Women

Women 

Section Highlights: 

• Christie conditionally vetoed Lisa’s Law, a bill that would have created a pilot program to track domestic violence offenders with GPS technology. Instead, he proposed a study of the technology. But his administration missed the deadline to complete the study by five months, and when it finally released the study, domestic violence advocates criticized it as a “highly offensive” example of victim blaming that seemed to be more concerned with the potential abuse of the technology by victims than the threat posed by offenders.     
• In both 2012 and 2014, Christie vetoed two equal pay laws that would have strengthened workplace protections for women. 

Domestic Violence

Lisa’s Law

January 2014: Conditional Veto And Call For Study

In January 2014, Christie Conditionally Vetoed “Lisa’s Law,” A Domestic Violence Law That Would Have Implemented Pilot Program To Track Domestic Violence Offenders With GPS, Protecting Victims From Offenders Who Violated Restraining Orders. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Gov. Chris Christie on Monday conditionally vetoed domestic violence legislation named for a slain Toms River woman. The bill (A-321), known as ‘Lisa’s Law,’ would help protect victims of domestic violence by allowing courts to order electronic monitoring of certain offenders. According to a news release from Assembly Democrats, the bill is on hold while the Attorney General evaluates the availability of the technology needed to implement the monitoring system. The Attorney General now has 120 days to report back with the findings. […] ‘I’m disappointed and a bit surprised at the Governor’s delay in this bill given that roughly 15-18 other states have instituted similar laws,’ said Assemblyman Troy Singleton, D-Burlington, who sponsored the bill. ‘However, I’m committed to working together to build consensus so that we can see this law implemented as swiftly as possible.’ Singleton added Zindell’s death shows that more must be done to protect victims of domestic abuse from a similar fate. If Lisa’s Law is implemented, it would establish a four-year pilot program in Ocean County for electronic monitoring of certain domestic violence offenders. The purpose of the monitoring is to notify the victim if the offender is nearby.’ [Asbury Park Press, 1/13/14] 

January 2014: Christie Conditionally Vetoed Lisa’s Law, Which Would Have Established A Pilot Program To Electronically Monitor Domestic Violence Offenders Who Violated Restraining Orders, And Asked For A Study On The Technology Instead. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Lisa’s Law passed the Legislature in January and would have established a pilot program in Ocean County to electronically monitor offenders of domestic violence restraining orders and notify their victims once they got close. Christie vetoed the bill under the condition that the Attorney General’s office study whether the technology is available and can be implemented in New Jersey. The deadline to report back to Christie was in May; it was released on Wednesday night.’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

May 2014: Missed Deadline For Study

May 2014: Christie Missed Deadline For Study On Domestic Violence Law. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Gov. Chris Christie’s administration blew a deadline to complete a study on electronic monitoring of domestic violence offenders as part of the state’s proposed Lisa’s Law sponsored by Assemblyman Ronald Dancer, R-Ocean.’ [Asbury Park Press, 5/28/14]

• After Conditionally Vetoing Domestic Violence Law, Christie Proposed Study. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘A Lisa’s Law bill, also sponsored by Assemblyman Troy Singleton, D-Burlington, passed both houses on Dec. 19, 2013, but Christie waited 24 days until taking action with a conditional veto. When the bill was finally signed into law Jan. 17, the key change inserted by Christie delayed implementation and gave the state Attorney General’s Office 120 days to submit a report on available technology to monitor domestic violence offenders.’ [Asbury Park Press, 5/28/14]

October 2014: Controversial Release Of Study

October 2014: Five Months After Missed Deadline For Lisa’s Law Study, Christie Released The Study On The Same Day That A Domestic Violence Advocacy Group Planned A Press Conference To Criticize Christie For Not Releasing The Study. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘It was five months past the blown deadline on a task force report on domestic violence by the time legislators and advocates announced they would hold a news conference calling out the delay. Then, hours before the group was to gather in a first-floor state room in the capitol on Thursday, the report, ordered by Gov. Chris Christie to study the availability of technology to track domestic violence offenders, was released by the Attorney General’s office. The timing of the release would be the least of the frustrations for advocates of Lisa’s Law, a bill introduced in 2009 following the slaying of Toms River resident Letizia ‘Lisa’ Zindell by her ex-fiance.’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

• Task Force Said It Needed More Time To Complete The Study, Which Was Why It Was Released Late. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Loriquet said the task force, comprised of four deputy or assistant attorneys in the office, needed more time to work with vendors, other law enforcement and other municipalities with similar programs. ‘In order to not provide something that was superficial, we requested more time,’ he said.’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

Advocates For Domestic Violence Law Said Study Released By Christie Was Not Thorough Or Fair To Victims Of Domestic Violence. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘The timing of the release would be the least of the frustrations for advocates of Lisa’s Law, a bill introduced in 2009 following the slaying of Toms River resident Letizia ‘Lisa’ Zindell by her ex-fiance. Sponsors and supporters of the bill say they don’t believe the 18-page report is thorough or, in some areas, fair to victims of domestic violence. They have cited two specific passages in the report that suggest that an electronic monitoring program, as the bill would require, could be manipulated by victims of domestic violence, who are often women. It also says the offender can manipulate the program.’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

Advocates Said The Study Contained Victim-Blaming And Was ‘Ignorant.’ According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘But one portion of the report is ‘pretty disgusting’ to Tara DeLorme, who was friends with Zindell and after her death founded the nonprofit Lisa’s Light Foundation. The report says ‘no law enforcement or court personnel can control the actions of the victim,’ who ‘could choose to abandon her GPS or communication device in favor of reconciling with the offender, give her device to a proxy for the purpose of retaliation or revenge, or simply forget to carry her device on any particular occasion.’ ‘To go ahead and roll back and begin victim-blaming is extremely unsettling,’ DeLorme said. ‘We’re basically saying our victims are calculated and looking to impose harm on someone else rather than getting them safe ... and it’s ignorant.’’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

Co-Sponsor Of Domestic Violence Bill Said The Tone Of The Study Was ‘Highly Offensive.’ According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Assemblyman Troy Singleton, D-Burlington and a co-sponsor of the bill, also was critical of the timing and the tone of the report, which he called ‘highly offensive.’ ‘To have a passage in there to somehow insinuate that this would be used as a tool of revenge for victims to somehow jam up their offenders, I think, is unconscionable,’ he said. ‘We should be doing more things to turn victims into survivors, not piling on by trying to make it seem like they’re the guilty party.’’ [Asbury Park Press, 10/6/14]

October-December 2014: New Legislative Action

October 2014: Lisa’s Law Was Reintroduced In The New Jersey Assembly. According to the Record, “Two South Jersey assemblymen re-introduced a bill Thursday that would create a pilot program for monitoring domestic violence offenders — despite a report by the Attorney Generals Office that raises concerns about cost and how it would work. The bill’s sponsors, Assemblymen Troy Singleton, D-Burlington, and Ron Dancer, R-Ocean, say they still believe there’s a way to use a GPS monitoring program to protect victims and alert them when an offender is close by. Both the victim and offender would have to be equipped with a GPS device.” [Record, 10/2/14]

December 2014: Lisa’s Law Was Voted Out Of The State Assembly’s Judiciary Committee. According to the Herald News, “An Assembly committee Thursday approved a bill that would allow judges to force individuals convicted of multiple stalking offenses to wear GPS monitoring devices to help ensure victim safety. The bill, along with two others aimed at helping victims of domestic violence, were approved unanimously by the Assembly Judiciary Committee. If it becomes law, the measure would authorize judges to order electronic monitoring for anyone convicted of a second or subsequent stalking offense against the same victim. The bill does not spell out how long offenders would have to wear the ankle bracelets, the cost of which would be charged to them. […] Lisa's Law, the name given to the domestic violence monitoring bill, would create a four-year pilot program in Ocean County to monitor some domestic violence offenders.” [Herald News, 12/12/14]

Editorial Criticism

Star-Ledger Editorial: After Christie Changed Domestic Violence Pilot To ‘Mere Study,’ The Resulting Study ‘Includes Little Discussion Of The Potential Benefits, And A Lot Of Hand-Wringing Over All The Ways This Might Not Work.’ According to an editorial by the Star-Ledger, ‘It happens far too often. To an unhinged abuser, a restraining order is nothing more than a piece of paper. Which is why two lawmakers have proposed ‘Lisa’s Law.’ It would require the state Attorney General’s office and parole board to establish a GPS monitoring program to track abusers who repeatedly violate restraining orders, and alert their victims if they’re close by. Lawmakers unanimously approved the bill last year. But Gov. Chris Christie conditionally vetoed it, changing it from a pilot program to a mere study. The result, released last week by acting Attorney General John Hoffman, includes little discussion of the potential benefits, and a lot of hand-wringing over all the ways this might not work.’ [Editorial – Star-Ledger, 10/12/14]

Equal Pay

Opposition

In 2012 And 2014, Christie Vetoed Two Equal Pay Bills: One Would Have Increased The Statute Of Limitations On Equal Pay Violations, And The Other Would Have Required State Contractors To Be Transparent About Wage Information. According to Law 360, “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Friday again vetoed two bills designed to promote pay equality for employees of state contractors and prolong the statute of limitations for unfair wage claims, after shooting them both down in 2012. Christie conditionally vetoed the Unfair Wage Recovery Act, pending modifications, which would have restarted the statute of limitations governing pay discrimination claims with each paycheck an employee receives by declaring each paycheck an individual instance of the violation. He absolutely vetoed the Wage Transparency Act, which would have compelled state contractors to compile and submit details about gender, race, job description and wage information for all their employees as a condition of the state contract.” [Law 360, 8/11/14]

• Wage-Reporting Requirements Were Already In Place For State Contractors, But Bill Would Have Added Requirements To Report Gender And Race Information. According to Law 360, “Wage-reporting requirements are already in place in New Jersey for contractors who are subject to the Prevailing Wage Act, but 1038 would’ve added requirements for gender and race information for employees, and would also require contractors not subject to prevailing wage laws to submit the information.” [Law 360, 8/11/14]
• Christie Said He Supported Bringing New Jersey In Line With Lilly Ledbetter Act, But He Wanted To Amend Bill To Limit Amount Of Back Pay Someone Could Receive To Two Years, Regardless Of How Long Pay Disparity Lasted. According to Law 360, “Christie endorsed the general purpose of the unfair wage bill, Senate Bill 783, saying it would bring New Jersey state law into alignment with the federal protections offered by the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. But Christie, in his veto message, recommended amending the bill with language that would limit the amount of back pay an employee could collect to a two-year period, regardless of how long the pay disparity lasted, in keeping with the federal legislation.” [Law 360, 8/11/14]
• Christie Called Equal Pay Measures A “Patchwork Of Proposals” And That The Measures “Would Simply Impose Costly And Burdensome Mandates Upon Our State’s Businesses.” According to Law 360, “Christie said the bills, which were passed by the New Jersey Senate in March, were part of a ‘patchwork of proposals’ to address workplace discrimination, many of which he approved, according to the veto messages for the bills. But the transparency bill wouldn’t do much to improve anti-discrimination laws or boost workplace equality, Christie said. ‘As I explained when I vetoed this proposal last session, expanding the existing rigorous reporting requirements of the Prevailing Wage Act would simply impose costly and burdensome mandates upon our state’s businesses, and would do nothing to tangibly advance the bill’s purported goals,’ according to Christie’s veto message for Senate Bill No. 1038.” [Law 360, 8/11/14]

Editorial Criticism

Star-Ledger Editorial: Christie Said He Was In Favor Of Equal Pay, But He Vetoed Two Equal Pay Reforms. According to an editorial by the Star-Ledger, ‘Gov. Chris Christie says he’s committed to pay equity for women. So why, for the second time, has he killed two sensible reforms that would help prevent women from getting cheated in their paychecks?’ [Editorial – Star-Ledger, 8/14/14]

• Star-Ledger Editorial: Christie Vetoed Bill That Was Modeled After Lilly Ledbetter Act, Which He Claimed He Supported. According to an editorial by the Star-Ledger, ‘This is modeled after a provision of the federal Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that Christie said he supports. Unfortunately, flaws in federal law make it hard to enforce. Even if a woman has been discriminated against for decades, she can recover no more than a two- or three-year window of back pay.’ [Editorial – Star-Ledger, 8/14/14]
• Star-Ledger Editorial: Christie’s Conditional Veto Of A Bill That Would Let A Woman Obtain All Back-Pay She Was Owed If She Was Discriminated Against Made “New Jersey Law Worse For Employees Than It Is Today.’ According to an editorial by the Star-Ledger, ‘Weinberg’s other bill, the Unfair Wage Recovery Act, Christie’s conditional veto has rendered toothless. Under this reform, a woman who suddenly discovers she is being paid less than male co-workers would have had the opportunity to seek all the back pay she is owed, without hitting an arbitrary statute of limitations. […] Weinberg wanted to remedy that in New Jersey. Our state law against discrimination has no such cap on damages. But Christie gutted her bill because he thinks there should be an arbitrary cap on damages in state law, too — one that’s not tied to injury. He is actually advocating to make New Jersey law worse for employees than it is today.’ [Editorial – Star-Ledger, 8/14/14]
• Star-Ledger Editorial: ‘In The End, Is Our Governor Most Concerned With Protecting The Interests Of Women, Or Their Bosses?’ According to an editorial by the Star-Ledger, ‘So yes, he says he supports equal pay. He agreed to require employers to hand out anti-discrimination fliers, and prevent them from retaliating against workers who compare wages in an effort to detect discrimination. All good. But is it enough? In the end, is our governor most concerned with protecting the interests of women, or their bosses?’ [Editorial – Star-Ledger, 8/14/14]

Support

Christie Signed Legislation That Banned Employers From Retaliating Against Employees Who Discuss Their Jobs And Compensation With Coworkers. According to Lexology, ‘New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has approved legislation banning retaliation against employees who discuss their jobs and compensation with their colleagues if the purpose of the discussion is to assist in investigating potential discriminatory treatment concerning ‘pay, compensation, bonuses, other compensation, or benefits.’ The new legislation (P.L.2013, c.154) prohibiting ‘salary secrecy’ is designed to combat the obstacles to uncovering wage discrimination created by discouraging employees from discussing their wages and benefits with others. The new pay equity protection is effective immediately.’ [Lexology, 9/5/13]

Christie Signed Legislation That Made It Illegal For Employers To Retaliate Against An Employee Who Shared Salary Information With Coworker. According to New Jersey 101.5, ‘A win for women in New Jersey.  A bill to help fight the gender wage gap has been signed into law today by Gov. Chris Christie. According to 2009 U.S. Census Bureau data, women still earn roughly 77 cents for every dollar their male counterparts earn, with the gender income gap highest in higher paying jobs. The law makes it illegal for employers to retaliate against any employee who discloses to any other worker information such as the job title, occupational category, rate of compensation (including benefits), or the gender, race or other characteristics of the employee if the disclosure was made for the purpose of investigating the possibility of pay or compensation discrimination.’ [New Jersey 101.5, 8/29/13]

Christie’s Spokesman’s Said He ‘Strongly Believes In Equal Pay For Women.’ According to the Newark Star-Ledger, ‘Christie strategist Mike DuHaime Christie said the governor ‘strongly believes in equal pay for women.’ ‘He proudly proposed legislation to ensure the same kind of equal pay enforcement here in New Jersey as the Lilly Ledbetter Act proposed on the federal level,’ DuHaime said. ‘Sen. Buono and her partisan colleagues in the legislature have refused, for 200 days, to act on this legislation to strengthen pay equality here in the Garden State, all so she can have a falsely-manufactured political issue.’ Democrats last year sent the governor a package of four bills on the topic. He signed one (A2647) that requires employers to post information on state and federal gender discrimination laws. He conditionally vetoed the other two bills – one that would extend the period of time employees could sue for gender discrimination (A2650),and one that would bar employers from retaliating against employees who discuss job titles and pay (A2648). On the former, Christie said he was bringing the bill in line with the federal Lilly Ledbetter Act.’ [Newark Star-Ledger, 4/9/13]