Youngstown Daily Legal News

Chamber backs bill to amend employment discrimination laws

TIFFANY L. PARKS
Special to the Legal News
Published: October 26, 2012

The Ohio Chamber of Commerce has endorsed a Senate bill that would revise the state’s employment discrimination laws.

Senate Bill 383, sponsored by Sen. William Coley, R-Middletown, aims to modify Ohio’s civil rights laws pertaining to employment and the statute of limitations for certain specified claims against an employer.

The bill states that a civil action against an employer alleging breach of an implied contract, a claim of promissory estoppel or the intentional infliction of emotional distress would have to begin within a year after the alleged practice.

In a statement, Tony Seegers, the director of labor and human resources policy for the Ohio Chamber, said enacting a measure such as SB 383 has been a long-standing priority for Ohio employers.

“The reforms contained in SB 383 will give employers a fair shake in defending against discrimination claims and will also help put Ohio’s legal system in sync with the employment laws of most other states,” he said.

“This is important, because a state’s legal climate can be either a major incentive or a major deterrent to business investment and job creation. We’d prefer to see Ohio become an even better place to build, expand or locate a business.”

Under current Ohio law, the Chamber statement said, employers could have to defend discrimination claims before both the Ohio Civil Rights Commission and a court.

“This can be both a costly and burdensome legal nightmare for businesses,” the statement read. “SB 383 will eliminate this dual front by requiring a plaintiff to file a charge of alleged workplace discrimination with either the Ohio Civil Rights Commission or file a suit in court, but not both.”

The Chamber statement went on to say revising state law would protect businesses while “still ensuring those who have been discriminated against in the workplace have a fair opportunity to fully pursue their legal claims.”

The bill states that any individual who believes he or she has been the subject of an unlawful discriminatory practice relating to employment would be permitted to file a charge with the commission within a calendar year after the discriminatory practice occurred.

If a charge is filed with the commission, SB 383 would prohibit the complainant from pursuing a civil action based on the same allegations.

With regard to capping the statute of limitations at a year, the Chamber statement said claims are decided “more fairly and efficiently the more quickly they are tried.”

“While the employment discrimination laws in many other states require that legal action be filed within one or two years, an employee currently has as long as six years under existing Ohio law to sue an employer for alleged employment discrimination.”

Although the Chamber has applauded Coley for introducing SB 383, the Ohio Employment Lawyers Association has taken an opposing view.

In a press release, the association described the bill as one that “protects sexual predators in the workplace.”

“This proposal would grant immunity to managers and supervisors who harass and intentionally discriminate against employees based on sex, disability, age, race, religion, military status or national origin,” the statement read, adding that harassers could be “off the hook” from personal liability.

If signed into law, SB 383 would allow an employer to raise an affirmative defense to liability under certain circumstances, such as the employer exercised “reasonable care to prevent or promptly correct the unlawful discriminatory practice or harassing behavior.”

Fred Gittes, legislative counsel for the OELA, said the bill is similar to a proposal that was shelved in the 125th General Assembly.

“This bill should also be rejected because individuals and employers who discriminate against or harass Ohio workers should be held fully responsible for their illegal conduct and those suffering discrimination should have access to full and equal remedies under state law,” he said.

Gittes said he is “saddened” by the bill’s provisions.

“We should be looking for ways to improve the working environment in Ohio to keep qualified employees here rather than eliminating protections and allowing hostility and racism in the workplace,” he said. “We oppose the bill because it makes it cheap for employers to discriminate against employees by placing severe limits on what an employee can recover for intentional discrimination.”

Seegers urged lawmakers to push SB 383 forward.

“Back in the ‘90s, when the Ohio Supreme Court was controlled by an activist majority, a series of outrageous decisions twisted our employment laws beyond recognition,” he said. “It’s way past time we fix the problems the Court caused.”

SB 383 is co-sponsored by Sens. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, Kris Jordan, R-Powell, and Cliff Hite, R-Findlay.

The bill is awaiting a committee assignment.

[Back]