Goodbye, Ruby Tuesday. EEOC hung sex discrimination on you.

I’ve got some apples reverse sex discrimination on the menu today.

How you like dem apples?

More after the jump…

* * *

(At the last minute, after a deep internal debate which cost me at least 12 brain cells. I decided to save Karma Chameleon for another post.)

The EEOC announced last week that it filed this federal court complaint alleging that the restaurant chain Ruby Tuesday discriminated against male employees for temporary assignments to a Utah resort.

According to the complaint, Ruby Tuesday allegedly advertised internally in nine states “the opportunity to earn more money and gain valuable work experience while on temporary assignment to Park City, Utah.” Supposedly, the internal ad contained an “explicit and exclusive preference for female applicants,” arising from concerns about housing employees of both genders together. The EEOC alleges that Ruby Tuesday denied at least two male employees the opportunity and benefit of working in Park City. Supposedly, the company filled seven slots, all with women. 

In its press release, the EEOC described this as “an explicit example of sex discrimination” and “a cautionary tale to employers that sex-based employment decisions are rarely justified, and are not consistent with good business judgment.”

As Nicole Pasulka points out in this post at TakePart.com about the Ruby Tuesday action, workplace discrimination can affect anyone. She’s right. So, Ruby Tuesday allegations notwithstanding, make sure that your workers are trained to not to treat anyone differently based on any protected class. And that your supervisors take complaints of reverse-[insert protected class] discrimination in the workplace as seriously as they would any other complaint of discrimination.

Even for us white guys.

Updated: