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.