Amendment in the nature of a substitute sought to: 1) require a plaintiff to establish the "disparate impact" of an employment practice and show a causal connection between the practice and such impact, then the employer would have been required to prove the "business necessity" of such discriminatory practice; 2) provide for "equitable relief" in discrimination cases rather than punitive and compensatory damages provided for in the bill; 3) limit the ability of nonparties to challenge a court decree resolving a claim; 4) limit the statute of limitation provisions only to seniority plans; 5) provide that current law prohibit racial discrimination in all aspects of a private contract; 6) extend Federal employment discrimination law to Congress; and 7) provide that changes made to existent law are effective upon enactment.

Ask AI
Amendment Number
702
Description
Amendment in the nature of a substitute sought to: 1) require a plaintiff to establish the "disparate impact" of an employment practice and show a causal connection between the practice and such impact, then the employer would have been required to prove the "business necessity" of such discriminatory practice; 2) provide for "equitable relief" in discrimination cases rather than punitive and compensatory damages provided for in the bill; 3) limit the ability of nonparties to challenge a court decree resolving a claim; 4) limit the statute of limitation provisions only to seniority plans; 5) provide that current law prohibit racial discrimination in all aspects of a private contract; 6) extend Federal employment discrimination law to Congress; and 7) provide that changes made to existent law are effective upon enactment.
Purpose
An amendment in the nature of a substitute which would: 1. Change the definition of the provisions in the bill which allow certain discriminatory employment practices "required by business necessity". The substitute defines "business necessity" to include such practices as have "a manifest relationship to the employment in question or the legitimate employement goals (which) are significantly served by, even if they do not require, the challenged practice."; 2. Eliminates the provisions of the bill authorizing compensatory and punitive damages in cases of intentional discrimination, providing instead for "equitable relief" only in cases when compensatory back pay is not available; 3. Restricts the ability of non-parties to challenge a court ruling if parties had notice of the original proceeding; 4. Limits the statute of limitations provisions to apply only to seniority plans, rather than when discriminatory practices begin or are determined to have an adverse impact; 5. Limits the illegality of intentional discrimination to those which are a "major" contributing factors for employment.
Congress
101
Type
HAMDT
Latest Action Date
Aug 3, 1990
Latest Action Text
On agreeing to the Michel amendment (A003) Failed by recorded vote: 188 - 238 (Roll no. 309).
Latest Action Time
13:47:13
Submitted Date
Aug 3, 1990
Chamber
House of Representatives
Update Date
Jul 1, 2021
Amendment 702 — Informed