We’re talkin’ softball. Continue reading
Let’s imagine that one of your female co-workers gets promoted. Shortly afterward, some of your male co-workers spread false rumors about how their recently-promoted colleague must have slept her way to the top.
Do you think that: (a) these rumors are gender-based, or (b) based upon false allegations of conduct?
The former could be the lynchpin to a viable sex-based hostile work environment claim. If it’s the latter, i.e., the rumors could have just as quickly been spread about a man, then the hostile work environment claim gets dismissed. Continue reading
Among Fortune 500 companies, 91% prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and 83% prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. [Source] But, under federal law, circuit courts remain split as to whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination based on LGBT status.
So, let’s say you’re a Fortune 500 company accused of LGBT discrimination in a jurisdiction in which the law may permit that type of abhorrent behavior.
Do you defend by arguing that the law permits LGBT discrimination? Continue reading
At least as it relates to a big employment case that could be coming down Supreme Court Boulevard in 2019. Continue reading
Chris reported yesterday that the U. S. Department of Justice filed this brief with the United States Supreme Court in this case, in which it argues that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal employment discrimination law, does not cover discrimination against an individual because of the individual’s gender identity.
Is this a big deal? Yes. Is it a surprise that the DOJ has taken this position? Heck no. Continue reading