Loading the public record
Loading the public record
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
All recent votes116th CongressHouse
(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.
(Sec. 8) The EEOC shall report on the status of federal mixed motive age discrimination in employment claims made against federal agencies.
Written by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, describing H.R. 1230 as passed House on Jan 15, 2020. It is not the text of the measure; a later amendment may have changed what it does.
Jan 15, 2020Each bar: ✓ Yea from the bottom, ✕ Nay aboveJan 15, 2020
House Jan 15, 2020 · the primary vote
Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act
Passed
261 Yea 155 Nay 13 not voting
Party-line vote 33 of 416 voting members broke with their own party: 33 Republicans.
DemocratsRepublicansFilled: YeaRing: NayGrey: not voting or present
429 members on this roll call, from the official House record. Party majorities need at least five voting members, so an independent never counts as breaking with a party.
Signing on is not a vote: a member can cosponsor H.R. 1230 and vote against it. 7 signed when it was filed.
Organizations that named H.R. 1230 in a lobbying disclosure. Only those that cited the bill by number appear, so this is a floor, not a full list.
25 disclosures name this measure. Retrieved from LDA.gov on 2026-10-05. Senate Office of Public Records cannot vouch for the data or analyses derived from these data after the data have been retrieved from LDA.gov.