December 5, 2018
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:

Members of the Housing, Health, Energy, and Workers’ Rights Committee
Patricia Lee and Asha Venkataraman, Council Central Staff
CB 119374: Office of the Employee Ombud

On December 6, the Housing, Health, Energy, and Workers’ Rights committee (HHEWR) will
discuss Council Bill (CB) 119374, establishing the Office of the Employee Ombud (OEO). This
memo provides (1) background leading up to the introduction of the Council Bill; (2) a
description of the bill; and (3) issues identified by Central Staff and Councilmember Mosqueda,
as well as Councilmember Mosqueda’s proposed amendments to address those issues. The
amendment language is included in a substitute version of CB 119374, attached to this memo
(Attachment A). The origins of the legislation and issues that Central Staff identified are
described in a October 23 memo presented and discussed during the budget process.
Background
Due to concerns about workplace culture that surfaced Citywide over the last several years, the
Mayor’s Office established the Anti-Harassment Interdepartmental Team (IDT), which issued
recommendations in its July 2018 report, Addressing and Preventing Workplace Harassment
and Discrimination. As noted in the October 23 memo, Councilmember Mosqueda’s staff,
among other City department staff, participated as members of the IDT.
The IDT recommended the creation of and specific characteristics for an Ombuds function
within the City to address a variety of concerns. In particular, the IDT’s report recommended
that the City:
“Immediately investigate and propose a structure for an Ombuds function within the
City. This neutral third party is necessary to adequately address the lack of trust and
support people experience when they report incidents of harassment. A proposal should
be led by OCR and SDHR and be completed within three months. The Ombuds function
will address these overarching concerns: (Immediate-Mid-Long)
a. Be an advocate for employees
b. Be independent (of the executive)
c. Address concerns that employees have that may not rise to the level of a full
investigation
d. Offer support
e. Be trauma-informed
f. Follow up with employees throughout the process
Page 1 of 7

 g. Offer confidential support (they will not be a mandatory reporter)
h. Listen with empathy
i.

Engage in harm reduction

j.

Communicate with regular updates and completely respond to my questions

k. Help to hold leadership accountable.” 1
As part of its efforts, the IDT highlighted four high priority areas for immediate implementation:
Accountability & Values, Central Hub, Independent Advocate System, and Comprehensive
Training. The recommendations reflect a multi-faceted approach, recognizing that multiple
changes may be necessary to implement them. As applicable here, the “Central Hub” priority
area includes:
•

“Establish an independent entity to support Citywide intakes, investigations, and
review to replace existing system. Communicate and educate on multiple entry
points and resources for support.

•

Ensure options to be anonymous, confidential, rooted in [race and social justice],
independent, and relational.” 2

The “Independent Advocate System” includes:
•

“Launch an advocate system to support employees through the intake, reporting,
investigation, resolution, and aftercare processes.

•

Advocates will be survivor-centered, competent, passionate, RSJI-trained, skilled in
trauma-informed care practices and not mandatory reporters.” 3

In response to the IDT Report and recommendations, Mayor Durkan signed Executive Order
2018-04 on September 21, 2018, outlining how the Executive branch would reform and update
its handling of allegations of harassment and discrimination. The Mayor’s Office subsequently
transmitted CB 119374 to establish the OEO in conjunction with the 2019-2020 Proposed
Budget and added $564,000 in 2019 and $562,000 in 2020 to support start-up costs and three
positions in the new office. The Mayor’s Office indicated that the OEO would enter into a
memorandum of understanding to use Seattle Department of Human Resources (SDHR) staff
for administrative support. The proposed budget also addressed the “Central Hub”
recommendation by adding a City Investigator to SDHR to coordinate employee intakes and
investigations and develop a consistent approach to intakes and investigations across the City.
The Council did not approve the expenditure of funds for the OEO or pass the legislation.

1

City of Seattle, Anti-Harassment Interdepartmental Team, Addressing and Preventing Workplace Harassment and
Discrimination, Page 36 (July 2018).
2
Id. Page 2.
3
Id.
Page 2 of 7

 Instead, the Council adopted Green Sheet 23-1-B-1 during the budget review process to proviso
funds until the Council passed CB 119374. The proviso reads:
“None of the money appropriated in the 2019 budget for the Office of Employee Ombud
may be spent to hire staff, set up administrative functions, or establish the office until
the City Council passes an ordinance approving the establishment of an Office of
Employee Ombud; however, this spending restriction shall not apply to the initial
administrative tasks of identifying a physical office space, beginning the recruitment for
the Director, or assessing the equipment needed for a new office.”
The HHEWR committee plans to discuss CB 119374 in December and potentially again in
January and plans to vote it out of committee either in December 2018 or in January 2019, with
the goal of scheduling a Full Council vote on January 21, at the latest.
CB 119374
This legislation establishes and codifies the new OEO in the Seattle Municipal Code. As
proposed, it provides that the:
•

Mayor appoints, and the Council confirms the OEO Director.

•

OEO mission is to “assist individual City employees in understanding their options
and resources regarding allegations of workplace misconduct and navigating the
City’s processes and systems for reporting, investigating, and addressing work place
conduct concerns including, but not limited to allegations of harassment.”

•

OEO’s functions are to:
o Provide navigation to City employees about their options for addressing
allegations of workplace harassment, discrimination, or other misconduct
while maintaining confidentiality;
o Facilitate discussions to address miscommunications that may have led to
City workplace conflict; and
o Report by March 31 annually to the Mayor’s Office and the Council on broad
systemic issues including recommendations to improve the City’s Personnel
Rules, investigation system, workplace expectations, and other City
processes and systems.

•

OEO director shall provide input to the Mayor and the Council on the OEO’s
performance recommendation about any process improvements.

Under this legislation, the OEO would operate independently of other City departments, assist
City employees in understanding and navigating the City processes available, and be an
alternative source of information to what is currently provided. The OEO would not have the
authority to conduct investigations; instead, investigations would be streamlined in a unit in
SDHR for all departments. Currently, many City departments conduct their own investigations.
Page 3 of 7

 Proposed Amendments by Councilmember Mosqueda
In reviewing CB 119374, Central Staff and Councilmember Mosqueda identified a variety of
issues about how the OEO is established and functions, including that the proposed legislation
does not embody all the IDT Recommendations about the ombuds function. The following
summarizes these issues and the amendments to mitigate concerns.
1. CB 119374 does not fully reflect the IDT recommendations or detail how the OEO will
function.
CB 119374 provides a broad description of the OEO’s mission and functions but does not
provide detail on how the OEO will conduct itself or how it might better meet the IDT
recommendations. Proposed amendments reflected in Section 3.15.022.C (Att. A Pages 5-6)
would require the OEO to submit an implementation plan to the Council by the end of the
second quarter of 2019 describing how the OEO will:
•

Maintain data on the number, types and outcomes of complaints and inquiries
received;

•

Maintain and communicate employee confidentiality;

•

Recommend whether and how oversight will be structured, in consultation with the
IDT;

•

Develop a written disclaimer notifying City employees that their consultation with
the OEO does not constitute the filing of a complaint or legal action, is not
considered legal advice, and that the decision to pursue any options is the decision
of the City employee;

•

Recommend in-person trainings to prevent workplace discrimination and
harassment in City employment upon hire and/or on a routine basis;

•

Coordinate with the City’s contracted Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for
appropriate emotional assistance and consultation referrals;

•

Review current structures in the City to address harassment and discrimination and
recommend changes needed, including evaluation of the best placement for
investigations to address barriers to reporting and underreporting; and

•

Review the structure of the OEO and consider it as an independent office to ensure
it is free from undue influence by elected officials or other reporting authorities.

2. The OEO is an office in the Executive Department with limited independence.
The IDT recommendations express a desire for independence, and CB 119374 proposes an
office within the Executive Branch that is independent from the Seattle Office for Civil
Rights (SOCR) and SDHR. The proposed amendments would strengthen the independence
of the OEO while maintaining it in the Executive Branch:
•

Section 3.15.020 (Att. A Page 3) would expressly state that the “OEO shall be free of
Page 4 of 7

 undue influence by elected officials or other reporting authorities” and require the
OEO to provide all reports and requested data concurrently to the Mayor and the
Council;
•

Section 3.15.022.C.8 (Att. A Page 6) (as described in Issue 1) would require the OEO
to submit an Implementation Plan, of which one of the elements is reviewing the
OEO’s structure to make the OEO independent and free of undue influence from
elected officials or reporting authorities;

•

Section 3.15.022.D (Att. A Page 6) would require that the OEO develop its annual
report in consultation with the IDT or a subsequent oversight body, labor
organizations, and other key stakeholders.

3. It is unclear if the OEO will serve non-Executive Branch employees.
As transmitted, CB 119374 was not completely clear about which employees the OEO
serves, as the OEO was first discussed through Executive Order 2018-04, which, by its
nature is only applicable to Executive department employees. The proposed amendment
reflected in Section 3.15.022.A.1 (Att. A Page 3) states that the OEO shall assist individual
City employees in all branches of City government.
4. The role of the OEO in providing information is limited.
The IDT recommended that the OEO should be an advocate for employees by supporting
them throughout intake, reporting, investigation, resolution, and aftercare processes. CB
119374 gives the OEO the role of providing neutral and impartial information to employees
about the City’s options for dealing with allegations of harassment, discrimination, and
other misconduct. The proposed amendments reflected in the sections described here
make the following changes:
•

Section 3.15.022.B (Att. A Pages 4-5) would broaden the role of the OEO from a
neutral place of providing information to an office that will assist employees in
understanding and assessing their situation and options, though it is not authorized
to provide legal advice.

•

Section 3.15.022.B.1 (Att. A Page 4) would allow the OEO to provide this type of
assistance to employees regarding workplace conduct that (i) meets the legal
requirements to be harassment, discrimination, or retaliation; (ii) is in contravention
of City Personnel rules, workplace expectations, or policies; and (iii) is inappropriate
though it may not rise to the level of a legal violation or violate City policy.

•

Section 3.15.022.B.2 (Att. A Pages 4-5) would allow the OEO to assist employees in
understanding their options about (i) the City’s processes and systems for
addressing workplace conduct; (ii) the City’s Alternative Dispute Resolution process;
(iii) as applicable, how to contact their union representative to discuss options; and
(iv) seeking remedies through State or Federal agencies, or through private legal
actions.
Page 5 of 7

 The OEO serves City employees who may have workplace conduct concerns as well as
employees who have allegedly engaged in inappropriate conduct. The following are
proposed amendments to support employees:
•

Section 3.15.022.B.3 (Att. A Page 5) would specifically allow employees to bring
another person with them for emotional support to any discussions employees have
regarding miscommunication or workplace conflict.

•

Section 3.15.022.B.4 (Att. A Page 5) would allow the OEO to refer employees to
other programs such as the EAP.

5. Oversight over the OEO is not covered by CB 119374.
Executive Order 2018-04 states that the IDT will work with the SDHR Director and the OEO
to submit an annual work plan. It also states that the IDT will continue to meet and provide
oversight of OEO implementation and requests that the IDT work with SDHR to guide the
City’s efforts. However, these roles are not reflected in the legislation. The following
proposed amendments would address this issue:
•

Section 3.15.022.C.3 (Att. A Pages 5-6) would require the OEO to consult with the
IDT a subsequent oversight body as well as labor organizations and key stakeholders
on its recommendations regarding oversight of the OEO.

•

Section 3.15.022.D (Att. A Page 6) would require the OEO to develop its annual
report in consultation with the IDT or a subsequent oversight body as well as labor
organizations and key stakeholders.

6. The City’s accountability to the OEO is unclear.
CB 119374 requires an annual report from the OEO on “any issues that may extend beyond
the experience of individual employees and have a broader, systemic impact on the City,
including providing any recommendations to improve the City’s Personnel Rules, complaint
and investigations systems, workplace expectations, and other applicable City processes
and systems.” However, it does not require the Mayor or the Council to respond or take any
action on any such recommendations.
Proposed amendments in Section 3.15.022.D.1-4 (Att. A Page 7) would broaden the
elements on which the OEO must report to include:
•

Recommendations on training, specifically for live, in-person training;

•

Information on patterns of inappropriate workplace conduct;

•

Recommendations on systemic changes to truly root all City workplaces in racial
equity and social justice.

In addition, the amendment language reflected in Section 3.15.022.E (Att. A Page 7) would
require the Mayor and the Council committee with jurisdiction over the OEO to respond to
Page 6 of 7

 the annual report within 120 days of the receipt of the report. The written responses would
include:
•

Any policies or legislation the committee with jurisdiction over the OEO intends to
put before the Council for approval;

•

Any further information the committee with jurisdiction over the OEO or the Mayor
would like from the OEO or the IDT;

•

Any alternatives the committee with jurisdiction over the OEO or the Mayor would
like the OEO or the IDT to develop; and

•

Any recommendations, and the reasons therefore, the committee with jurisdiction
over the OEO intends to reject or consider on a longer timeline.

7. Remaining amendments.
Amendments not mentioned above include the following:
•

Changes to the recitals would:
o Reaffirm the Council’s commitment to City employees having a safe and
respectful workplace (Att. A Page 1); and
o Specifically call out the IDT’s July 2018 report and its recommendations (Att. A
Page 2).

•

Incorporating in-person training as:
o Part of the OEO’s mission to provide recommendations (Section 3.15.022.A.2 Att. A Page 4);
o One of the elements to explore in the Implementation Plan (Section 3.15.022.C.5
- Att. A Page 6); and
o Part of the recommendations provided in the annual report (Section
3.15.022.D.2 – Att. A Page 7).

•

Expansion of the annual report would include:
o Recommendations on training, specifically for live-in person training (as stated
above) (Section 3.15.022.D.2 – Att. A Page 7);
o Patterns of inappropriate workplace conduct (Section 3.15.022.D.3 – Att. A Page
7); and
o Systemic changes to truly root all City workplaces in race and social justice
(Section 3.15.022.D.4 – Att. A Page 7).

Attachments:
A. Proposed Amendments to CB 119374
cc:

Kirstan Arestad, Central Staff Director
Dan Eder, Deputy Director

Page 7 of 7