Workplace Discrimination

Late yesterday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a comprehensive ruling giving transgender individuals sorely-needed federal protections against discrimination in the workplace. According to the ruling, employers who discriminate against employees or job applicants on the basis of gender identity can now be found in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, specifically its prohibition of sex discrimination in employment.

This ruling marks the first time that the EEOC has held that transgender people are protected from discrimination by federal law. Chris Geidner broke the story late last night in Metro Weekly:

    "The opinion came in a decision delivered on Monday, April 23, to lawyers for Mia Macy, a transgender woman who claims she was denied employment with the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) after the agency learned of her transition. It also comes on the heels of a growing number of federal appellate and trial courts deciding that gender-identity discrimination constitutes sex discrimination, whether based on Title VII or the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws.

    The EEOC decision, issued without objection by the five-member, bipartisan commission, will apply to all EEOC enforcement and litigation activities at the commission and in its 53 field offices throughout the country. It also will be binding on all federal agencies and departments."

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/04/24/469806/eeoc-discrimination/

This is my second post here.  Congratulations, sisters.!

Have a wonderful, wonderful evening.

This is huge. 

Already some reverberations today as a result here in DC.  It will be very interesting to see when the usual suspects start angsting and what form that angst manifests in this time.

Will be watching this unfold in remarkably hawkish ways.

-Miki

This all sounds good but what if a client of the company you work for doesn't want you there because of your gender identity?
This is exactly what happened to me. My company was fine with having me work for them but a client, and a large one as well, rejected me solely because of my transition, Prior to my transition they were very happy with my services. My boss had no choice but to remove me from serving this client in order to not to loose large part of the company's income.
This is a gray area in terms of how far does the law really protects us!

Quote from: envie on April 24, 2012, 08:50:16 PM
This all sounds good but what if a client of the company you work for doesn't want you there because of your gender identity?
This is exactly what happened to me. My company was fine with having me work for them but a client, and a large one as well, rejected me solely because of my transition, Prior to my transition they were very happy with my services. My boss had no choice but to remove me from serving this client in order to not to loose large part of the company's income.
This is a gray area in terms of how far does the law really protects us!

I would suggest that you consult a lawyer...by removing you from servicing a client (because of their illegal discrimination), you probably suffered financial loss, and certainly were discriminated against, regardless of the money.

Now, they can't *make* the company work with yours, but they can be made to pay a substantial penalty for their crimes. Could it affect future contracts with your company? Perhaps...but given you could be looking at a multi-million dollar settlement (which is likely, given potential negative publicity), you might not have to worry about future employment. (And, if you *are* fired for this, that falls under "retaliation", which is also illegal...and all company lawyers will KNOW this.)

Talk to a lawyer, they know more.

Thanks Beth Andrea for your suggestions. I am no longer working for the company for reason unrelated to this incident. At the time I was contemplating to seek a lawyer but my company offered me different solution. Not so convenient for me at the time but still it was a replacement. If I had chosen to go down the law suit lane I'd not only have this large client but also my own company to battle with.  Since I didn't loose my job it seemed better to keep the status quo and not challenge the situation. I had a home stay partner and 2 year old daughter at home, so keeping quiet and keeping the job seemed like a painful but smart decision considering the circumstances.

I wouldn't start celebrating too hard until this is ruled in our favor by the supreme court, or brought into law by congress. Right now this only seems to be an administrative ruling, which is great... but you'd better believe there's going to be backlash about this on the political level.

This is a massive step in the right direction, though.

Good stuff.