Posts Tagged ‘transgender discrimination’

Transgenders Beneficiary of EEOC Settlement of Title VII Lawsuit Against Finance Loan Company

Count another victory for transgender employees in the battle against employment discrimination.

First Tower Loan, LLC, a financial loan company based in Flowood, Miss., agreed to settle a sex discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and implement gender identity protections, the EEOC announced October 6.

In September 2015, the EEOC intervened in a suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana filed by Tristan Broussard, a former employee of First Tower Loan (Broussard v. First Tower Loan, LLC, Case No. 2:15-cv-01161). The EEOC’s suit charged that First Tower Loan violated federal law by firing Broussard because he is transgender and did not conform to the company’s gender-based expectations. However, the EEOC’s suit was stayed pending an arbitration between Broussard, as a private plaintiff, and First Tower Loan. After an arbitration hearing, Broussard was awarded $53,000 in damages by the arbitrator, but no injunctive relief was awarded.

The 18-month consent decree resolving the EEOC’s suit strengthens the company’s discrimin­ation policy by prohibiting and preventing discrimination or harassment against an employee because the employee is transgender, or because the employee does not conform to the company’s sex- or gender-based preferences, expectations, or stereotypes. The agreement also prohibits the company from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates based on gender identity, transgender status, or sex stereotyping. First Tower Loan further agreed to provide training to its managers and employees explaining the prohibition against discrimination based on gender non-conformity under Title VII, and to provide its management with guidance on handling such complaints.

“We are pleased that First Tower Loan agreed to resolve this case by entering into this consent decree,” said Supervisory Trial Attorney Eduardo Juarez of the EEOC’s San Antonio Field Office. “This agreement will help protect other employees from discrimination based on gender identity, transgender status, or sex stereotyping.”


EEOC: Company Took Back Job Offer After Finding Out Male Applicant Was Transgender

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is sticking to its position that sex discrimination includes against persons who are transgender.

A&E Tire, Inc., a Colorado chain of automotive service shops, violated federal law by retracting a job offer and refusing to hire a male applicant once it was discovered that he was transgender, the EEOC charged in a lawsuit filed Sept. 29.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Egan Woodward applied for a services manager position at A&E Tire’s Denver location, and after his interview he was offered the position pending a drug test and background check. The application and background screening paperwork used by A&E Tire asked Woodward for his sex and for any other names he used in the past. In completing the application and paperwork, Woodward identified his assigned sex at birth and indicated he used another name typically associated with the female sex in the past.

Less than an hour after A&E Tire extended Woodward a job offer, he received a call from a manager asking him if there were a mistake in his paperwork, the EEOC said. When Woodward stated there was not, A&E never got back to him about completing the screenings or a start date and ultimately hired someone else for the position, the agency said.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on sex, including transgender status and sex-based stereotypes. The EEOC filed its lawsuit, EEOC v. A&E Tire, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:17cv-02362-STV, in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado after first attempting to reach a settlement through its pre-litigation conciliation process. The lawsuit seeks back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, as well as appropriate injunctive relief to prevent similar such discriminatory practices in the future.

The lawsuit announced today is part of the EEOC’s ongoing efforts to implement its Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP), which it renewed in 2016. The SEP includes “[p]rotecting lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender (LGBT) people from discrimination based on sex” as a Commission enforcement priority.

“Despite the significant legal and cultural progress we have made as a country in recent years respecting the rights of transgender workers, a lot of work remains to be done in rooting out stereotypes and prejudice,” said the regional attorney for the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office, Mary O’Neill.

Elizabeth Cadle, district director for the Phoenix District Office, said, “Transgender individuals want to work and give to the economy, sharing their skills and ideas just like anyone else. They should not be deprived of the right and ability to do so just because of unfounded fears, misconceptions, and biases.”

Transgender Employee’s Rights Violated By Applebee’s Restaurant in New York, EEOC Says

The firing of a female employee allegedly because she complained about sexual harassment has resulted in her employer opposite the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in an employment discrimination lawsuit.

The EEOC announced on Friday that it has filed this Title VII lawsuit against Apple Metro, Inc., which operates several dozen Applebee’s Neighborhood Bar & Grill restaurants in the New York City area. The alleged Title VII violation took place at the company’s Hawthorne, N.Y., restaurant, the EEOC said.

According to the EEOC’s complaint, Apple Metro staff made numerous crude and derogatory references to the employee’s transgender status, repeatedly and intentionally referred to her with a male name and male pronouns, and made offensive comments about her genitalia. After the employee complained to management about the harassment on several occasions, the company fired her.

“The law requires employers who receive reports of sex harassment to investigate and take action to stop any unlawful treatment of their employees,” said Kevin Berry, the EEOC’s New York District director. “That includes harassment of individuals because of their gender identity.”

“The EEOC is committed to protecting the rights of all employees under federal law, through litigation if necessary, so that employees can work with dignity,” said Jeffrey Burstein, regional attorney for the EEOC’s New York District Office.


HR Issues in Entertainment News

Life sometimes imitates art, and that can trigger bias issues for employers, writes our resident blogger Robin Paggi.

HR Issues in Entertainment News

If you’re a fan of entertainment news, but don’t want to get caught reading US Weekly magazine, here’s the latest along with some related HR information (because I see HR issues in everything).

After appearing on the PBS show, “Finding Your Roots,” Ben Affleck asked the show to omit information that revealed that one of his ancestors was a slave-owner (evidently, this is high drama in Hollywood). Affleck explained his actions by posting this message on Facebook: “I didn’t want any television show about my family to include a guy who owned slaves. I was embarrassed.” Perhaps Affleck thought people might think less of him because of his ancestry.

People may refuse to see Affleck’s movies because of what his ancestor did if they want to; however, employers may not refuse to hire people because of who their ancestors were or what they did.

Most of us don’t even know who our ancestors were, so how would employers know and why would they care? Many of the people who are currently facing ancestry discrimination are or look like they are of Middle-Eastern descent. Why? The people who staged the September 11 attacks were, the people we have been at war with are, and our current biggest terrorist threat is from the Middle East. It appears that some employers don’t want to employ people of Middle-Eastern descent because of those reasons.

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1,040 discrimination complaints were filed between 9/11/2001 and 3/11/2012 by individuals who were – or were perceived to be – Muslim, Sikh, Arab, Middle-Eastern or South Asian. And, in my home state, California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) reported that it received 3,421 complaints in 2014 alleging national origin/ancestry discrimination or harassment. Obviously, the issue has not gone away.

Employers must remember that ancestry is a protected characteristic, which means they may not make any kind of employment decisions (hiring, promotion, firing, etc.) about applicants or employees because of who their ancestors were or what they did. Additionally, they must ensure that their employees are not harassed because of their ancestry.

In other entertainment news, Caitlyn Jenner, the reality star formerly known as Bruce, recently joined Twitter after debuting as a woman on the July cover of Vanity Fair. US Weekly reported that just four hours after her first tweet, she had more than 1 million followers.

People other than Caitlyn’s fans might not be so supportive of her or other transgender people. According to the DFEH, 439 people filed complaints in 2014 that they had been harassed or discriminated against because of their gender identity and/or gender expression.

For people unfamiliar with these terms, the American Psychological Association defines transgender as being “an umbrella term for persons whose gender identity, gender expression or behavior does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.” Gender identity refers to “a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else.” Gender expression refers to “the way a person communicates gender identity to others through behavior, clothing, hairstyles, voice or body characteristics.”

Employers need to know that it is against the law in some states, such as California, for them to make employment decisions about people because their identification or appearance is not consistent with their body parts or because they have taken steps to transition from one sex to another. Additionally, employers in those states are required to allow employees to dress and act like the gender that they identify with.

Having said that, the EEOC has taken the position that discrimination against a transgender person is a violation of Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination in employment.  Therefore, the agency will accept and investigate charges from people who believe they have been discriminated against because of transgender status (or because of gender identity or a gender transition).

Celebrities and their issues might be entertaining, but running afoul of discrimination laws is not. Employers and supervisors must be aware of all forms of discrimination (there are many in addition to those listed above) so they don’t become a story in the news.

Robin Paggi is the Training Coordinator at Worklogic HR.

Robin last wrote for us on lessons learned from a recent high-profile retaliation lawsuit. Before that she wrote about a Facebook photo that promoted a firing and before that on making it OK for employees to ask for your help and before that on working in Family-Run Businesses. Before that she wrote on There’s More to Motivating Than Money;  Love at Work: How Should Employers Respond, and prior to that about lessons for employers in the Brian Williams matter.  Prior to that she wrote about giving employees a second chance. Before that she wrote about making sure the applicant is a good fit for the job and before that about  cure for inappropriate behavior at work. Before that she wrote about cyberloafing, on business lessons from a Christmas story and before that about cell phone policies at work. She has also written for us on rules for holiday parties at work and before that about preventing workplace bullying.

11th Circuit Upholds Judgment for Public Employee Fired for Gender Identity Disorder

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, based in Atlanta, ruled this month that a public employee fired from her job because she has gender identity disorder may seek damages for violation of her constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The plaintiff, Vandiver Elizabeth Glenn, was fired from her job as an editor in the Georgia General Assembly’s Office of Legislative Counsel. She sued under 42 USCS 1983, which prohibits denial of rights to public employees.

A federal district court ruled in her favor, and the appeals court affirmed.

Importantly, the appeals court found that “discrimination against a transgender individual because of her gender non-conformity is sex discrimination.” The court also stated that “[a]ll persons, whether transgender or not, are protected from discrimination on the basis of gender stereotype.”

Although the issue addressed was employment discrimination against public sector employees, it is likely private sector employees in comparable situations will cite to this opinion as favoring them.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which applies to private sector employers and employees, prohibits sex discrimination, but no federal court has extended that prohibition to discrimination against transgenders.

We’ll see if the 11th Circuit opinion changes that.