HB 3187
Makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to require or request disclosure of certain information regarding age and attendance or graduation dates.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
At the request of
(at the request of AARP)
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
91%
Oppose
9%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill prohibits employers from asking or requiring employees to disclose information about their age, attendance records, or graduation dates. It aims to protect individuals from age-based discrimination in the workplace by clarifying what constitutes ‘because of age’ for employment discrimination laws. The bill includes exceptions for bona fide seniority systems and employee benefit plans, and removes a previous provision regarding age limits for apprentices. It also amends existing labor laws related to employee complaints and protections.
Key provisions
- Prohibits employers from requesting or requiring disclosure of age, attendance, or graduation dates.
- Clarifies the definition of ‘because of age’ for employment discrimination purposes.
- Allows observation of terms in bona fide seniority systems and employee benefit plans.
- Removes the allowance for age limits in apprentice selection.
- Amends ORS 659A.030 to include salary, length of employment, and retirement eligibility as factors considered ‘because of age’.
- Updates ORS 654.062 to strengthen protections against retaliation for reporting safety violations.
- Establishes a rebuttable presumption in favor of the employee if discrimination occurs within 60 days of protected activity.
- Requires the Director of Labor and Industries to adopt rules consistent with the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act.
Who is affected
- Employers
- Employees
- Labor Organizations
- Human Resources Professionals
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Gregory Smith
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of updating Oregon's workplace age discrimination law emphasize the need for fairness and equal opportunity in the workplace. They argue that current laws have loopholes allowing employers to avoid liability, even when age may be a factor in their decision-making. Testifiers highlight personal experiences of age-based workplace discrimination, citing the importance of treating workers fairly based on qualifications rather than age stereotypes. Many emphasize the need for stronger protections against age discrimination, particularly for older workers who face unique challenges in finding employment and building retirement savings. Advocates also stress the importance of promoting an 'age-friendly' society, where individuals over 50 deserve full and equal access to employment opportunities, free from scrutiny based on physical appearance or perceived limitations.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of House Bill 3187 express concerns that the measure would create unnecessary legal uncertainty, increase the risk of baseless lawsuits, and impose unmanageable restrictions on employers' ability to make employment decisions. They argue that the bill's vague language and broad definition of discrimination would undermine fair and predictable workforce practices, while also expanding age discrimination laws beyond the current 18-year threshold, potentially harming small businesses and the overall economy. Additionally, opponents contend that removing certain questions from job applications would hinder compensation analysis and compliance with Oregon's pay equity law, and that the bill's provisions would be too costly and complex for Oregon's small businesses already struggling with inflation and workforce shortages.