skip to main content

H.R. 1230: Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act


The text of the bill below is as of Jan 9, 2020 (Reported by House Committee).


IB

Union Calendar No. 295

116th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 1230

[Report No. 116–372]

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 14, 2019

(for himself, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. Katko, Mr. Hurd of Texas, Ms. Adams, Mr. Takano, and Mr. Grothman) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

January 9, 2020

Additional sponsors: Mr. Phillips, Mr. Levin of Michigan, Mr. Stauber, Ms. Norton, Ms. Bass, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Raskin, Mr. Van Drew, Mr. DeSaulnier, Ms. Stefanik, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Ms. Stevens, Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois, Ms. Meng, Miss González-Colón of Puerto Rico, Ms. Wild, Ms. Underwood, Ms. Omar, Mr. Sablan, Mr. Harder of California, Mrs. Lee of Nevada, Ms. Jayapal, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Rouda, Ms. Castor of Florida, Ms. Haaland, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Suozzi, Mrs. Trahan, Mr. Payne, Mr. Cuellar, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. Higgins of New York, Mr. Gonzalez of Texas, Ms. Lee of California, Ms. Spanberger, Ms. Kaptur, Ms. McCollum, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Kildee, Mr. Neal, Mr. Sires, Mr. Malinowski, Mrs. Axne, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Blumenauer, Mrs. Dingell, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr. Richmond, Mr. Lowenthal, Ms. Pressley, Ms. Tlaib, Ms. Pingree, Mrs. McBath, Mr. Castro of Texas, Mr. Lynch, Mrs. Hayes, Ms. Shalala, Mr. Rose of New York, Ms. Finkenauer, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Ms. Schrier, Mr. Norcross, Mr. Courtney, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Cisneros, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Morelle, Mr. Foster, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Trone, Ms. Waters, Ms. Wilson of Florida, and Mr. Casten of Illinois

January 9, 2020

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic

For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on February 14, 2019

A BILL

To amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and other laws to clarify appropriate standards for Federal employment discrimination and retaliation claims, and for other purposes.


1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act.

2.

Standards of proof

(a)

Age discrimination in employment Act of 1967

(1)

Clarifying prohibition against impermissible consideration of age in employment practices

Section 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 623) is amended by inserting after subsection (f) the following:

(g)
(1)

Except as otherwise provided in this Act, an unlawful practice is established under this Act when the complaining party demonstrates that age or an activity protected by subsection (d) was a motivating factor for any practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice.

(2)

In establishing an unlawful practice under this Act, including under paragraph (1) or by any other method of proof, a complaining party—

(A)

may rely on any type or form of admissible evidence and need only produce evidence sufficient for a reasonable trier of fact to find that an unlawful practice occurred under this Act; and

(B)

shall not be required to demonstrate that age or an activity protected by subsection (d) was the sole cause of a practice.

.

(2)

Remedies

Section 7 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 626) is amended—

(A)

in subsection (b)—

(i)

in the first sentence, by striking The and inserting (1) The;

(ii)

in the third sentence, by striking Amounts and inserting the following:

(2)

Amounts

;

(iii)

in the fifth sentence, by striking Before and inserting the following:

(4)

Before

; and

(iv)

by inserting before paragraph (4), as designated by clause (iii) of this subparagraph, the following:

(3)

On a claim in which an individual demonstrates that age was a motivating factor for any employment practice, under section 4(g)(1), and a respondent demonstrates that the respondent would have taken the same action in the absence of the impermissible motivating factor, the court—

(A)

may grant declaratory relief, injunctive relief (except as provided in subparagraph (B)), and attorney’s fees and costs demonstrated to be directly attributable only to the pursuit of a claim under section 4(g)(1); and

(B)

shall not award damages or issue an order requiring any admission, reinstatement, hiring, promotion, or payment.

; and

(B)

in subsection (c)(1), by striking Any and inserting Subject to subsection (b)(3), any.

(3)

Definitions

Section 11 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 630) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(m)

The term demonstrates means meets the burdens of production and persuasion.

.

(4)

Federal employees

Section 15 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 633a) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(h)

Sections 4(g) and 7(b)(3) shall apply to mixed motive claims (involving practices described in section 4(g)(1)) under this section.

.

(b)

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(1)

Clarifying prohibition against impermissible consideration of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in employment practices

Section 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–2) is amended by striking subsection (m) and inserting the following:

(m)

Except as otherwise provided in this title, an unlawful employment practice is established when the complaining party demonstrates that race, color, religion, sex, or national origin or an activity protected by section 704(a) was a motivating factor for any employment practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice.

.

(2)

Federal employees

Section 717 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 2000e–16) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(g)

Sections 703(m) and 706(g)(2)(B) shall apply to mixed motive cases (involving practices described in section 703(m)) under this section.

.

(c)

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990

(1)

Definitions

Section 101 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12111) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(11)

Demonstrates

The term demonstrates means meets the burdens of production and persuasion.

.

(2)

Clarifying prohibition against impermissible consideration of disability in employment practices

Section 102 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12112) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(e)

Proof

(1)

Establishment

Except as otherwise provided in this Act, a discriminatory practice is established under this Act when the complaining party demonstrates that disability or an activity protected by subsection (a) or (b) of section 503 was a motivating factor for any employment practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice.

(2)

Demonstration

In establishing a discriminatory practice under paragraph (1) or by any other method of proof, a complaining party—

(A)

may rely on any type or form of admissible evidence and need only produce evidence sufficient for a reasonable trier of fact to find that a discriminatory practice occurred under this Act; and

(B)

shall not be required to demonstrate that disability or an activity protected by subsection (a) or (b) of section 503 was the sole cause of an employment practice.

.

(3)

Certain anti-retaliation claims

Section 503(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12203(c)) is amended—

(A)

by striking The remedies and inserting the following:

(1)

In general

Except as provided in paragraph (2), the remedies

; and

(B)

by adding at the end the following:

(2)

Certain anti-retaliation claims

Section 107(c) shall apply to claims under section 102(e)(1) with respect to title I.

.

(4)

Remedies

Section 107 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12117) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(c)

Discriminatory motivating factor

On a claim in which an individual demonstrates that disability was a motivating factor for any employment practice, under section 102(e)(1), and a respondent demonstrates that the respondent would have taken the same action in the absence of the impermissible motivating factor, the court—

(1)

may grant declaratory relief, injunctive relief (except as provided in paragraph (2)), and attorney’s fees and costs demonstrated to be directly attributable only to the pursuit of a claim under section 102(e)(1); and

(2)

shall not award damages or issue an order requiring any admission, reinstatement, hiring, promotion, or payment.

.

(d)

Rehabilitation Act of 1973

(1)

In general

Sections 501(f), 503(d), and 504(d) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791(f), 793(d), and 794(d)), are each amended by adding after title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12111 et seq.) the following: , including the standards of causation or methods of proof applied under section 102(e) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 12112(e)),.

(2)

Federal employees

The amendment made by paragraph (1) to section 501(f) shall be construed to apply to all employees covered by section 501.

3.

Application

This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall apply to all claims pending on or after the date of enactment of this Act.

4.

Severability

If any provision or portion of a provision of this Act, an amendment or portion of an amendment made by this Act, or the application of any provision or portion thereof or amendment or portion thereof to particular persons or circumstances is held invalid or found to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, or the application of that provision or portion thereof or amendment or portion thereof to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected.

January 9, 2020

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed