On the recordJune 23, 2021
When considering any legislation, Congress first should determine whether the legislation is needed and, next, whether the bill under consideration will provide a workable, feasible, and effective response to the issue at hand. Proponents of H.R. 2062 claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Gross, 2009, and Nassar, 2013, have harmed workers who faced age discrimination or unlawful retaliation. Publicly available data does not show that the Supreme Court decisions in Gross or Nassar have discouraged individuals from filing Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charges of discrimination, which is a signed statement asserting employment discrimination. {time} 1515 Unfortunately, the one subcommittee-level hearing earlier this year in the Committee on Education and Labor on H.R. 2062 also covered several other unrelated bills. At the very least, this far-reaching legislation deserves more than a cursory examination. Furthermore, a Democrat-invited witness who testified at the hearing in favor of H.R. 2062 acknowledged that ``it is difficult to quantify the impact that the Gross decision has had on the number of older workers who bring cases and the number of those who win them.'' The reality is that a review of EEOC data shows that the rate of EEOC age discrimination charges as a percentage of all charges filed is approximately the same for the 11 years before and after the Gross decision.…
Source
govinfo.gov




