Lawmakers tasked with ensuring workplace safety on Capitol Hill say there’s an explanation for why the number of publicly reported settlements is so low: The reforms to the complaint-reporting process passed in the #MeToo era are working.
But there’s also a strange reporting quirk that is leaving a portion of workplace rights settlements entirely out of public view, and one former congressional staffer who spoke to NOTUS described the workplace dispute resolution process as “a complete shit show.”
A law passed in 2018 was intended to create more transparency around which congressional offices are involved in settlements over misconduct complaints and how much Congress (and taxpayer money) pays out for those agreements. The publicly reported number of settlements has dropped significantly since 2019, when the reforms took effect, something lawmakers take heart in.
“I haven’t, honestly, heard concerns about the reforms leading to a change in culture in a negative way, so I’m hopeful that this is [due to] more enlightenment,” Rep. Joe Morelle, the House Administration Committee’s top Democrat, in response to NOTUS asking about the drop in the number of reported settlements in recent years. “People recognized how important workplace safety is and appropriate behavior.”
A spokesperson for the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights said that because of the way the reforms were written, it stopped publicly reporting all workplace settlement payouts. Now, only a subset of settlements specified by the reforms — including discrimination, family and medical leave — are public. It’s a factor that makes the number of publicly reported monetary settlements look smaller in recent years.
Payouts for claims related to the other parts of the congressional accountability law — including those that cover accommodations for people with disabilities and workplace safety — are now no longer reported at all, not even in the aggregate, leaving the public in the dark.
To explain why there appears to be fewer settlements, some current and former House Administration Committee members also pointed to the required training in raising awareness about workplace harassment and discrimination, arguing it has been effective and part of a broader cultural shift.
“I think the capacity of staff to stick up for themselves with the institutional support is there, so I wouldn’t assume that it’s not working,” because there are fewer reported settlements, former committee chair Zoe Lofgren told NOTUS.
Lawmakers also credited the fact that members are personally liable for certain settlements, like those hinged around complaints of discrimination or harassment against lawmakers, which are made public in annual OCWR reports.
“We all groan about it, but every time I do the training, there’s always something I go, ‘OK, wait a minute. I hadn’t thought about it that way,’ even though I’ve done this for years. I do think the training helps a lot,” Rep. Morgan Griffith, a Republican member of the committee, told NOTUS. “Things aren’t done in the back room, and you could end up with personal liability. Personal liability always helps people think a little better.”
The reforms were also intended to make it less burdensome for staff to file a workplace complaint, but at least one former staffer who was involved in a lengthy OCWR complaint process that led to a settlement payout described their experience as grueling and complicated.
“It was completely distracting. It completely changed the entire morale of the office. It created animosity amongst coworkers that worked very closely together in serious situations and long hours. It was uncomfortable,” this staffer told NOTUS, referring to a months-long process of depositions in which the staffer participated as a third-party witness after their coworker filed a complaint.
The staffer added that they received little information throughout the process about their rights or what they should do if they faced professional backlash for participating in depositions.
A spokesperson for OCWR told NOTUS it does not directly conduct investigations or depositions for workplace discrimination claims. Employees are responsible for providing, and paying for, their own representation in proceedings, though House employees can request free assistance and representation from the Office of Employee Advocacy.
Lawmakers amped up protections in 2018 after a string of misconduct allegations in Congress revealed the secretive process — overseen by the OCWR, then called the Office of Compliance — that kept the public in the dark about which offices were drawing from a publicly funded misconduct settlement account.
The changes require the OCWR to publicly report certain settlements and hold members of Congress financially liable for their own alleged misconduct. An earlier 2018 resolution also required the House to provide sexual harassment training and offer free legal counsel for House employees about employment issues through the Office of Employee Advocacy.
“That was a huge shift,” former Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier, who sponsored the changes, told NOTUS. “After it was passed, it took a good year or two to get stood up.”
OCWR has reported significantly fewer workplace rights settlements within the legislative branch than it did before those reforms took effect. Congress paid out $1.6 million in publicly reported monetary settlements for 33 claims between 2020 and 2024, data reviewed and compiled by NOTUS show. In the five years before the reforms passed, there were more than 56 settlements, costing more than $3 million.
The difference is at least partially attributable to the settlements OCWR stopped publicly reporting after the law, the office told NOTUS.
Congress sets aside funds to be used for Congressional Accountability Act enforcement, including to settle workplace discrimination and harassment claims. But lawmakers are required to reimburse those funds within 90 days if they have agreed to a settlement from a harassment or retaliation claim that directly involved them.
At least one House Republican is calling for cutting back workplace rights training. Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, in a letter to the House Administration Committee this week, requested for training to be limited to once per congressional cycle — every other year — instead of annually “because the training’s substance remains substantially similar each year.” (Issa’s office did not respond to a request for comment.)
The last time the House Administration Committee, which oversees the OCWR, had a public hearing about the office’s operations was in 2021. Current committee members largely told NOTUS that they hadn’t heard of any major issues with the OCWR since the Congressional Accountability Act was amended in 2018.
Committee members from both parties also told NOTUS they weren’t aware that the number of reported settlements had been dropping, and more reforms hadn’t been on their radar for consideration — though they acknowledged there may be ways to improve employees’ awareness of their rights.
“You don’t want the training to become stagnant, nor just where somebody runs through it,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk, a Republican on the House Administration Committee, told NOTUS. “There’s typically a lot of grey areas, but I think for both the employee and the member, it’s just good to have clarity.”
Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, who was on the Administration Committee when the reforms were passed, agreed that the public reporting of settlements helps discourage inappropriate workplace behavior on Capitol Hill.
“If there are high-profile cases and controversies in the field, I certainly think that may scare some people out of bad behavior. I think our rules changes also send the message that people won’t be able to sweep it under the rug,” Raskin told NOTUS.
Settlements have in the past been politically weaponized.
During last year’s campaign cycle, the National Republican Campaign Committee made a point of attacking Democratic Rep. Josh Harder over a $32,500 misconduct settlement in 2023 stemming from his office. That was paid out from taxpayer funds, even though it was after the reforms, signaling that Harder was not personally liable for the misconduct in his office. (Harder’s office did not respond to a request for comment.)
Republican Rep. Carlos Giménez, the only lawmaker whose office settled a claim last year, wasn’t too worried about his name being attached to a discrimination claim he wasn’t personally involved in.
“I believe in transparency,” Giménez told NOTUS, adding that as a former mayor in Florida, he was used to open records laws. “More of the federal government should be more transparent. Whatever happens, it happens. If you have to explain it, you have to explain it. That’s the way it goes, so I have no problem with it.”
—
Emily Kennard and Claire Heddles are NOTUS reporters and Allbritton Journalism Institute fellows.