Wilson Draws Criticism for Veto of Sex Harassment Bill

Gov. Pete Wilson on Tuesday drew heavy criticism--and the surprise resignation of a state official--for his unexpected veto of a bill by a fellow Republican that would have enabled victims to collect cash damages from employers for sexual harassment and other forms of workplace abuse.

With national attention riveted on the harassment issue in the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, Wilson rejected the California bill shortly before the midnight deadline Monday for acting on the proposal.

The bill would have empowered the state Fair Employment and Housing Commission to order damages up to $200,000 for employees who could show they were subjected to sexual or other forms of harassment on the job.

In protest, the Republican vice chairman of the commission, Milan D. Smith Jr., announced his resignation.

“Your veto effectively kills California’s Civil Rights Commission,” Smith said in a letter to the governor.

Citing the now familiar themes he used in the explosive veto two weeks ago of a bill outlawing job discrimination against homosexuals, the governor suggested that cash compensation for victims of employment abuse would be unnecessarily burdensome for business.

Further, he said the potential to receive $200,000 in damages would “stimulate” filing of claims against employers “regardless of merit.”

Linda Joplin, statewide coordinator of the California branch of the National Organization for Women, charged that Wilson’s veto represented “another example where the reality of sexual harassment in the workplace is not taken seriously. I don’t think it was taken seriously by the U. S. Senators (in the Thomas case) or taken seriously by the governor.”

Republican Sen. Marian Bergeson of Newport Beach, who carried the bill on behalf of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission, called Wilson’s action “unfortunate.” She said she believed that California women will be “disappointed . . . because the process now is not providing an adequate system for redress.”

And in a surprise twist, the chairman of the commission, Osias Goren of Los Angeles, who said he was a campaign fund-raiser and longtime supporter of Wilson, denied an assertion by the governor that Goren wanted the bill enacted so employees could gain “significant leverage” over employers in reaching job discrimination settlements.

Goren, a lawyer, real estate developer and farmer, said he discussed the “philosophy” of the bill with Wilson last spring but “at no time did I say I wanted to use that leverage to get employers to settle. I’m an employer, a businessman myself.”

In 1982, the commission--made up of gubernatorial appointees--began on its own to order compensatory damages in job discrimination cases. However, the state Supreme Court last year ruled that the agency had no statutory authority to do so. The Bergeson measure sought to provide that authority.

Now, Bergeson said, the commission possesses only “meaningless powers.” She said it should be abolished unless given authority to levy damages. The commission is authorized to order the payment of back wages, reinstatement to a job and reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses.

Bergeson said she had managed to neutralize early opposition to the bill by the politically influential California Chamber of Commerce and California Manufacturers Assn., and had struck an agreement with employer representatives to set maximum awards at $200,000.

An administrative process, rather than a judicial one, would be more fair and less costly to employers and workers, she argued.

“While the bill was going through the Legislature, there were courts awarding millions of dollars,” she said.

In explaining his veto, Wilson said that if the Bergeson measure became law “innocent” employers might choose not to defend themselves “simply to avoid the hassle, notoriety and expense of defending. That’s not fair to the employer or his other employees.”

But by vetoing the bill, Wilson will send victims seeking compensation directly to the courts where “jury awards are abominable” for employers, said Goren, an appointee of both former Govs. Edmund G. Brown Jr. and George Deukmejian.

Goren said that until last year, commission awards averaged about $18,000 and the largest ever was $150,000. He said if the commission’s largest award had been decided in the courts, “the woman would have got millions.”

Steven C. Owyang, the commission’s executive and legal affairs secretary, said that sexual harassment cases have soared in the past seven years and now represent about two-thirds of the cases reaching the commission. He said 27 of the last 41 cases involved sexual harassment charges.

On housing discrimination cases, the commission also had been levying damages until a few weeks ago when it was ordered to quit by the state Supreme Court. “We’re flying with broken wings right now,” Owyang said.

Joplin, statewide coordinator for NOW, was struck by the similarities in Wilson’s explanation for vetoing the homosexual discrimination bill and Bergeson’s measure.

“It is essentially the same argument: bad for business. Well, sexual harassment is bad for business, especially for women employees,” she said.

Bergeson, who declared herself to be “a supporter of Judge Thomas and an ally of the governor,” also struck out at Wilson’s suggestion that the cash compensation would encourage the filing of frivolous claims. “We are talking about substantive, well-founded cases,” she said.

Meanwhile, the governor:

* Signed a bill by Assemblyman Pat Nolan (R-Glendale) to prohibit the jailing of women on contempt of court charges if they refuse to testify against a spouse or live-in partner who abuses them in domestic violence cases. Judges could, however, order such women to participate in a domestic violence prevention program or to perform appropriate community service.

* Vetoed a bill by Assemblywoman Marguerite Archie-Hudson (D-Los Angeles) that would have allowed a misdemeanor charge to be filed against a law enforcement officer who fails to report witnessing an unlawful assault of a person by another officer within 48 hours of the incident. This measure was sparked by the beating of Rodney G. King by Los Angeles police officers. The governor said the legislation was unnecessary because it duplicated existing law that requires any officer observing unreasonable force by another officer to stop such activity and report it.

* Vetoed a bill by Assemblyman Curtis Tucker (D-Inglewood) to prohibit people from riding in the back of a pickup truck unless the space is equipped to secure them to the vehicle. The governor said current law prevents children under 12 from being transported in the rear of a pickup truck unless it is enclosed or they are accompanied by an adult.