Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Signs Executive Order Banning City Agencies from Inquiring about Salary History of Job Applicants

November 4, 2016

First Lady Chirlane McCray: Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to City Hall.

[Applause]

I am so honored to share this grand stage with so many dedicated City employees.

Hello, dedicated City employees.

[Laughter]

We represent a broad array of agencies and roles, but those of us here who are women, women of all ethnicities, and those who are men of color have one troubling experience in common – our work has been consistently undervalued. Almost all of us have been paid less than we deserve from the very beginning of our work life.

When I graduated from college, back in 1976, women made 60 cents for every dollar that men made. That means my classmates and I had far less value than our male peers in the most literal way. That means the deck was stacked against us from the very start. And that means we were set up for a lifetime of less pay and the likelihood that we would never catch up.

Now, fast forward to last May when my daughter, Chiara, graduated from college. You would think – you would hope that in the four decades between her graduation and mine we would have closed the wage gap, but we’ve barely cut it in half.

Today, women of all ethnicities make on average 80 cents for every dollar men make. White women earn 82 cents for every dollar white women make. Black men earn 73 cents for every dollar white men make. And women of color are paid the least by far. For example, Latinas make just 54 cents for every dollar men make – 54 cents.

How can this be the case in 2016 in a country that claims to be a meritocracy?

And how can we close this gap as quickly as possible?

Today, the City of New York is answering these questions with bold, progressive policy because we need to make fundamental changes in the way people are hired in our city.

And let me say that again in Spanish because it bears repeating –

[First Lady McCray speaks in Spanish]

[Applause]

Now, here’s the reality. From the very beginning of our careers, women of all ethnicities, men of color have been paid less than our colleagues for the exact same work.

And every time we get a new job, our salary is based on what we were making before. So, not only do we start lower on the earnings ladder, we don’t rise as high with each rung that we climb.

The Commission on Gender Equity – which I lead as co-chair – is working to close disparities in pay in NYC and improve economic mobility. We are bringing the full force of City government to jumpstart the effort.

The executive order that Mayor de Blasio is announcing today will go a long way to ensure equal pay for equal work in our city beginning with our hardworking City public servants, because we can’t wait another 40 years to close the wage gap, and we won’t.

It is now my great pleasure to introduce an up-and-coming feminist, a feminist activist, a young woman who currently works as a Neighborhood Organizer in the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs, and she is exactly the type of developing leader any organization would be fortunate to hire, and she most certainly deserves equal pay for all of the skills she brings to the table.

Hina Naveed, the floor is yours.

[…]

Mayor Bill de Blasio: Once again, Chirlane McCray was right – Hina clearly is an up-and-coming leader. Let’s thank Hina for her wonderful remarks.

[Applause]

Chirlane talked about the trajectory of her life, and she’s told me the stories many times over the years about that feeling, that weight of knowing that no matter how good you were, no matter how hard you worked, that there was a really good chance you would not be paid fairly.

And I think it is very striking that the majority in this country – since women are the majority – that the majority have suffered under that reality for decades and decades. And the more we have looked at the question of inequality and income inequality the clearer it is that we have to go at the underpinnings of income inequality. That includes sexism and unequal pay for women – that includes structural racism.

Income inequality takes on many forms and has many reasons. Some of them are about some of the worst strains in our society that we have to weed out.

But I can tell you having listened to these stories for years that Chirlane’s own example – young woman who worked her way to Wellesley College – the college of presidents –

[Applause]

Come back in a week, I’ll be able to say that.

[Laughter]

Worked her way to Wellesley College, worked her way to New York City to start out in publishing, and gave it her all – one of the hardest working people I’ve ever known in my life, but always knew that that threat of unequal pay dogged her wherever she went.

And that has been a powerful example to me of why we had to do this and why New York City has to lead by example.

There’s another story in my life I’d like to refer to that is powerful in a very deep way because my own mother who travelled a very, very similar path to Chirlane – my mother, daughter of Southern Italian immigrants, was very hardworking, very driven, worked her way to Smith College, and that was a shock to begin with that this young woman was able to get to Smith College — and she excelled.

And she wanted to go work in the media and she got a job at, the then fairly new, TIME Magazine. This is the very end of the 1930’s. Well, she was exceedingly well-educated and capable and driven, but TIME Magazine at that time would not allow women to be reporters. There was a ban on women being reporters. So, she had to take the next job available which was Researcher and paid a lot less.

And that was the pattern of her entire life. She kept rising up through the ranks in different companies in communications, but always knew and would always tell us as kids that she knew that there are other people in the same exact company doing the same exact work getting a lot more pay.

So, this is something that in my family has been a reality and it affected, of course, the whole family. I think in families all over this city this has been a prevalent reality. Thank God it’s out in the open now. Thank God we’re talking about it and it’s the chance to do something about it.

And it’s time for New York City to take a decisive step forward.

We are clear that the unfairness we’re talking about here has been baked into our economy, has become something that affects the lives of women from the beginning of their career and then never lets go for decades and decades.

We have to break that cycle here and now. So, we are, today, devoting ourselves to an executive order that will end the practice of requesting salary history, which is one of the ways that this cycle is perpetuated; because salary history that’s based on unequal treatment then becomes the basis for the next salary, the next salary, the next salary, and it never ends.

We have to break that cycle. We have to weed out the past, start afresh, and value every one, and particularly, value women who have been subject to this discrimination – value them based on their talents and abilities and what they can do for the people of New York City in the job for which they’re being hired.

This executive order prohibits City agencies from asking job candidates about their salary history before making a conditional offer of employment.

It will affect over 350,000 jobs in City government and because it takes effect in just 30 days, will start having an impact in this year 2016. It will start to affect thousands of people who apply for open jobs or who apply for promotions and transfers to higher level jobs.

So, this is action that will happen right now, that will start changing the lives of women in this city this year and that’s what we need.

I want to thank – there’s so many people who are here because this is something that is passionate as an issue to focus on and to act on for so many people including so many in my administration.

This would be a good moment to say that the changes we’re making have to take many forms. And one of the most foundational things we determined – I’ve often credited our First Lady for this point – Chirlane said very adamantly from the beginning of the transition period, the senior leadership positions of this administration must reflect the population of this city and had to be majority women.

We’re very proud to say that the senior leadership positions of this administration are majority women.

[Applause]

And that is the first time in New York City history that that has happened and that means that the highest paid jobs in City government today – the highest paid jobs are held by women.

[Applause]

And those women hire more women on their teams and so on and so on.

But we wanted to make this systemic – systemic change through this executive order.

Let me thank the members of the administration who are here, and, again, here with passion to make this change. I’m going to name them all quickly and you can clap for them all.

Executive Director of the Commission on Gender Equity Azi Khalili.

Our DCAS Commissioner, Lisette Camillo.

Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs Commissioner, Nisha Agarwal.

International Affairs Commissioner, Penny Abeywardena.

Consumer Affairs Commissioner, Lorelei Sala.

Human Rights Chair and Commissioner, Carmelyn Malalis.

Sanitation Commissioner, Kathryn Garcia.

Appointments Director, Rachel Lauter.

Commissioner for the Mayor’s Office to Combat Domestic Violence, Cecile Noel; Small Business Services Commissioner Gregg Bishop – yes, we hire a few men too.

Unknown: Average men.

Mayor: Oh. There is nothing average about Gregg Bishop. He is exceptional.

Unknown: In general.

Mayor: Moving on – Department for the Aging Commissioner, Donna Corrado; Commissioner for the Department of Veterans Services, Brigadier General Loree Sutton; President and CEO of the Economic Development Corporation, Maria Torres-Springer; and acting Counsel to my office, Paul Rodriguez. We thank them all and so many of you contributed to this progress today.

The elected officials who are here with us adamantly believe in this change and are supporting us and helping us to build this change. I want to welcome and thank Assemblymember Richard Gottfried; Assemblymember David Weprin, Assemblymember Rebecca Seawright, Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon, Councilmember Ben Kallos, Councilmember Margaret Chin – thank you all. Give them all a round of applause. Whoops –

[Applause]

– Councilmember Helen Rosenthal; Assemblymember Felix Ortiz; another one of our Commissioners – Commissioner for the Department of Records, Pauline Toole.

And I want to thank the organizations and advocates who have been so supportive – the Center for Children’s Initiatives, A Better Balance, and PowHer NY. We thank you all.

[Applause]

Couple other points I want to make. Part of the problem with this discussion of salaries and wage equity is that let’s face it – salaries are a taboo subject. People don’t talk about their salaries. People are very careful about how they talk about their salaries. So in many cases, people are not able to even know if that disparity is occurring. In the public sector, we bring this out in the open. The public sector has, because we’re unionized, because we do publish salaries, because we work from a different set of standards – the public sector has a much better record in this vein than the private sector. We believe this executive director – excuse me – executive order will deepen that process.

But because people don’t talk about their salaries, too much of this inequality goes on. And then it affects not only the employee, it affects her entire family. And again, it affects her earning power over years, in fact, over decades. So fixing this situation is not just a matter of our values and of fairness, but think about the positive multiplier effect. When you bring a woman to her true salary value that means that correction will now affect everything that comes thereafter. And this is something we’re proud of – we know that as we apply this executive order it will have a very positive multiplier effect in the lives of those who benefit. And for many women who are just starting their career, it helps to ensure that their fair value is recognized for decades thereafter. That has an impact on the whole city. That has impact on the livelihood of families and the stability of families going forward. So this is good public policy on a very practical level, in addition to the obvious moral grounding for it.

This – one last point – is part of a set of initiatives that we started at the beginning to go at inequality and to go at equity. We knew that women were being treated unfairly in a number of ways, and that there were huge burdens on them economically. That’s why we did paid sick leave for a million more people. That’s why we did paid parental leave. That’s why we did pre-K for all and afterschool for all our middle school kids. It’s for everyone, but we knew in each and every one of those policies that we were giving women an opportunity to have a better life and to overcome some of those barriers and burdens. This is the next step in that progression. There’s always more to do, but we knew this was another step in the same vein to bring us to a more fair society and to address income inequality at the same time. We are very appreciative of the fact that the City Council is looking to legislate on this issue for the entire city and we look forward to supporting that effort. And I want to thank Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito for her focus on this issue. But we also know that anything done legislatively will take months and months before it ever would become – take effect. We needed to do this executive order now, so we could start [inaudible] out the score right now. No one should be blocked from a fair salary and from the value that they have earned.

Let me say a few words in Spanish.

[Mayor de Blasio speaks in Spanish]

Mayor: With that, I am proud to introduce someone who has been working very hard on this issue – Public Advocate Tisch James.

[Applause]

[…]

Mayor: Now, I want to introduce someone who is fighting for the rights of women and fighting pay equity in a very, very tough venue – the United States House of Representatives, not a place that has been at the forefront of social progress lately, but she fights on and we thank her for it – Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney.

[Applause]

[…]

Mayor: We’re going to take your questions on this topic first and a few of my colleagues will be available from City government to help answer the questions as we go along. So, on this topic first – questions? Yes.

Question: Economist have done studies that have shown that when you compare people doing the same job with similar experience and similar training that the wage gap vanishes. You know, maybe a couple percent. In which case the statistic that has been sighted today shows 40 percent wage gap or 30 percent wage gap doesn’t really mean anything. Can you comment on this?

Mayor: I haven’t seen those studies. I think it is uniformly believed that that 80 percent number is accurate if you’re talking about the entire economy. There may be some sectors – I would be the first to say there may be sectors or levels of employment where that is less true, arguably at the highest levels maybe that is less true, but I think the problem at large is persistent in the economy overall. And to Congresswoman Maloney’s point, you know, the multiplier factor – I think that was a very helpful, powerful point. Once it starts it not only persist throughout career earning, but then has impact on pension and retirement. So, our understanding is this is still a society wide phenomenon and if that 80 percent number is effectively accurate, obviously, that is a very big gap to fill.

Yes?

Question: As you mentioned, the Public Advocate introduced legislation back in August that would ban employers from asking about salary history both in the private and the public sector, which arguably would impact – well, would impact a lot more people.

Mayor: Absolutely.

Question: Given the makeup of the City Council, which sort of leans in that progressive direction, obviously. What are the obstacles to passing the bill and why not – are you going to push for it or do you think –

Mayor: Yes, as I said I support the legislation. I appreciate the Public Advocate introducing the idea. I believe the Speaker wants to, but we are not there yet – that there is going to be

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Well, you have to ask the Speaker. There’s a legislative process. And even with the legislative process coming to fruition there is a lag time for something that is going to affect all employment in the City; there will be a lag time before implementation. And suffice to say the drafting of a bill like that and final process is more complicated then something we do just for our own employees. So, the simple answer for us is if we could do this right now – we could reach 350,000-plus jobs right now. It will take effect in 30 days, done all within our power versus something that will require both a legislative process and then a longer implementation timeline, why wait?

Yes?

Question: My understanding is executive orders could also apply to contractors with business for the City. [Inaudible] including that in this measure?

Mayor: In this round, no. This was focused on our own employees. There are some areas where we, obviously, have taken that approach, there are others where we haven’t, but the discussion was just about doing it for our own employees.

Yes?

Question: Do you have any idea how much it will cost the City to actually [inaudible]?

Mayor: Yes, we’ve looked at that. We think it’s a very modest impact in the first couple of years, but then it grows out over time. The reason for that is in the first few years – you know – I can’t give you the perfect number, but let’s say we’re talking about a few thousand jobs where either someone is filling an open role or going for a promotion or a transfer. The unionized jobs are generally not what we’re talking about here because the unionized jobs come with much more set pay scales; obviously people coming off a civil service list. There is not a lot of give in that. It’s pretty much set. So, you’re talking about a relatively few jobs in the short term, but as more and more people fill jobs there is more and more turnover the cost start to go up. And obviously generationally if someone has their salary corrected – let’s take that 80 percent number – because of this executive order if someone goes from 80 percent to 100 percent they continue at that higher level throughout the rest of their career with the City. So, I think in the short run we’re talking about single digit millions. You know several million dollars – in the long run it is a bigger impact, but the logic – you know – and I think [inaudible] of the taxpayers. You know, flip that question on its head, okay, we can save money by being discriminatory, well that is unacceptable.

[Laughter]

Yes?

Question: 90 percent of the city’s workforce, according to this press release, is paid in accordance with collective bargaining agreements. So, I’m curious to know if the union set the salaries for individual jobs, how does the City get involved with what the union is saying?

Mayor: Again, I’ll let the – I’ll let the lawyers come forward and folks who have been working on this – our DCAS Commissioner, Lisette Camillo and my acting counsel Paul Rodriguez – they can help fine tune the answer. But I think the common sense answer is – you’re talking about well over 350,000 jobs in City government including Housing Authority, including Health + Hospitals, etcetera. And for all those jobs that are not strictly determined by a union scale or a civil service list, you’re still talking about tens of thousands of jobs and, again, there’s pretty regular turnover.

So, the impact is going to be very substantial by any measure, and most importantly the multiplying effect – getting back to the Congresswoman’s point – once you make the correction it has a very big impact for many years thereafter. So, in the short term I think the impact is on several thousand people and that grows over time.

You want to add anything – or Brittny? Okay. Okay. Please. Yes you can.

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney: This is such an important initiative. We spent so much of our time, really, in the City government – and I know the Mayor and First Lady have – on ways to eradicate poverty. Well, one fundamental fair way to help eradicate poverty and take positive steps forward is to pay women fairly. There was a report done by Heidi Hartman, who is the Women’s Research Foundation, that if women were just paid fairly – equal pay for equal work — that you would eradicate half the poverty in America. Just think about it, we’re fighting all the time for services, this, that, and the other. So, this is a very, very important initiative and I hope that other cities will follow the great City of New York in it.

Mayor: Thank you. See if there’s any over here and I’ll go over there after that. Yes.

Question: [Inaudible] supporting Advocate James in your effort to expand this type of rule into the private sector. What kind of fight do you expect?

Mayor: Look, the only measure we have so far – and this happened only in the last few months – was the state of Massachusetts where there was a really intense discussion, but they got there so that’s encouraging to me. I am certain there’ll be some opposition. I don’t doubt that. But I think we all – and I certainly look forward to working with the Public Advocate, with the Speaker, and everyone to say, really when you think about the opposition, where does the logical argument flow? If it is related directly to a discriminatory history, and this is a tool that could undo – we believe will undo that discriminatory history. So, what’s the counterargument? You know, how do you address it?

Knowing that discrimination has existed requires every effort to find the way forward, and so far this appears to be one of the most promising. So, I think that’s will win the day.

Question, yes?

Question: Is the City government –

Mayor: Is it what?

Question: What is the City government’s gender and racial makeup [inaudible] –

Mayor: We – look, this a complicated issue to say the least. We believe it’s a case-by-case kind of dynamic. We have found some instances such as the decision we made around School Safety Agents where we as an administration said, we think there’s a historic problem here that needs to be addressed. We have found others where we think the situation is not at all as clear. So, I don’t have a perfect statistic. I think it is more nuance than the case of the public sector, as I said. My view – I might differ with the Public Advocate on this – my view is public sector comes with so many more anti-discriminatory guarantees like union membership and disclosure that I think we’re better positioned, and I think the City of New York in particular compared to other public sector entities is.

But we’ve had some of it undoubtedly and when we find we try and address it specifically. But I think the point here is this allows a much broader reset and if a woman is coming into the public workforce carrying with her a private sector bias then we get to correct it. That’s the way we look at.

Question: Have you studied it in the Mayor’s Office?

Mayor: We’ve studied it in certain individual cases where it’s been brought up particularly by Labor, but we do not, in my knowledge and I’ll turn to my colleagues, we don’t have a holistic study across the entire –

Question: [Inaudible] in the Office of the Mayor – of folks who work for your –

Mayor: Again, since the numbers I outlined before we have the highest number of women at the highest salaries. I think that effectively says we have already addressed that issue.

Question: Mr. Mayor, I believe studies have also shown that women are less likely to push for promotions or to discuss salary increases. I know we’re talking about hiring in the first place but what can be put into place to ensure that with this eliminated, the offers aren’t still low-balled compared to what they would be to a man?

Mayor: I would answer this way – we’re sending a very powerful message to all of our managers up and down the line that we expect pay equity. There is a provision in the executive order for any employee to have a formal complaint if they believe pay equity was not recognized. So, we’re making that very clear to our managers too. And I think, again – I think our team up and down the line will have every reason to want to buy into this. But if anyone needs an extra reminder, there is a complaint process and if there is a complaint we will specifically look into that in a formal manner. And if a manager were not to be following this executive order, there obviously would be consequences.

So, I think the point we’ll get across – I also think, I believe this very fundamentally, and Chirlane and I have had this conversation for a long time – if you want to change the dynamics, the rules, the laws are all important. The accountability structures, the consequences but possibly the most elemental thing is just hire more women at the top positions and they will enforce it for you.

[Applause]

So, you know, we talked about all the commissioners who are here. I think it’s fair to say that they would look very unkindly on any manager downstream from them not addressing pay equity. I think that’s going to be self-correcting on that level.

Any other questions on this topic, yes?

Question: I would assume, and tell me if I’m wrong, that most of these positions are budgeted for certain amounts. So, wouldn’t that person be getting that amount even if you don’t that person’s pay history?

Mayor: I think there’s – and I’m going to look to my colleagues, I’ll start and they’ll correct me. These are my consciences here. I think there’s always elasticity when you’re talking about something that’s not strictly stipulated by civil service for example. There’s always some elasticity. This is true of hiring for senior positions. And the history was – and very common – if you came to me for a job and you were making $50,000 and the salary range was $50,000 to $70,000, then as a manager I would have an incentive to say I’ll give you $55,000 not all the way to $70,000 because I think I can get you for $55,000, right. That’s fine as a managerial principle except when you have a discriminatory reality as the basis of why got $50,000 to begin with.

So, what – as we looked at this more and more, we came to a simple conclusion, you had to disrupt the cycle. So, yeah, there will be situations where someone – if they were asked their salary history – it would have led to them getting a lower city salary. That would have, sort of, Management 101 but it also would have baked in historic discrimination. We’re much more comfortable freeing the situation up and getting people to truer value.

And so, I don’t think it’s – to the point about budget – budgets obviously are based on broad personnel costs. We don’t say, you know, here’s the exact point everyone gets paid in every agency because we know that elasticity exists. So, it’s a broad pool and managers have to make decisions within that pool of money.

But I think the most important – sort of, to make it vivid is imagine just this progression where a women is constantly held back from her true value then you say that’s no longer an allowable discussion. We’re not going to look at the past. We’re only going to look at your value today in light of the job before us and what you bring to it. We believe that will organically, naturally start to increase pay.

Yeah.

Question: Mr. Mayor, this piece about the most female managers and the most women of color. I wonder if as a white guy you can speak to if there’s been a –

Mayor: Representing white guys everywhere, I’d like to say –

[Laughter]

Question: You know, valuing, elevating, listening to women and women of color, and if that’s been a process for you, and what you would say to all the white guy bosses out there –

[Laughter]

Mayor: First of all, something I want to make clear from the beginning, my mother was a woman.

[Laughter]

So, I refer everyone to – Chirlane and I are huge fans of Samantha B. and the recent full frontal about the second presidential debate where she puts a graph on the question of how many people should be offended by what Donald Trump has said about women. And she puts this graph up that kind of emerges on the screen and evolves and it does a full circle and it says 100 percent of the US population has a relative who is a women.

[Laughter]

And I grew up in a single-parent household. My mother was, for the vast majority of my upbringing, was the sole breadwinner, when my parents were divorced. And my father did not contribute to the household income. And my mother, clearly – because she went to Smith College; because she was a professional woman at a point where there were few; because she went to the Margaret Sanger Clinic as a young woman – there were a lot of things about my mother that was very – clearly she had very strong feminist impulses.

My point is – I was blessed to get the right education from the beginning and then to choose the right partner in life who furthered my education.

So, message to – excuse – my message to white guys, my message to employers is this is just good for everyone. It really is.

Question: [Inaudible]

[Laughter]

Mayor: Yeah.

Question: Do you notice –

Mayor: Does it take learning? Sure, it takes learning. I mean this dialogue was a very healthy one but it’s an understandable one, and I’m sure people are going to read this and hear about this and say, “Oh my God, I’m going to have to pay more for my employees.” But they’re not going to; at first blush, necessarily think because we’re ending a long term pattern of discrimination.

So, what I would say to white guys – how this one, try this one on for size – if the shoe was on the other foot? If you were the part of the class that hadn’t gotten fair salaries for decades and decades, you’d sure want to be valued based on your actual ability.

So, do unto others – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I got a lot of those.

[Laughter]

And I think it is good for the whole society. I do think it’s really wonderful if you have an opportunity in life to be educated and enlightened by people who are different from you. Not everyone has had that so much. But for those who haven’t had that, it’s just basic fairness. And if it puts more money in the pockets of families, it makes for a better society.

Question: I just wanted to ask the First Lady if you ever felt that you were a victim of being paid less than a man who was doing a comparable job. And then the Mayor has said in the past that you’ve been the key advisors on hiring decisions within the administration. Do you still play that role?

First Lady McCray: Yes, I still play that role and as the Mayor said earlier, talking about salary is taboo so I really can’t say that in any of the positions I’ve had from my work – from my days in publishing I can’t really say that there’s been a direct parallel to a male earning more than me. I suspect so. When I first met Bill he was making more than I was and I’m like six years older than he is. And he’s still making more than me.

[Laughter]

Mayor: Damn it.

David, just a reminder on the role Chirlane plays – very substantial hire was made a couple of months ago, and I said to people at the time very publically, the hiring of Jimmy O’Neill – the final interviews were done by Chirlane and I. Period.

Question: For the Public Advocate.

Public Advocate Letitia James: Yes.

Question: You’ve said that the –

Mayor: Do you want to come over here, Tish?

Question: That the government sector does three times – is three times regarding the pay gap than the private sector. Why do you suppose the private sector does a better job of assessing people fairly?

Public Advocate James: What I said was – women employed by our City’s government face a wage gap two-and-a-half times as large as women working in the not-for-profit sector and three times as large as women working in the private, for sector – in the private, for-profit sector – that’s what I said. But I said that in the past, City government historically has been one of the worst offenders when it comes to pay equity. And as was referenced by the Mayor of the City of New York, we do know that the Teamsters settled a lawsuit, and as you know there is another union which is currently in negotiations with the administration regarding pay equity. And that is Local 1180.

Question: So why do you suppose the private sector has a better record than government or the not-for-profit sector?

Public Advocate James: So there’s been a lot of speculation with regards to why private sector – I mean there’s this notion that women in the private sector obviously have more educational background and are in executive positions, and therefore in a better position to negotiate their –

Question: [Inaudible] people like that – they don’t have extensive education or [inaudible]. But they work in the private sector.

Public Advocate James: Yeah. I really – there’s – again, there’s not a lot of science on why there’s a difference between public and private. I do know that in the public government – in public government, there’s unions to protect them. Those outside of the union contracts, obviously there’s been an issue of pay equity. In the private sector, get on the executive level, there’s more parity. But on the lower levels, there’s still an issue of unbalance that needs to be addressed, which is why the bill that I am proposing would apply not only to the public, but also to the private sector as well.

Question: It sounds like the unions are doing a bad job.

Public Advocate James: No, I wouldn’t say that at all. I said – apparently, there are individuals who are employed and not covered by union contracts, and that’s the number that the Mayor referenced in particular. Those with a union contract, obviously do – are paid much more equitably than those that do not. But there’s a significant number of individuals on the public payrolls that are not covered by the union contracts. And therefore, this bill and the executive order would go a long way in addressing that inequity.

Mayor: Okay. Last call for questions on this topic and then we’re going to sign the executive order. Yes?

Question: Does this prohibit negotiation by the employee, prospective employee, or would it only prohibit you guys from asking?

Mayor: So I will start, and my lawyers are ready. They are eager to answer. Again, it is – you cannot ask before a conditional offer is made. Now, why don’t we have Brittny and Paul come forward and talk about what happens after that in terms of the negotiation process.

Deputy Commissioner Brittny Saunders, Strategic Initiatives, Commission on Human Rights: Yes. So the –

Mayor: [Inaudible] introduce yourself.

Deputy Commissioner Saunders: So I’m Brittny Saunders. I’m currently Deputy Commissioner for Strategic Initiatives.

Mayor: Wait, I’m going to give you more because of the sign. Hold on one second.

Deputy Commissioner Saunders: At CCHR.

Mayor: Wait, say that all again. Just so they get again.

Deputy Commissioner Saunders: I’ll say it all again.

Mayor: Okay.

Deputy Commissioner Saunders: I’m Britney Saunders. I’m Deputy Commissioner for Strategic Initiatives at CCHR. [Inaudible] worked closely on this.

Mayor: Human Rights Commission.

Deputy Commissioner Saunders: Human Rights Commission. That’s right, to clarify. And yes, so the executive order bars the inquiry by the City agency. Basically, so the City agency cannot ask a question about salary history unless it’s after a conditional order and even then – I’m sorry a conditional offer – and even then, only under limited circumstances. But it doesn’t prevent an applicant from saying – these are my expectations or requirements. So there’s room for negotiation, but the City cannot rely on a salary history.

Mayor: Last call – questions on this topic. Okay, we’re going to go over now. First, Chirlane and I are going to have a point of privilege and stand by this banner alone for a moment because we love this banner. And then everyone else can gather around for the signing.

[Mayor de Blasio signs Executive Order 21]

Mayor: Thank you. Alright – other topics.

Yes, David?

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Okay. Yes, I go to street fairs. I went to them more often when the kids were at home growing up. The truth is I think there are more burning issues in this city. So, in fact, this was something inside the bureaucracy, if you will, and this process has begun to reevaluate the possibly. It was not something I initiated. It was not something I asked for, and obviously something we’ll continue to look at going forward. So, I think the reforms that were made in the Bloomberg administration were broadly right. There were some cases I might differ on, but were broadly right. But we’ll certainly look at it again in the future, but honestly not one of my priorities.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: I learned about it the same way I often learn about things – that I heard that this was a process that was already underway in terms of the hearings and that would be coming out publicly.

Question: [Inaudible] terror threat timed for the day before the election. What is the NYPD doing to respond to this potential threat?

Mayor: So, a couple of things, what we have now – this is – I talked about this on the radio a little while ago. This is something that I was briefed on several days ago – that is, at this moment, we’re still developing information on. The level of credibility is not clear. It is definitely not an overly specific threat. So, right now, the way the NYPD is looking at it and our federal partners are looking at it is we are in a state of vigilance, but, to be clear we – besides the fact that we’re always in a state of vigilance and we have our counterterrorism forces on alert all the time – we were already in a period of ramp up because of the marathon on Sunday and the extraordinary events of Tuesday night, having two presidential campaigns having their events in New York City. Again, someone can check the facts here. My memory is you have to go back many decades to find that having ever happened before, and obviously in a very different time with different security considerations. So, we already were in a high ramp up dynamic. You’re going to see a lot of officers out, particularly our Critical Response Command and SRG – Strategic Response Group officers. You’re going to see a lot of measures taken very visibly around the marathon, which is all five borough, around all of the election activity on Tuesday – obviously, all five boroughs, particularly, the events around the candidates will be in Manhattan. But on Monday as well, you’ll see an expanded presence. We want to urge very clearly – everyone go about your business. They’ll be a lot of NYPD folks out there to protect you, but also the reminder that we often give, if you see something, say something. If anything appears to be out of the ordinary it is very important to report it.

Question: Is the Board of Elections ready to handle the biggest voter turnout that is expected on Tuesday?

Mayor: Well, I would first say I would love nothing more than it being the biggest voter turnout. I am far from certain that is the case, you know. I think the 2008 Obama turnout was for the ages. I’m not sure we’re going to meet that. But, look, I would say two things – in terms of the broad integrity if the voting process, yes. In terms of efficiency, that remains to be seen. The questions that we have all raised – not just since the presidential primary, but in pretty much every cycle previously – we saw lines that shouldn’t have bene there. We saw machine breakdowns that shouldn’t have happened. We saw poll sites not open on time. This is a systemic problem with the Board of Elections and there are real solutions. One, I’ve offered them $20 million, which is not a minor amount of money, but they have to guarantee me certain reforms and they have to be accountable for those reforms. They have still not agreed to that. Two, I think we should change the law in Albany, and I am going to work hard for this, of giving the Executive Director of the Board of Elections authority to run it in a professional, modern fashion. That executive director does not have that full authority right now. So, look, I wish the Board of Elections directly reported to me – it does not. It is governed by State law. I think the eyes of this city will be on the Board of Elections on Tuesday. And if they, once again, have these kinds of problems, I think the pressure will mount for bigger reform.

Please?

Question: Just a follow up on that. If this doesn’t go well with the Board of Elections will you look to see [inaudible]?

Mayor: No, I think it is more complexed than that. I have seen some real progress under Mr. Ryan. And I think he is saddled with a Board that is not willing, necessarily, to cooperate in that progress and also he does not have the full power an executive director should have. So, I think he has been more a part of the solution than a part of the problem. I think the problem is structural and legal. We need to change the law.

Question: I know you haven’t been really willing to engage on this topic so far, but what are you going to do if Mr. Trump should wins on Tuesday? I know Charlie Rangel told [inaudible] that he is going to leave the country, but he doesn’t have to be in office.

[Laughter]

Mayor: I respect the Congressman, but I look forward to staying right here. Look, first – obviously I really do believe Hillary Clinton is going to win. I think it is a much closer election than we thought a few weeks ago, but I think Hillary Clinton is going to win. Second, and I was talking to some folks on my time earlier about this, I was already politically active at the time of Ronald Reagan’s victory and it was a devastating defeat for a lot of us, but what – the lesson we learned is you know, you stay at your post and you fight for change. So, if there is a Trump victory there is going to be a lot of work that will have to be done to protect what we value in this city from bad federal policies and to change the Congress two years later to continue making progress. So, I think people stay at their post and fight for change.

Yes?

Question: As this event began the Bridgegate verdicts came in guilty across the board for both defendants – your reaction?

Mayor: I’m not surprised. I think everything we’ve earned suggest a pretty lured tale. And I suspect there will be further ramifications in New Jersey for certain. So, you know, I look forward to the day when we can get these kinds of things behind us and people who would do such a thing are no longer in the public sector. The good news is they have been caught and I think it will lead to further examination.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: What?

Question: Should Governor Christie be prosecuted?

Mayor: I am not a prosecutor. I am not a lawyer. I certainly think he still has not given us good enough answers.

Question: [Inaudible] what is it? What do we know about it?

Mayor: Look, I will refer detail questions about NYPD and FBI. I think the most important thing – because this is – again, we’ve been watching carefully over the last few days. And we know this is a time of year where the threat stream increases. This is just a given. We’re going to see it now all the way to January 1st. But what we look for is credibility and specificity. So far, we have unclear credibility and a lack of specificity simultaneously. So, again, to the extent the NYPD or the FBI want to fill in more blanks they will, but what I can say in terms of our stance besides overall vigilance is we’re just going to unite Sunday, Monday, Tuesday into a constant pattern of increased NYPD presence and, particularly again, our counter terror forces. You will see a lot of uniformed personnel out and we think that is what we need to do right now and also I want to encourage everyone, if they see anything unusual to report it.

Yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to clarify one thing on the timeline of the Rivington deal. When that first became public, you and your office said that you learned about it through media reports. When Tony Shorris testified last month, he said that when he heard about it he notified DOI and that he notified you. I was just wondering, did you learn about it from media reports or Tony Shorris?

Mayor: Best of my memory, it was literally the same day – that the media reports and when I heard internally were the same exact day.

Question: From Mr. Shorris?

Mayor: Yes, to the best of my memory.

Marcia?

Question: [Inaudible] Are there any specific places that you think will be more vulnerable than others? I wanted to talk to you about this whole idea of outside forces – Russia [inaudible] trying to disrupt this election cycle through. There has been some sort of a pattern through this election cycle [inaudible]. How do you feel about this? Do you think that democracy is under attack by outside forces?

Mayor: Marcia, I think it’s a great question. There are a couple of things that have happened this year that we’re going to need to look back on and decide how to address. First of all, Marcia, the fact that, you know, we saw one political party and one candidate attacked by a foreign nation through these hacking incidents – we’ve never seen anything like that in the history of this country. There’s certainly more to be proven, but our own intelligence community says it emirates from Russia and with the authorization of the Russian government – that’s unprecedented in the history of this country. I don’t think it’s going to change the outcome of the election, but I think it has hurt – I think it certainly might affect voter participation levels, for example. I think it has caused some doubt, particularly in some states, about the sanctity of the electoral process. You have to add to that then Director Comey’s action, which was unprecedented, and I think very unhelpful to ensuring that we have a fair an objective election process. And then, on top of that, having a candidate that I think we can all agree, as a major party nominee, we’ve never seen anyone who went out of his way so much to question the voting system. And, in fact, until his poll numbers were better about a week ago, Donald Trump’s regular line was the election system was rigged which, again, discourages participation. So, you’ve got three things that have happened all in the course of weeks that do threaten the Democratic process, and certainly threaten participation. We need to ensure in the future that doesn’t happen. One, we have to have an honest conversation about what he role is of the FBI in the two-month period before an election, which previously as clear, and now that president’s been broken. We have to put that genie back in the bottle, in my opinion. Two, we have to get to the root of the Russian hacking and take measures against it, but also make sure that, that can’t happen from any country in the future. And three, you know, I do predict the defeat of Donald Trump, and I won’t be surprised if he then claims that the election system was rigged again. We have to prove to the American people that’s not what happen, that he just got rejected.

Yeah?

Question: I wonder if [inaudible] was any kind of a path [inaudible] the day before the election, do you think that was [inaudible]?

Mayor: Yeah, it’s very speculative, obviously. I do feel a separate, but related point. I feel that the electoral systems are broadly well protected. And I think there’s an understandable confusion about how much they interconnect with the internet. I’ve looked at this issue a bit – they broadly don’t. So, the electoral systems are more self-contained and a lot of work has been done state by state, locality by locality to protect the election dynamics from any outside interference. On the question of whether, God forbid, there was an attack – what it would mean – look, I think we’ve learned many times over part of the democratic process is resiliency. We go through wars, we go through depressions, and we keep our elections on schedule. So, that’s what I would predict in any eventuality, but I think the clear point about this, again, very vague information we’ve received is, we’ve received it, and now everyone is on high alert and ready to prevent anything from happening.

Media Contact

pressoffice@cityhall.nyc.gov
(212) 788-2958

Secondary Navigation

Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Signs Executive Order Banning City Agencies from Inquiring about Salary History of Job Applicants

Media Contact