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 votes117th CongressHouse
This bill revises the evidentiary standard for age discrimination by establishing an unlawful employment practice when the complaining party demonstrates that age or participation in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation related to an age discrimination claim was a motivating factor for an adverse practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice (thereby allowing what are commonly known as mixed motive claims).
The bill (1) permits the 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 the 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 the complainant to prove that age was the but-for cause for the employer's decision).
The bill applies this evidentiary standard 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.
In a claim in which age discrimination is shown, but where the employer demonstrates that it would have taken the same action absent the motivating factor of age, the bill authorizes courts to grant declaratory and injunctive relief, but prohibits the court from awarding damages or issuing an order requiring any admission, reinstatement, hiring, promotion, or payment. This limitation also applies to claims of discrimination based on disability.
The bill also includes reporting requirements for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor.
Written by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, describing H.R. 2062 as passed House on Jun 23, 2021. It is not the text of the measure; a later amendment may have changed what it does.
Jun 23, 2021Each bar: ✓ Yea from the bottom, ✕ Nay aboveJun 23, 2021
House Jun 23, 2021 · the primary vote
Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act of 2021
Passed
247 Yea 178 Nay 5 not voting
Party-line vote 29 of 425 voting members broke with their own party: 29 Republicans.
DemocratsRepublicansFilled: YeaRing: NayGrey: not voting or present
430 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. 2062 and vote against it. 13 signed when it was filed.
Organizations that named H.R. 2062 in a lobbying disclosure. Only those that cited the bill by number appear, so this is a floor, not a full list.
42 disclosures name this measure. Retrieved from LDA.gov on 2026-10-04. 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.