To make the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 applicable to the House of Representatives and the instrumentalities of the Congress, to give certain employees of the House of Representatives and the instrumentalities of the Congress the right to petition for judicial review for violations of certain laws and rules concerning civil rights and employment practices, and for other purposes.
For Further Action See H.R.4822.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
Applies the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and the remedies and procedures referred to in the Fair Employment Practices Resolution to any: (1) employee of (or applicant for employment by) the House of Representatives; (2) employing authority of the House; or (3) employee of (or applicant for employment by) the Architect of the Capitol, the Congressional Budget Office, the General Accounting Office, the Government Printing Office, the Office of Technology Assessment, or the U.S. Botanic Garden. Applies the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to: (1) the Congressional Budget Office; (2) the General Accounting Office; (3) the Government Printing Office; (4) the Library of Congress; (5) the Office of Technology Assessment; and (6) the U.S. Botanic Garden. Requires the Architect of the Capitol to report to the Congress on steps taken pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1989 relating to the minimum wage rate of its employees. Expresses the sense of the House that the Committee on House Administration should make recommendations regarding the application of the Occupational Safety and Health Act to the House. Authorizes any employee of (or applicant for employment by) the House who has been aggrieved by a violation of the Fair Employment Practices Resolution (relating to nondiscrimination), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Fair Labor Standards Amendment of 1989, or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to petition for review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit of the final decision pursuant to the Fair Employment Practices Resolution. Expresses the sense of the House that the Rules of the House should be amended to address the issue of the source of payments by the House to satisfy a judgment against a Member who has been found guilty of a violation of one of such Acts. Gives employees of instrumentalities of the Congress who have been aggrieved by the violations of the following Acts the right to petition for judicial review: (1) the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (excluding Library of Congress employees); (2) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; (3) the Civil Rights Act of 1991; and (4) the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (excluding employees of the Architect of the Capitol).
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.370 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.