Bill Summary for Bill Number HB10-1269

Date: 03/01/2010

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB10-1269

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Votes: View-->	Action Taken:
Adopt prepared amendment L.001 (Attachment F). Th Adopt prepared amendment L.002 (Attachment L). Th Adopt prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment M). Th Refer House Bill 10-1269, as amended, to the Commi	Pass Without Objection FAIL FAIL PASS

06:43 PM -- House Bill 10-1269

Representative Levy, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 10-1269 concerning the creation of remedies available in employment discrimination cases. The bill establishes the Workplace Fairness and Civil Rights and Remedies Act of 2010. It allows a plaintiff in an employment discrimination case brought under state law to receive compensatory and punitive damages. These damages are in addition to the remedies available under current law including front pay, back pay, interest on back pay, reinstatement or hiring, and other equitable relief. The bill caps the total compensatory and punitive damages that may be awarded, but if the case is tried by a jury, the court is not to inform the jury of the caps. The court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party.

For the first year the bill is effective, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorney fees and costs, are only available against an employer with 15 or more employees. The damage limits for employers with 15 or more employees are the same as in federal law. The damage limits for all employers are shown below:

For employers with Maximum Overall Damages
14 or fewer employers $25,000
between 15 and 100 employees $50,000
between 101 and 200 employees $100,000
between 201 and 500 employees $200,000
more than 500 employees $300,000

Under state law, a person who believes he or she has been discriminated against must exhaust administrative relief before filing with a court. To accomplish this, the person must file a charge of discrimination (claim) with the Colorado Civil Rights Division (CCRD) of the Department of Regulatory Agencies. The division investigates the claim and the director makes a determination. If a claim is not settled at the division, the person may file with the appropriate court within 90 days of a determination, dismissal, or after receiving a "Right to Sue"notice.

Under federal law, plaintiffs who prevail in employment discrimination cases may be awarded compensatory and punitive damages and attorney fees. This only applies to cases against employers with 15 or more employees. An exception is the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) which applies to employers with 20 or more employees and allows for the award of attorney fees but not compensatory or punitive damages. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation cannot be brought under federal law.

06:50 PM

Representative Levy distributed prepared amendment L.001 (Attachment F). She also distributed a written statement of support from The Bell Policy Center (Attachment G) and a list of states that offer compensatory and punitive damages (Attachment H).

06:53 PM -- Barry Roseman, Plaintiff Employment Lawyers' Association, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Roseman discussed the remedies under state law for discrimination. He provided examples of cases of employment discrimination in which the plaintiffs had difficulty obtaining legal representation. He talked about checks and balances that currently exist in law to screen employment discrimination cases. Many cases are screened by the Colorado Civil Rights Division and the weaker cases are generally discarded. Mr. Roseman stated that the bill will not place a tremendous burden on Colorado employers because only a small number of cases will proceed. He responded to questions from the committee about the remedies under existing law.

07:05 PM -- Heather Atkinson, 9 to 5: National Organization of Working Women, read the written statement of Lorena Garcia. Ms. Atkinson also related the personal stories of individuals who have experienced employment discrimination.

07:11 PM -- Mindy Barton, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Community Center of Colorado, spoke in support of the bill. Ms. Barton discussed cases of employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. She stated that people do not have access to the law because they cannot afford attorneys without an award of damages.

07:14 PM -- Boone Kizer, One Colorado, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Kizer stated that the lack of remedies under current law means that individuals struggle to find representation in cases involving violations of state civil rights laws.

07:16 PM -- Melinda Reed, American Association of University Women Colorado, spoke in support of the bill. Ms. Reed supports the vigorous enforcement of state nondiscrimination laws.

07:18 PM -- Dave Garrison, representing himself, spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. Garrison is a small business owner with 12 employees. He related details of his experience with an employee who filed a discrimination case that went through several appeals. He stated his belief that this bill will have negative consequences for small businesses faced with baseless discrimination cases. He responded to questions from the committee about the nature of his case.

07:25 PM -- Chris Ottele, Colorado Civil Justice League and Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. Ottele stated that the bill would take cases out of federal court and try them in state court at a significant cost to Colorado taxpayers. He provided information about meritless and baseless employment discrimination cases that he has defended in the past. He stated his opinion that the system is set up to hurt employers. Mr. Ottele responded to questions from the committee.

07:34 PM -- Melinda Hall, representing herself, spoke in opposition to the bill. Ms. Hall related details of her experience as a human resources professional who has been involved with employment discrimination cases that she believes were frivolous and baseless. She urged the committee to vote no on the bill because of her belief that it will encourage more baseless claims to be filed and pursued.

07:42 PM -- Andrew Volin, Colorado Civil Justice League, spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. Volin related details of his experience as an employment attorney who helps companies defend against discrimination claims. He stated that the bill will negatively impact all Colorado employers. Mr. Volin distributed three charts regarding charges of discrimination (Attachments I, J, and K). He stated that current law provides adequate remedies for discrimination claims. He expressed his opinion that the bill will result in a significant rise in the number of employment discrimination claims filed in Colorado. He stated that he has never defended against a claim that had merit.

08:02 PM -- Barbara Thompson, Mountain States Employers' Council, spoke in opposition to the bill. Ms. Thompson stated that the bill imposes very strong legal remedies on small employers who cannot afford the burden.

08:06 PM -- Mari Newman, Colorado Bar Association and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), spoke in support of the bill. Ms. Newman commented about the fact that the bar association and the ACLU rarely take the same position on the bill. The bar association is concerned with the bill because it helps to provide fair and equal access to justice and to the courts for all workers in Colorado. She provided information about meritorious employment discrimination claims for which she was the attorney. She explained that it can be financially burdensome for her to represent plaintiffs in discrimination cases. Ms. Newman discussed current statutory provisions that provide disincentives for bringing frivolous lawsuits. She talked about the award of attorney fees in Colorado. She addressed many of the comments made by opposition witnesses. Ms. Newman stated that the bill is the right thing to do. She responded to extensive questioning from members of the committee.

08:33 PM

Representative Levy wrapped up her presentation of the bill and asked for a favorable recommendation.


BILL:	HB10-1269
TIME:	08:38:48 PM
MOVED:	Levy
MOTION:	Adopt prepared amendment L.001 (Attachment F). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Court
		VOTE
	Court
	Gardner B.
	Kagan
	King S.
	Miklosi
	Nikkel
	Pace
	Ryden
	Waller
	McCann
	Levy

Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB10-1269
TIME:	08:49:30 PM
MOVED:	Gardner B.
MOTION:	Adopt prepared amendment L.002 (Attachment L). The amendment strikes language relating to the award of attorney fees. The committee discussed the amendment. The motion failed on a vote of 4-7.
SECONDED:	Waller
		VOTE
	Court	No
	Gardner B.	Yes
	Kagan	No
	King S.	Yes
	Miklosi	No
	Nikkel	Yes
	Pace	No
	Ryden	No
	Waller	Yes
	McCann	No
	Levy	No

Not Final YES: 4 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:	HB10-1269
TIME:	08:52:31 PM
MOVED:	Gardner B.
MOTION:	Adopt prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment M). The motion failed on a vote of 4-7.
SECONDED:	Nikkel
		VOTE
	Court	No
	Gardner B.	Yes
	Kagan	No
	King S.	Yes
	Miklosi	No
	Nikkel	Yes
	Pace	No
	Ryden	No
	Waller	Yes
	McCann	No
	Levy	No

Not Final YES: 4 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:	HB10-1269
TIME:	08:53:11 PM
MOVED:	Levy
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 10-1269, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations with a favorable recommendation. The motion passed on a vote of 7-4.
SECONDED:	Court
		VOTE
	Court	Yes
	Gardner B.	No
	Kagan	Yes
	King S.	No
	Miklosi	Yes
	Nikkel	No
	Pace	Yes
	Ryden	Yes
	Waller	No
	McCann	Yes
	Levy	Yes

Final YES: 7 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS