So when the plaintiff in this federal court decision I read last night cited as evidence of her employer’s heterosexual animus that her gay coworker received a cake and party by gay supervisors on his 30th work anniversary, whereas she did not receive cake or party for the same occasion, my Spidey senses were really tingling. Continue reading
The former part-time Director of Operations for a college hockey team was sure that her employer fired her because she was gay. Continue reading
Who is my “source”?
I got the scoop from EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas, who updated us on LinkedIn over the weekend about a Tennessee federal judge who entered this preliminary injunction to stop the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from implementing this technical assistance document issued in June 2021 that purports to explain employers’ post-Bostock obligations under Title VII concerning dress codes, bathrooms, locker rooms, shows, and use of preferred pronouns or names.
So, where did the EEOC go awry? Continue reading
That’s effectively the argument the plaintiff, an openly gay man, made in this case.
In case you missed President Biden’s State of the Union Address last night, I’ve got you covered with everything HR compliance that came up. Continue reading
Henning Schlottmann (User:H-stt), CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Over at the FisherBroyles Employment Law Blog, my partner, Amy Epstein Gluck, wrote here about a recent federal court finding that a Catholic school could not avoid discrimination claims after firing a gay teacher from a secular position.
Serendipitously, I just read a story about a lesbian seeking to become a women’s lacrosse coach at a Catholic high school. The school initially withdrew the offer. But, this story has a happy ending. Continue reading
Danachos, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Thank you for all of the positive feedback and comments both via email and here on LinkedIn following yesterday’s transgender pronoun post. Many of the requests were for additional resources to promote a trans-inclusive workplace. Continue reading
Amousey, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
Most employees are at-will; they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all. And intentionally misgendering a co-worker would be enough.
But, what if the employee objects on religious grounds? 🤔 Continue reading
Marielam1, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Bostock v. Clayton County that an employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender has discriminated based on sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yesterday, the Supreme Court declined to address the Fourth Circuit’s decision in G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, where the appellate court ruled that under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, transgender students may use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. Otherwise, the school is discriminating based on sex.
While Bostock has nothing to do with bathrooms and G.G. has nothing to do with the workplace, I think you can see where I’m going here.
The Employer Handbook Blog