Tag Archives: Sexual Orientation

Transgender Woman Protected From Sex Discrimination, Court Decides

Discrimination, Employee Rights, Litigation, Termination, , , , , ,

The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits an employer from discriminating against a transgender woman “on the basis of sex” and also ruled that the supervisor’s belief that gender transition “violates God’s commands” is not a defense to employment discrimination.

The Sixth Circuit, which decides federal cases brought in Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio, reviewed the firing of Aimee Stephens from her job at a funeral home in which she had originally worked as a male in the case of EEOC v. R.G & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes (U.S. 2018)

After she was diagnosed with gender identity disorder, Stephens told her boss, Thomas Rost, that she was planning to transition to female. Her boss fired her. Rost stated during the lawsuit that he terminated Stephens’s employment because “he was no longer going to represent himself as a man” and that a person’s sex is “an immutable God-given fit”.

The Sixth Circuit decided, like the Second and Seventh Circuits (covering New York, Vermont, Connecticut and Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, respectively) before it, that a company violates an employee’s civil rights if the employer fires that worker on the basis of sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity.

The funeral home where Stephens worked hoped that its termination of her would be protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the U.S. Supreme Court’s case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (U.S. 2014).

However, almost three decades ago. the U.S. Supreme Court had already rejected the argument that a supervisor’s religious squeamishness was sufficient to overcome the civil rights laws. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Employment Division v. Smith (U.S. 1990) that a person may not defy neutral laws of general applicability even as an expression of religious belief. “To permit this,” wrote conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, “would make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”

Despite this long-standing Supreme Court precedent, the funeral home argued that the presence of a transgender employee would require Rost to leave his job, because forcing him to work with a transgender person was an infringement of his religious rights and also would “often create distractions for the deceased’s loved ones”. Continue reading Transgender Woman Protected From Sex Discrimination, Court Decides →

How Texas Employers Should Respond to Marriage Decision

Benefits, Discrimination, Employee Rights, Forms and Policies, Personnel Policies, , ,

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states has Texas employers scrambling for a correct response. Businesses need to consider employee benefits, leaves of absence and many other Texas workplace policies to address the change in the definition of spouse.

Unlike some changes in the law, this one will not wait for Texas employers to catch up. Travis County had already issued 54 licenses to same sex couples by noon today. The Austin American-Statesman reported that clerks in Dallas, Bexar, Tarrant, Midland, McLennan and El Paso counties also began issuing licenses to same-sex couples and judges have already started marrying same-sex couples today in Texas.

Here are some of the employment law considerations that businesses need to address immediately: Continue reading How Texas Employers Should Respond to Marriage Decision →

Texas Employers Should Consider Equal Treatments for LGBT Employees

Discrimination, Employee Rights, , , , , ,

Texas employers traditionally have not had to worry about being accused of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, because there is no federal or Texas law that makes sexual orientation discrimination illegal. Additionally, Texas employers previously have not had to provide spousal benefits, such as family coverage under a group health care policy, to same sex spouses.

The laws of Texas have not changed, but the tide is turning for all American employers, and Texas businesses are not immune to that trend. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively legalized gay marriage in 11 more states when the court declined to hear appeals of lower court decisions finding state laws banning same sex marriage unconstitutional. So recently, gay couples received marriage licenses and were married in several conservative states including Oklahoma, Colorado, North Carolina, Virginia, and even Utah.

At the same time, the EEOC and several courts have been wrestling with Title VII gender discrimination claims by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) employees who say their employers have discriminated against them. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have laws explicitly protecting LGBT employees. 91 percent of Fortune 500 companies already prohibit this kind of discrimination. But in the states where sexual orientation laws are not in place, employers can expect the EEOC and disgruntled workers to file cases to try to change the law through the court system if not the legislature.

Finally, President Obama has issued an executive order requiring that businesses that do at least $10,000 in federal work annually have to protect LGBT employees from discrimination. This affects an estimated 22 percent of the civilian workforce nationwide and many employers in Texas.

All of this means that Texas employers are engaging in very risky behavior if the employer doesn’t protect its employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In addition, many Texas employers have retail locations or offices in the 30 states that recognize same sex marriage. Therefore, consistency in employment policies means that most of these employers should go ahead and change the definition of “spouse” in their policies and insurance plans to include same sex spouses regardless in which state the employee resides.

You may not agree politically with these changes sweeping the country, but as a prudent employer, you should consider whether the wise business decision for your company is to protect LGBT employees and treat them equally when it comes to benefits.