As I’ve mentioned before, in my spare time (a lot more, now that the kids are out of the house) I sometimes review the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s federal sector Digest of EEO Law (which they used to issue quarterly, but now seems to be a little more sporadic). Sometimes, in addition to the recitation of federal sector cases, the EEOC will include an in-depth article on a particular topic of interest. Although these digests (and the articles they contain) are geared towards the federal government, the EEOC’s approach to certain employment issues can also be helpful for private employers. And that’s what we have here, with the EEOC’s article, “Moving Towards Equality in the Workplace for LGBTQI+ Employees.” Continue Reading The EEOC’s “Best Practices” for LGBTQI+ Employment Equity
Bostock v. Clayton County: The Epilogue… and What It Means for Employers (for Now)
As I mentioned in a previous post, I am always curious as to how things turn out. But often as an employment lawyer, I am left in a state of ignorance. I give advice to employers on what to do in tricky situations, but don’t always hear whether my advice was implemented (I certainly hope so!) or what resulted (good things, hopefully!). And often I wonder what happens to the parties in high-profile cases – like Bostock v. Clayton County, one of a trio of cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s prohibition on “sex discrimination” in employment encompasses sexual orientation and gender identity.
Continue Reading Bostock v. Clayton County: The Epilogue… and What It Means for Employers (for Now)
Does “Sex” Encompass Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity? The Supremes Will Soon Decide.
A more conservative Supreme Court than we’ve seen in recent history is poised to consider whether Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination based on “sex” includes sexual orientation and gender identity. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a trio of cases in the 2019-2020 term, which begins in October. We previously wrote on this topic here as the Circuit split was developing.
Not even the federal government tasked with enforcing employment discrimination laws agrees on whether Title VII covers sexual orientation. The Department of Justice reversed course during the Trump administration and now takes the position that sexual orientation is not covered, whereas the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is holding firm to its position, first adopted in 2015, that sexual orientation is covered, as is gender identity. Additionally, under an Executive Order signed by President Obama (not yet rescinded by President Trump) and enforced by the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, federal contractors and subcontractors are prohibited from discriminating against applicants and employees on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, in addition to (and separate from) sex.
Continue Reading Does “Sex” Encompass Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity? The Supremes Will Soon Decide.