know as Gretchen said, that arbitration was never designed for this. It was designed for peer on peer litigation, where companies were having to have a commercial dispute, it was cheaper and easier to go through arbitration, but they're equally balanced in terms of resources and in terms of access. And so that imbalance was created when it was applied to these types of civil rights cases, and issues of justice. And so unfortunately, most people who had to go into these arbitration processes couldn't call out their perpetrator. They couldn't warn their fellow workers. They couldn't change the climate at work because that perpetrator may never have been held to account accountable. And so it just perpetuated a system that was extremely harmful to workers, especially if there was a predator at that workplace. And so we learned pretty quickly that if you vitiated these forced arbitration clauses, you would restore basic constitutional rights. When our law passed, it changed constitutional rights, for 60 million people overnight. And that I think, is going to go a long way to allowing people to not only come forward, but to change the climate of their workplace and to get justice and I'm very grateful for Gretchen's leadership. I worked with Senator Lindsey Graham, who also very much wanted to help when he heard Gretchen's story. And so together, we got together to get this bill done in the Senate, and then we had great, great partners in the house to do the same work. Unknown Speaker 10:53 Great, thank you so much. And yes, part of what's happening here is changing a culture of silence to around sexual harassment at companies more broadly in society. Ken, as a Republican from Colorado, can you tell me a little bit about your journey on this legislation? You know, why didn't you see it as important and, and what made you become one of the leading sponsors of it? Unknown Speaker 11:21 Well, I was a prosecutor for 25 years, and I prosecuted rape cases, I prosecuted domestic violence cases, I prosecuted a lot of cases and supervised the prosecution of a lot of cases. And really, over that time, I have a heart for victims. And so often victims don't have a voice. And when I sat down with Gretchen, and talked about this bill, it just became something that impacted me in a way that brought me back to those days when I was talking to to victims of crime. And not just sexual crimes, but all crimes and so often these the folks who are in these jobs, one they need the income to, they understand that if they do something that is controversial in the workplace, it may affect their, their future employment, even if they leave that particular employer, and three, so often what I saw was recidivism in the criminal world where the same person is committing rapes, the same person is committing domestic violence, the same person is in this long pattern of conduct. And so to leave a predator in the workplace is the absolute worst thing that we can possibly do. And this is, this is really, using a scalpel as a conservative, I'm opposed to the federal government developing one size fits all solutions in this country. But this was the use of a scalpel to deal with a particular kind of cancer that we could try to cut out of the workplace. And I joined the Senator and really congratulating gretchen carlson on on her courage and perseverance. There were a lot of twists and turns in this legislation. But when I saw Gretchen, I knew that I was on the right side doing the right thing. Unknown Speaker 13:28 Thanks so much. And yeah, it's it's a scalpel approach, but very powerful one, indeed, affecting the lives of 16 million people, and then, therefore, more broadly in the workforce generally. So you mentioned a bunch of twists and turns along the way. So can if you don't mind me, me asking, you know, other than Gretchen Carlson, what were the key ingredients that made the passage of this legislation possible, from your perspective? Unknown Speaker 14:01 Ie when you say key ingredients in the way that Bill evolved, or? Unknown Speaker 14:06 Yeah, yeah. How did the bill of Yeah, how did the bill evolve? What were the factors that came into play in in making it possible to get this level of bipartisan support? Unknown Speaker 14:18 Sure. So So, from my perspective, the the last Congress, the bill was really defined as a sexual assault, sexual harassment and sexual discrimination. In the workplace, you couldn't have forced arbitration for those three categories. I had a problem with sexual discrimination because I thought it was too broad. And so I didn't support the bill in the last Congress. when the bill came back this Congress, it was just sexual assault and sexual harassment. And I felt a lot more comfortable supporting the bill. There were still some some issues that I knew Republicans were going to have with the bill. So I went to work. And again, Gretchen was great and and the senators and members of Congress, members of the House on in both parties were great in terms of trying to really get to the solution. So often what we deal with in Congress, and I think that, you know, the legislative process has been compared to making sausage. And I think that's unfair to sausage makers, frankly. But I do think that we are, we do our best to on some bills, try to reach a common ground and move forward. So sexual discrimination was dropped from from this bill, then we had there was a labor union carve out that was in this bill. And that caused a lot of Republicans to not join the bill. And it caused a lot of other Republicans, it gave them a talking point. They were really battering Republicans in the House with that particular clause that was taken out of the bill. And then finally, on the floor of the House, we introduced an amendment that had been sort of run by the senators and run by both sides in the house to change the definition of sexual harassment. And what we did was we said that each state has a definition of sexual harassment. And the bill should just focus and allow the state definition to control as opposed to defining sexual harassment at the federal level and imposing that on the states. And I think that's really that that last amendment is what brought more than 100 Republicans in the House on board. Unknown Speaker 16:47 That's really interesting. So there was that federalism aspect that made it possible for more Republicans to to join? Senator, from your perspective? What was it here that that enabled this kind of this bipartisan dynamic to come together? It sounds like you needed to have you at Senator Graham, who could work with members of his own party. You You were joined by others on your side of the aisle. But what were the key elements that helped make this this legislation possible from your perspective in the Senate? I think you may be on mute. Unknown Speaker 17:33 Sorry about that. From my perspective, I work on a bipartisan basis every day. And I had been working with Senator Graham for about five years before this on ending sexual assault in the military. And we both served on the Armed Services Committee. And we really worked hard over many years trying to find common ground on how to reform how the military dealt with this issue. And so we had a very good working relationship. When gretchin approached us about employment contracts. It was something that Lindsay felt very comfortable doing. So he said, Here you go, Kiersten, this is something I can agree with you on. So it was just a way for him to continue the work we've been doing in a much more difficult context. This was very easy, common ground for us. And so once we paired up on this getting a majority in the Senate was not difficult, because both of us have a great deal of goodwill developed with our colleagues on understanding these constitutional issues, and understanding the problems of sexual assault and sexual harassment. And we've been working together for so long that people saw when we agreed that this must be really common ground. And so that was necessary. And then second to that was getting Joni Ernst engaged. She had some initial concerns that were dealt with, with the amendment in the house. Same with Mike Lee. And so when those two senators felt we'd gotten the bill to the right place, they were able to sign off that was absolutely necessary. And then last, it was important that, frankly, President Biden was the president because this is something he wanted done. And we had the majority in the House and Senate. So getting it on the floor was possible. This was not something that Senator McConnell ever put on the floor in the past five years that Senator Graham and I had the bill. But because this was a presidential ambition, as well as having Senator Schumer in charge of the Senate, that strong relationship I have with Senator Schumer, and the interest by the president was enough to get the vote. And so that's how we were able to get the vote in the Senate, which is pretty much the hardest thing on any bill. It's not bipartisanship. I have a dozen bills that are bipartisan and ready to go. And so to all my colleagues or most of my colleagues, and so it's about time, the most precious commodity in the Senate is the time that you Have a bill on the floor. And there's only so many bills that will ever get the benefit of a vote. And so Senator Schumer and I had such good relationship that he made this a priority. Unknown Speaker 20:09 Okay, that's, that's really helpful. Insight. So it's a combination of you had a track record, right, and a reputation of working on bipartisan legislation with Senator Graham, a willingness to compromise along the way, and to address concerns. And then yes, whether it's house rules, or the majority leader, being able to get it on the floor is also key. And Senator, if I might follow up with you as well. There were also some concerns from folks in your party as the bill made its way through, how did you address objections that oh, wait, this is too narrow. Now, it's not going as far as we hoped it would. Unknown Speaker 20:52 So that was a real challenge. Because we want to provide these protections for all workers, whether you're discriminated against because of your age, or because you may have a disability, or because of your race, or your gender, or your LGBTQ status, those issues are just as important to all of us as fighting for people who are harassed or discriminated against on the basis of sexual harassment. But we knew that one positive step forward is still worth doing and making sure that this class of employees could be protected, was really meaningful. We also had a lot of data on this particular kind of harassment and discrimination. We had a lot of examples, you just had the Harvey Weinstein case, you'd had many allegations of other workplace sexual assault, sexual harassment, for people to draw on, they knew it was a problem. They'd heard about it in their local papers. They'd heard about it on the national news. And so there's just more common ground because more people know about it. It also means that our work is not done. And so I spoke to Senator Graham at the White House bill signing in said to him, so how about any of these other areas, or any of them areas that you'd like to now work on with me to protect workers? And so Senator Graham said, Yes, and we are now working on ending age discrimination in the workplace. So that is the next bill, we are going to introduce. And we will marshal all the evidence and data because there's a lot of data on age discrimination. Certainly in my state, I've heard about it from so many constituents, especially once you hit 55. There's a lot of pushing out in favor of younger people, because younger workers are less expensive. So I think that this will be the next piece that we tackle together, Senator Graham and I, because you do need to work on a bipartisan basis, and you have to build from there. But eventually, we'll protect all workers. And I'm not going to give up until we do. Unknown Speaker 22:57 Great, thanks so much. And it's really interesting to hear that it was the data played such an important role here having the facts that everyone could agree on, on the facts was key, as well as those high profile instances that drew public attention to this really, really interesting insights. Ken, back over to you. So I, again, you talked about some changes that were made in the legislation that enabled you to get on board. But there were still some objections from from folks. And on your side of the aisle. Could you talk a little bit about what what remained is the sort of barriers why, for them why they didn't feel comfortable signing on, do you think? Unknown Speaker 23:39 Sure. I think one of the interesting differences between the House and the Senate is nothing is unanimous in the house, or many things that are unanimous in the Senate, fortunately, I guess. So they're they're really the the Republicans were opposed to this bill felt like it was a slippery slope that that if we did away with arbitration in this area, it was really a way to start doing away with arbitration and all areas. I didn't. I didn't agree with that. I think it's one of those arguments that most people saw through frankly, I had a number of House members come to me and tell me that after the debate on the floor, they were convinced to vote for this bill. And so I think they saw through that that argument about the the slippery slope of ending forced arbitration in cases of sexual assault and sexual harassment. on the Democrat side. It was interesting, and we really couldn't argue too much about how this wasn't, you know, a slippery slope how this was, you know, this was the last thing that we were going to do because on the progressive side in the house, they wanted more they didn't want to pass this bill and hurt their chances of ending our victory. Trade Agreements all together force arbitration all together. And so there was really a delicate balance of how do you convince enough Republicans that this is not the end of force arbitration, and at the same time, get the progressives on the Democrat side, onto this bill. And so that was the balancing act that we had to deal with in the house. Unknown Speaker 25:26 It's really interesting. So rhetoric can actually get in the way of results here. If when you tone it down, and you focus on what the bill actually does, it might make it easier to reach consensus. Let me Senator, I understand you've got to go off to do some votes very soon. So I'd like to have another question for for all three of you, if I if I might. You know, we know from our research at the Conference Board, that, you know, there is a huge focus at the C suite, the CEO level among consumers, and among employees, of course, on economic issues and on workplace issues. The number one issue for CEOs in the United States and around the world is attracting and retaining talent, CEOs. Again, their number one and two social issues are economic opportunity, and economic fairness, that beats out all other social issues. For consumers, their number one and number two sustainability issues beating out environmental concerns are actually fair labor and fair working conditions. Really interesting. But bipartisan, all levels of accompany care about economic opportunity, economic fairness, and workplace, you know, fair labor conditions and fair wages. So I'm wondering whether, apart from the the idea of maybe tackling age discrimination, are there other areas that you see as possible for for bipartisan collaboration to address this, this real focus on on workplace, workplace fairness, and an opportunity? Senator, I'll start with you. And then can I'd like to hear your views as well as your views, Gretchen. Unknown Speaker 27:25 So in terms of workplace fairness, some of the other areas that I work on include equal pay for equal work, just making sure there's an encouragement for employers to have more transparency, simply just listing what jobs you have and what the general pay is for those jobs. And then doing your own assessment, like, if I have a male and a female doing the same job are they being paid the same. So really encouraging transparency, encouraging the ability for employers to ask if other people in their same job are receiving the same pay. And so we have legislation to do that. There's also workplace fairness issues around the care economy, meaning that, despite all other things, women are still doing something like 70% of the care and household chores in any given family. So it's very hard to have the responsibilities you have at work and all the responsibilities at home, or the vast majority of the responsibilities at home. And so increasing structural support for work, meaning a national paid leave plan, affordable daycare, universal pre K, those three things alone would make it easier for parents to thrive in the workplace, to make sure single parents can thrive in the workplace, to make sure that the caregivers and families who are often women can thrive in the workplace. And so those are some fairness and equity issues that I'm also working on. Because we want everyone to thrive. We want everyone to be working at their fullest economic potential when all workers are working for their highest pay in their most senior job they can get you have a faster growing economy, and you have more prosperity in America. So these investments would make a huge difference in creating economic growth immediately. Unknown Speaker 29:18 Great. And could I ask you Do you think there's much prospect for bipartisan support in the Senate for for some of these? Or where do you think the likelihood of bipartisan support is greatest? So the Unknown Speaker 29:31 affordable daycare idea, there's lots of bipartisan ideas about how to get there with tax credits, tax deductions, for national paid leave, again, there's bipartisan support on the tax benefit side, not necessarily on making an earned universal benefit yet, but that's what I'm working towards. And universal pre K. I think there's potential bipartisan support with just grants to states that create this kind of support. So there's always a place for bipartisanship, there's always a piece of every idea that can find common ground. And that's what I'm working towards. Unknown Speaker 30:09 Great thanks. Can, you know, come from a different side of the aisle different parts of the country? And, you know, I'm understanding your concerns about federalism and expanding role of federal government. Are there areas where you think that two parties can come together to to improve economic opportunity, or workplace conditions and, and so forth? Unknown Speaker 30:36 I think there are, I am somewhat reluctant to to go in some of the areas that the senator measured, but I do think that when we talk about improving our economy, we're talking about improving our economy for everyone. And what we saw in the last few years, or actually, a few years ago, with tax cuts were an improved economy, a business economy that really helped a lot of people. I think one of the things we have to focus on is competition in the workplace, making sure that there are employers who are competing for employees and are willing to give benefits to employees, because they want to retain employees, or, frankly, they want to attract employees from other companies. And so I have a much greater comfort in the private sector dealing with a lot of the issues that we see around fairness and around equity and and how do we really improve the working conditions and in my mind, having the federal government or state government interfere is is dangerous, because oftentimes, we have unintended consequences that set us back as opposed to move us forward. So I think that, from my perspective, we need to make sure that we have competition and in and also, I think one of the great things that gretchen carlson did, frankly, was to bring awareness to certain issues. I, when when she mentions that, you know, she would go and talk to groups and ask them to raise their hands if they knew whether they had a forced arbitration agreement or not. And no one raised their hands. When we talk about the need for affordable daycare, in my district, I went last August, probably 15 different towns that had less than three 4000 people in them. And getting affordable daycare in rural America is even more is even more of a challenge than than in urban America. And so they're they though those challenges I think can be solved it at least in a partnership between the private sector and government. But we all want to Unknown Speaker 33:09 have like some good bipartisan basis to work on. I'm going to follow up on affordable daycare. Alright, it's really hard. There's one slot for every eight kids that need it right now. So we definitely want to find ways to make more availability. Unknown Speaker 33:26 Yeah, okay. Okay. The gavel? Yep. It's the it's approved. All right. I clerked at the Supreme Court. And the joke was that when Justice O'Connor voted, the whole thing was decided anyway. So you get a couple of people together, it works. No, I think that's it's really interesting, because it is something that crosses the on these economic issues. It crosses the red blue divide, it crosses the divide between rural areas and urban areas. So I think there's an opportunity for folks to come together here. So So Gretchen, your thoughts on what's next on the horizon. And thank you, Senator. Unknown Speaker 34:07 So at my organization, lift our voices, we are laser focused on eradicating the two silencing mechanisms in the workplace. So arbitration, which we've been talking about, and then also NDAs, which are the other culprit of keeping these issues silent and promulgating throughout decades and decades. So we believe that those are the silver bullets to equity. So now that we've accomplished forced arbitration just for harassment and assault, and I happen to agree with the senator, that we need to protect other other groups who are disenfranchised as well from that, but getting to NDAs is incredibly important. And the congressman and I just had a conversation about that yesterday as well as with the center because we believe that that's a huge other way that companies, you know, silence, silence their people and it's kind of an old school way of looking at it. So we believe that actually our issues are the silver bullets to equity for everything. Because if silence is a key marker inside of your company, then maybe you also don't agree with paying your people fairly, and lifting them up and retaining them because everything else is silent. So that's my first point. The other thing about pushing out talent, that is such a high important concern for all C suite executives. That's exactly what happens with NDAs and forced arbitration. You push out women, you push out people of color, you push out diversity. And you may not even realize that you're doing it not because you're naive. But I've had many conversations with CEOs, where they've actually looked at their general counsel in the room and they said, do we have these things? And the general counsel say, Yep. And on one occasion in Chicago, the CEO said, Not anymore. They're going away today, because he did not understand that he was pushing out the exact people he wanted to retain. And especially in an employee market right now, where employees have more choice. We believe that these things are incredibly important. The last thing I would just add is that you talk about the studies at the Conference Board, a study that we did at lift our voices with a partner organization, found that the number one issue amongst men and women about workplace issues now in 2021, for the first time ever, it was not equal pay. That was number two. Number one was eradicating misogyny, harassment, assault, and silence in the workplace, unbelievably. So we have come a long way in the last five years to educate people about these issues. Unknown Speaker 36:47 Really interesting. And you can it also seems to me that you were talking about competition for for workers. And sounds like there's another potential area for common ground here. And look, I'm not advocating or nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, not advocating for any legislation here, obviously, but does sound like there's common ground around the idea of transparency to to enable the the labor market to work more efficient ways. So that's not necessarily telling companies what they need to do, but increasing some degree of transparency. I don't know if you've got thoughts on on that idea. Unknown Speaker 37:27 Oh, I think absolutely. And I've had great conversations with Gretchen, one of the challenges on the federal system, again, is to see how things work. Oftentimes, we look at states and we see a law that's passed in the state and what the impacts are, and frankly, the state will come back a year or two later and amend the law and, and and fix some of the issues. And so before we end up doing something on a national level we learn from and even one of the great things that occurred here with with Gretchen's work was that some of these major American companies did away with the forced arbitration before Congress and were acted, and before many of the states acted, and so there are corporate players who recognize the benefits of doing the right thing. And and I think that, you know, I am reluctant to use federal power. Before I know what the results gonna be. And I think that we, in various people in the Senate and House are in various different places on that someone to lead. And hopefully, the states and corporate America follow. And, and some of us want to be a little more careful, especially in this area of how we move forward. And so I think that, as Gretchen and I, and others work through these non disclosure, non disclosure agreements and some of the other areas, it's really a challenge. I do look forward to working with Senator Gillibrand on daycare, I think it is a huge issue in America. And so I think it's really exciting to be able to learn more, and, and find some good solutions. Unknown Speaker 39:21 Well, that, that that's great. And I you know, it's it's wonderful to see this, this happen in real time like this. So I'm just wondering, you know, as its you talked about, can the, you know, states are sort of laboratories of democracy. You've got the private sector in the front lines of working through a lot of these issues, and you can see some private sector ordering on them. I'm wondering what your advice is to CEOs today in the wake of the passage of this law, you know, how would you talk to them about what they are To be doing with their, with their workforce with questions of, you know, workplace fairness in all what? You're in a room with a bunch of CEOs, what's what's your advice to them? Unknown Speaker 40:12 Well, it's rare that I'm in a room with a bunch of CEO. Unknown Speaker 40:19 Virtually right now, Unknown Speaker 40:20 okay. You know, one of the things I've been working on our antitrust laws in relation to big tech, and I have had a lot of interaction with CEOs and counsel for various companies. And I think that I don't know that that CEOs really understand the impact they have on members of Congress, when they come in, door closed, no notes being taken, nothing's recorded, and just honestly say, you know, we've got an issue, and we're looking for some help in solving this issue. And that, honestly, it really has an impact on members in the House and Senators. And so I would, I would say, get involved, you know, get off the couch, just like I tell voters, and I don't care if you vote for me, or you vote for somebody else, but make sure you vote. And in the same thing with with CEOs, if there is an issue, whether it's with competition and antitrust area, whether it's with labor issues, whether it's with immigration, frankly, it's another issue that I work with, work on and judiciary, get off the couch, get to the Hill, come see 1012 members in a day, and I know everybody's busy. I'm not suggesting that, that you avoid your Government Affairs Vice President at all, but but it coming from a CEO, it's a lot more powerful, genuine and I think taken more seriously. And so I would, I would encourage people to get involved. Unknown Speaker 41:56 That's, that's really excellent advice. And I just note that companies in some ways are feeling a little shell shell shocked, we've we did a survey and found out that actually, about 80% of corporations felt like 2022 was going to be as challenging an environment for corporate political activity as 2021 was, and that was both on the political contribution side, and on the and on the public advocacy lobbying side. But what you're saying is, don't be shy, come forward, and bring your CEO to talk about the issues that really matter. So you can have that transparent, candid conversation that actually, frankly, also builds an environment of trust going forward. Absolutely. Yeah. No really, really helpful. Christian, I'd like to turn to you to to ask you about the about the journey here. I mean, this this legislation was percolating for a while. It represented a broad grassroots movement. And I can you talk we talked a bit about the legislative process, but I'd actually like to wind back the clock a little bit and talk about the grassroots movement here, and how that led to the, to the legislation that that was passed in February and signed into law. Unknown Speaker 43:21 Yeah, because we had this massive victory, it makes it seem like, you know, poof, this is great. bipartisan bill, this has been an arduous journey for the last five years for me, I would you know, sometimes I call it a slog. But luckily, I grew up in the great state of Minnesota, where my parents instilled in me the Protestant work ethic, and I've killed myself to, to basically try to get this done with the help of the two people on this call today, who were champions of it, but I could write a book on how to pass a bill now. And, you know, really, it was just it was walking the halls of Congress. You know, I started five years ago, and mainly my strategy was to get to Republican because this tends to be more of a Democratic issue. And so so that was my goal. And being able to flip somebody like like Ken, who originally didn't agree with this legislation, and then we made slight tweaks, and then he did was, you know, really great experience for me. And we've developed a friendship over that. And that's what happened with other members of Congress as well. In the Senate, we all know it's 5050. So I needed to have 10 Republicans on board and even though you mentioned it was unanimous consent, there was a ton of stuff in the weeds that people don't know about. I had to get 10 Republicans to get to that point. And so that was my kids, and I actually would have a happy dance in the kitchen every time I got another one. We actually had a board up in our kitchen where we were marking off till we got to 10. So at first we got five on on judiciary in the Senate. So we had Graham and Grassley and Kenny And Blackburn and Holly, and if you think about their politics, even inside of the Republican Party, they're very different. So very conservative to more moderate. So it was interesting how they came together on this issue. And then I got outside of judiciary. I've got a Portman Collins Murkowski. Oh, also on judiciary Tillis, and then shelling more capital. And that, you know, when I got 10, that was a crying day of joy, because I knew that it would pass. And as Senator mentioned, the next hurdle was how the hell do we get this thing to the floor? Because it was such a small, narrow bill, you know, how do we get the attention of Schumer? To be able to, you know, do we need to attach it to something that's bigger? Do we, you know, is there a way we can get it, it became that, you know, Schumer said it was one of his top 10 priorities, to get to get to the floor. And so it's almost like the perfect storm it, the house actually acted first. And in February, I was there for it. We had 20, firm Republicans. And we got 113, thanks, in part very much to Ken, who's on this call, who really whipped them up. And then that sends a big message to the Senate. And three days later, the Senate has a different format of how they did it. But it was unanimous consent, I was also there for that. And then I cried, tears of joy. And then three weeks later, we were at the White House to to sign this into law. And I spoke and introduced the president. And after he signed it, he gave me this pen. So this is, you know, something that's going to remain really important to me. And this is not about Gretchen Carlson, this is about the millions of people that I have helped, because I happen to have the platform to be able to get this done, and the perseverance, and I encourage, as Ken said, I encourage you to call your members of Congress and I also encourage every CEO, and C suite or HR executive on this call to reach out to me, because I want to help you through this process, you can go to my website at Gretchen carlson.com, or at lift our voices.org. I want to help you get on the right side of history on this and do what's right for your employees. Because this is how we solve these issues. It's by talking about them. And I think that in the beginning, when I started this five companies felt like maybe it was just a passing fad, and they didn't really have to address it. And I actually noticed this major tonal shift the second time we brought the bill around, where I would ask people raise your hand if you're in favor of keeping women and men who are assaulted and harassed in the workplace silent. Oh, I don't see any hands. Okay, so now we have a good starting point. And this is how we get it done. So I encourage all companies to do what's right now because he has left the station. And you're going to be left in the dust with this particular issue. And people are going to leave your companies if you continue to silence them. So call me up, get on the right side of history. And and I will help you through this process. Unknown Speaker 48:10 Thanks very much. And thanks for all of your remarkable work on this and for sharing the insights of what it took to get this done. I think one thing that's also struck me about this discussion, is that one thing that might have made some of this possible was that this was not a high profile issue on which there was polarization beforehand, right. I mean, it was you brought something to light that people could look at in light of data and so forth. And they hadn't they they weren't necessarily entrenched. And I think that's also something for folks who are thinking about problems that need to be solved. Hmm. You know, speak up, because it's congressman, it's Ken, you said, you know, come forward with these issues that people may not know about. But where we're Congress might might might be able to help. And that seems to be an interesting dynamic area as well. So let me just conclude if I could with any any final words of advice that each of you, each of you might have, for anyone who's seeking to get legislation through this year? And an image or is it is it just wait for 2023? Or is you know, what should you be doing it to be doing? Now if you've if you've got one of these issues? If you're at a company and you say, you know, whether it's relating to tech or antitrust, you know, there's whole litany of, of topics that are out there that that companies would like to see action on. Ken, what should they do? Do they just hold their breath and wait for 23? Or what did they do now? Unknown Speaker 49:52 No, I think one of the lessons that I think Gretchen learned and shared before is that this is Five year process, you've got to, you've got to start a bill, you've got to start with an idea, you've got to start with a small group of people that feel passionately inside these buildings, and then it starts to percolate. And as other people learn the issue better, they start to join, and you gain this critical mass at some point. But you don't, you don't come to Congress, that our government wasn't set up to move quickly. And thank God, it wasn't because we would have and your business executives would be really mad. Because there would be no predictability in what we were doing. And that's really important for the business world, the corporate world and also for the country. And so as as we start to talk about the next set of issues in the labor area, the corporate area, and I trust area, the immigration area, it takes a while to get people to come together, one of the things I think that's really amazing is that people will do, instead of taking a poll and figuring out whether the people in my district agree with me, I'll actually lead on an issue and then go and try to make sure that I am talking and explaining why I did what I did. And that takes time. And so we convince the leaders in this body that they need to move forward on an issue, then it's up to the leaders to go back to their, to their districts to their states. And and talk about the issue. So you you help build a critical mass in the country. That's how our government works. It's how it worked and this particular legislation, and it's how it will work in the future. Unknown Speaker 51:46 That's really important. So people need to think when they're interacting with with policymakers, that you're not just trying to get their vote, you actually want they need to become ambassadors for you on the topic, so that they can go back and explain their votes to others who may need a bit of convincing. So I think that's, that's a really critical point. Gretchen, you've you've earned your stripes here on this, this bill, any any advice to others on getting legislation through in the future? Unknown Speaker 52:18 I'm already working on it. You got to strike when the iron is hot. As I said, I met with Ken in person yesterday, I met with Senator Gillibrand in person, and many others yesterday, actually, and spoke at the National Press Club. I mean, it's all about getting educational information out there for people. And and so, you know, we are immediately moving forward in these other areas, whether it's NDAA score arbitration for other issues, as the Senator mentioned, with regard to age discrimination, where we think we might be able to find the next era of bipartisan support. And no, I'm not waiting for 2023. Because, you know, we, I believe that we can maybe get one more of these issues accomplished before the midterms, when people still like each other right now. So so, you know, I continue to press forward, I kind of I know how it works a little bit now. So I have a lot more information than I did at the at the beginning. And it's it's true, it's finding the ambassadors who want to champion the cause, because they're the ones that are going to do the work. And then my last piece of advice would be that you just never know who you're going to get. You know, like that. I think I was gonna get Congressman Matt Gaetz. Did I think I was going to get Senator Josh Hawley, Senator Marsha Blackburn. No. But you know, a vote is a vote is a vote is a vote. And you never know what they're going to think about the issue. And and I'm grateful to anyone who voted for this and and saw it the right way. Unknown Speaker 54:01 Well, thanks. Thank you both so much for being part of this discussion. You know, the Conference Board focuses on being a place for open minded civil discussion in a safe and constructive environment. And, and this webcast has been the best example of that. So thank you. Thank you both for all you've done on this issue. And frankly, for all you've done with for our audience today, I would encourage the people who are watching today to please download the additional resources deck if you if you'd like. We've got a great wealth of information on two tectonic shifts that are happening in American capitalism these days. The focus on broader array of issues environmental and social issues, and the shift from stockholder to stakeholder capitalism. Got a lot of great resources. I also would encourage you to visit our geopolitics hub. The Conference Board is moving at the speed of relevance, providing timely and valuable and and unique insights to help corporations address the crisis in Russia and Ukraine, as well as its broader implications for economy and for the future of business in a world where the rule of law and human rights and civil rights are not always respected. And so there are a lot of resources here, go to the hub. The next slide here shows you some of the truly great work I think my colleagues are doing here at the Conference Board to address the crisis in the Ukraine. And finally, I'd say if you're not already a member of the Conference Board, please consider joining us, I think you'll find it enormously valuable to you as an individual to your firm. And frankly, by working with the Conference Board, you can have an impact on society, and help companies become better corporate citizens. It's something we've been doing from since 1916. And we look forward to doing for more than another century. So again, Ken, Gretchen, thank you so much for a fantastic discussion. I know you're incredibly busy. So we're deeply appreciative for the time you devoted today. Thank you to Senator Gillibrand who took time out in between votes to join us as well. So thanks for a great discussion. And thank you, everyone, for joining us. Stay safe and be well