Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: HR 2062 (US Congress)

 

As with many labor & employment law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


This week, the U.S. House of Representatives is considering passage of a proposed bill, The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act (a/k/a HR 2062), which would make it easier for workers to sue their employees for age discrimination.

The proposed bill would amend the evidentiary standard necessary to prove age discrimination by allowing a claimant to establish an unlawful employment practice when the claimant demonstrates that age or participation in an investigation, proceeding, o litigation related to an age discrimination claim was a motivating factor for an adverse practice even though other factors also motived the adverse practice.

Notably, HR 2062 would allow a claimant to rely on any type or form of admissible evidence, which would only have to be sufficient for a reasonable trier of fact to find that an unlawful act occurred.  As well, the claimant would not be required to demonstrate that age or retaliation was the sole cause of the employment practice.  (This is a change from a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case, Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., in which the Supreme Court held that a claimant must prove that age was the but-for cause for the employer’s decision.)

This amended evidentiary standard would also apply to claims brought under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

A similar bill cleared the House last session but got bogged down in the Senate.  With Democrats having majority control of both the House and Senate (unlike the last legislative session), might this time be different?


For additional information:  https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2062

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more