PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 10, 1999
Merit Systems Protection Board Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1999 - Amends Federal civil service law to authorize the Merit Systems Protection Board to establish a three-year pilot program to provide Federal employees and agencies with voluntary early intervention alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes to apply to workplace disputes involving removals, suspension for more than 14 days, and other adverse actions under Federal civil service law. Directs the Board to test and evaluate a variety of ADR techniques. Authorizes any Federal agency or employee to request such ADR.Requires the Board's Office of Policy and Evaluation to establish criteria for evaluating such ADR program, prepare a report, and submit it to the President and Congress.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Gekas, George W. [R-PA-17] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H10629-10631)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10629-10631)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3312.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10629-10632)
Mrs. Bono moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 582.
Committee on Government Reform discharged.
Committee on Government Reform discharged.
House Committee on Government Reform Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Oct. 23, 2000.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-994, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-994, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Civil Service.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3312 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3312 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3312 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3312 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.