If enacted, S1118 would introduce a new chapter – Chapter 151G – in the General Laws of Massachusetts that specifically outlines definitions and prohibitions concerning sexual harassment. This would amend existing labor and discrimination laws to create specific liabilities for professional investors who violate these provisions. The bill clarifies the legal standing of individual plaintiffs, allowing them to seek damages through civil actions while also enabling the Attorney General to pursue enforcement actions against offenders. These provisions aim to foster a safer and more respectful business environment in the financial and investment sectors, especially for those who might be vulnerable to harassment in these high-stakes situations.
Summary
Bill S1118, titled 'An Act relative to sexual harassment', aims to establish clear legal protections against sexual harassment specifically within the realm of professional investments in Massachusetts. Introduced by Senator Cindy F. Friedman and co-sponsored by other legislators, the bill intends to make it explicitly unlawful for professional investors to engage in conduct that constitutes sexual harassment, including making sexual advances or requests for sexual favors during business dealings. This represents a significant expansion of the existing legal framework regarding sexual harassment, particularly focusing on the intersection of such conduct with business transactions.
Contention
One notable aspect of the bill is the potential pushback it might face from some segments of the investment community. Concerns could be voiced regarding the implications for business dealings and how vague definitions may lead to increased legal costs and challenges for legitimate business practices. Proponents of the bill, however, argue that instituting clear boundaries on sexual conduct in professional environments is imperative to ensure all individuals can engage in investment activities free from intimidation or harassment. Thus, while the bill aims to enhance protections, it also raises questions about balancing these protections with the freedoms and operations of professional investors.