Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act
Latest action. Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to establish as an unlawful employment practice that age or participation in investigations, proceedings, or litigation under such Act were a motivating factor for any unlawful employment practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice (thereby allowing what are commonly known as mixed motive claims).
The bill (1) permits a complaining party to rely on any type or form of admissible evidence, which need only be sufficient for a reasonable trier of fact to find that an unlawful practice occurred; and (2) declares that a complaining party shall not be required to demonstrate that age or retaliation was the sole cause of the employment practice (thereby rejecting the Supreme Court's decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. , which requires a complainant to prove that age was the but-for cause for the employer's decision).
The bill authorizes a court to grant declaratory and injunctive relief, but prohibits a court from awarding damages or issuing an order requiring any admission, reinstatement, hiring, promotion, or payment.
The bill applies the same standard of proof to other employment discrimination and retaliation claims, including claims under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
(Sec. 5) The Government Accountability Office shall report on how the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigates mixed motive age discrimination claims arising under all such Acts amended by this bill.
(Sec. 6) The Department of Labor and the EEOC shall jointly conduct a study to determine the number of claims pending or filed, in addition to cases closed, by women who may have been adversely impacted by age discrimination as a motivating factor in workplace discrimination or employment termination.
(Sec. 7). The EEOC, for a five-year period, shall submit to Congress a report at one-year intervals on the number of age discrimination in employment claims brought under this bill.
The summary continues for 1 more paragraph. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Passed House" stage on January 15, 2020. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on January 16, 2020: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 116th Congress (2019-20), 344 of the 14,345 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 2.4 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
Robert Scott (D-VA) introduced it on February 14, 2019, and 91 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 81 Democrats, 10 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on February 14, 2019, 2765 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 2429 days ago, on January 16, 2020.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 116th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2021 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers