According to Chris Geidner at Buzzfeed.com (here), 128 members of Congress filed a brief in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc., urging the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to conclude the discrimination based on sexual orientation is sex discrimination and, therefore, violates Title VII.
So, yes, you should pay attention.
Late last week, one of those lawsuits settled.
Around this time last year, I blogged here about Guide to Restroom Access for Transgender Workers. According to OSHA, “all employees should be permitted to use the facilities that correspond to their gender identity.” And, it’s up to the employee to determine for him- or herself “the most appropriate and safest option.”
It should come as no shock that the federal administrative agency tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination law has released a fact sheet, which reaches the same conclusions.
Last week, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission made headlines by filing its first lawsuits against private-sector businesses challenging sexual orientation discrimination as sex discrimination.
Meanwhile, yesterday, another federal court in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc. (opinion here) concluded just the opposite: sexual orientation discrimination is “reprehensible,” but does not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Yesterday, I blogged here about the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission‘s first lawsuits challenging sexual-orientation discrimination as sex discrimination. While part of the EEOC’s Strategic Enforcement Plan to address emerging and developing issues, getting federal courts to agree that sexual-orientation discrimination is unlawful under Title VII is an uphill battle.
But, that doesn’t stop American businesses from creating and enforcing their own rules in the workplace against LGBT discrimination.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is officially stepping into the ring and taking the fight to private-sector employers whom the EEOC believes has discriminated against workers on the basis of sexual orientation. Yesterday, the EEOC announced (here) that it had filed two complaints in federal court against employers whom it alleges engaged in anti-gay bias.
Oh, it’s on now!
You know, being a client of the Blogger King has its perks. (That’s me. I’m the Blogger King). When I’m not litigating and counseling on employment-related issues, I’m taking blog post requests and emailing weekly updates of HR goodies that don’t make it onto the blog.
But, with my DropBox and Pocket chock full of recent cases, I’ll summarize the recent biggies.
On Tuesday, I had a great sandwich. You see, I made a turkey and swiss sandwich at home and, in a moment of brilliance, I added some of the leftover guacamole from Taqueria La Veracruzana.
Oh, right, you’re here to learn about sexual-orientation discrimination.
On Tuesday, voters in Houston, TX took to the polls and said no to Prop 1. That’s a ballot measure that would have outlawed discrimination at work against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees and job applicants. Amanda Terkel at The Huffington Post reports here that, despite having widespread support from local and national politicians and businesses, the measure failed, in large part, because of the “bathroom” issue. That is, many voters did not want transgender women using the women’s restroom (and vice-versa).
Meanwhile, on Tuesday in our Nation’s Capital, the District of Columbia Office of Human Rights issued a “groundbreaking report” revealing a high rate of discrimination against transgender job applicants.
Mr. Gaff worked as a custodian at a University. He claimed that, on several occasions, his subordinate called him a “fa***t.” So, Mr. Gaff complained to his supervisor. Then, Mr. Gaff was later fired.
Retaliation?
The Employer Handbook Blog