HBA-MPM H.B. 3615 77(R)    BILL ANALYSIS


Office of House Bill AnalysisH.B. 3615
By: Brimer
Business & Industry
3/26/2001
Introduced



BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

In the Texas Supreme Court Case Quantum Chemical Corp. v. Toennies, the
court held that the correct standard of causation applicable in all Texas
Commission on Human Rights Act discrimination cases is the "motivating
factor" standard.  Several justices noted in dissent, however, that several
federal appellate courts have held to the contrary and the United States
Supreme Court has held in the past that the motivating factor standard
applies only in cases with direct evidence of discrimination.  The federal
courts further suggested that in cases in which there is only
circumstantial evidence, the plaintiff must prove that discrimination was
the determining factor motivating the alleged unlawful employment practice.
House Bill 3615 provides that discriminatory employment practices are
established by direct evidence and provides that standards upheld by
federal courts apply to state courts with respect to actions relating to
alleged discriminatory employment practices. 

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the opinion of the Office of House Bill Analysis that this bill does
not expressly delegate any additional rulemaking authority to a state
officer, department, agency, or institution. 

ANALYSIS

House Bill 3615 amends the Labor Code to provide that an unlawful
employment practice is established when a complainant demonstrates by
direct evidence that race, color, sex, national origin, religion, age, or
disability was a motivating factor for an employment practice, even if
other factors also motivated the practice, unless race, color, sex,
national origin, religion, age, or disability is combined with objective
jobrelated factors to attain diversity in the employer's workforce.  The
bill provides that in a complaint in which the complainant does not offer
direct evidence of discriminatory intent, an unlawful employment practice
is established if the complainant demonstrates that but for the
complainant's race, color, sex, national origin, religion, age, or
disability, the employer would not have taken the alleged discriminatory
action.  The bill specifies that in no case shall the opinions or
statements of persons not participating in the employment action or
performance evaluations or appraisals conducted one or more years before
the employment be considered evidence that the purported reason for its
action is pretextual.  The bill requires the courts of the state to apply
the same standards as federal courts having jurisdictions over actions
arising in the state in evaluating evidence in actions brought under these
provisions. 

EFFECTIVE DATE

September 1, 2001.