Section 659A.112 - Employment discrimination

2 Analyses of this statute by attorneys

  1. Oregon Employment Legislation to Keep an Eye on This Year

    K&L Gates LLPSamuel HernandezMarch 3, 2021

    As the Oregon 2021 legislative session gets underway, there are several bills that, if passed, would have a significant impact on the employment landscape: lowering burden of proof requirements for employees bringing claims of discrimination, creating new avenues for employees to bring claims, and making it more difficult for employers to both enforce noncompetition agreements and properly classify others as independent contractors.Lower Burden of Proof for Employees Asserting DiscriminationSenate Bill (SB) 477 would drastically lower the bar for employees bringing claims against employers for discrimination based on a protected class (e.g., race, color, religion - Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 659A.030) or disability (ORS 659A.112). Under the current bill, a plaintiff would not need to prove (1) the conduct complained of was severe or pervasive so as to alter the terms and conditions of employment, (2) the employee was treated less favorably than other employees similarly situated, and (3) the employee followed internal company policies to report or complain about the violating conduct.

  2. What The 2021 Oregon Legislature Has In Store For Employment Law

    Tonkon Torp LLPClay CrepsJanuary 27, 2021

    We will be monitoring this bill closely.Burden of Proof in Discrimination Actions SB 477 would create quite a change to discrimination actions brought under Oregon law. The bill would provide that an individual bringing suit under ORS 659A.030 (basic discrimination for protected classes) or ORS 659A.112 (discrimination based on disability) would not have to prove that: (1) theconduct giving rise to the action was sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the employee’s terms or conditions of employment; (2) the plaintiff was treated less favorably than another similarly situated employee who is outside of the relevant protected class to which plaintiff belongs; and (3)prior to commencing the action, the plaintiff followed an employer’s internal personnel policies or procedures to report or complain about the occurrence of the underlying conduct giving rise to the action. This would be a significant departure from the state of the law currently applied to such actions. Obviously, this will lower the burden of proof for an employee to prove discrimination.