Women's Rights Employment Law Blog

A detailed report on EEOC perspective appears on the National Law Journal.

By Tresa Baldas

The federal government has launched an initiative aimed at cracking down on discriminatory hiring practices in the workplace -- a program that could land unsuspecting employers in court, employment attorneys are warning.

That's what happened to Walgreen Co. this month, lawyers note, when the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission hit the national pharmacy chain with a class action alleging widespread racial bias against thousands of African-American workers. EEOC v. Walgreen Co., No. 07-172, (S.D. Ill.).

The suit came one week after the EEOC announced "E-RACE" (Eradicating Racism and Colorism from Employment), an initiative that will have federal investigators paying much closer attention to how minorities are hired and promoted.

FOCUS ON HIRING

Specifically, the EEOC will focus on hiring decisions that are based on names, arrest and conviction records, employment and personality tests and credit scores -- all of which may disparately impact people of color.

For example, an African-American might be denied a job when an arrest record shows up on a background check or if a credit score turns out to be low. Such criteria, which have a disparate impact on minorities, were not considered in the past. But employers are increasingly considering such factors when hiring, and may unwittingly be denying jobs to large classes of minorities.

Many states have laws that restrict employers from asking about or considering criminal records when hiring. The EEOC holds that if an employer denies a job to an applicant because he or she has a criminal record, it could be considered discrimination if the person is a minority.

The EEOC also has a new specialized task force -- formed last year -- that will handle evidence turned up by E-RACE. Regional attorneys and directors will investigate in more detail and attempt to establish a pattern of discrimination within industries or employers, and present it to headquarters for possible litigation.

"I don't want employers to get the impression that they're some kind of bull's-eye," said EEOC attorney Paula Bruner, special assistant to the EEOC chairwoman. "We want them to be aware they need to step up in terms of their compliance with our laws."

According to the EEOC, race discrimination complaints continue to be the number one complaint made to the EEOC. In 2006, a total of 27,238 such complaints were filed. The EEOC also has seen a substantial increase over the past 15 years in discrimination claims based on color, which have soared from 374 in 1992 to 1,241 in 2006.

Continue reading "EEOC Cracks Down on Discriminatory Hiring Practices" »

Iowa Senate has a heartening news.

By Todd Dorman
Lee Newspapers

DES MOINES - A bill prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians in Iowa won Senate approval Monday over the objections of critics who predicted the measure would harm small businesses and open the door to lawsuits.

Backers of the bill, mostly Democrats, pushed it to passage on a 32-17 vote. They portrayed the legislation as a needed strike against discrimination that would also make the state more economically attractive.

The bill, Senate File 427, would add the words "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the Iowa’s Civil Rights Act, which currently bars discrimination based on age, race, creed, color, sex, national origin, religion and disability.

The act specifically targets discrimination tied to employment, housing, public accommodations, education and credit.

"Today, we have the opportunity to reaffirm that in Iowa, job performance is what counts, not what you look like, not what church you attend, not how old you are or who you love," said Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, who led debate on the bill.

"It is difficult to convince a talented young person to come to Iowa or stay in Iowa when they can be discriminated against simply because of who they are," Gronstal said.

How aware are the liberals when it comes to queer culture? Alternet takes a stab.

Queer 101: A Guide for Heteros By Cameron Scott, AlterNet. As last November's election neared and a Democratic victory appeared more and more likely, Republicans warned that Speaker Pelosi would impose her "San Francisco values" on average Americans. Americans to the right of the left coast felt in their gut that San Francisco values were a shameful thing, without really knowing what they were.

Even San Franciscans scratched their heads a bit. The local paper's sex columnist, Violet Blue, pointed out that it meant sex. She argued that the twist in conservatives' panties resulted from San Franciscans' sex-positive outlook. Blue offered a paean to some of the city's sexual rituals, several of which, such as the Folsom Street Fair, are primarily gay.

But even Violet Blue didn't tell the whole truth: The phrase "San Francisco values" came directly from the right's well-worn gay-baiting playbook. In a story called "San Francisco Values Front and Center," the right's faithful warrior Bill O'Reilly shifts from talking about the city's ousting of ROTC clubs from several high schools into a discussion of gay marriage. He includes standard playbook comparisons of gay unions to polygamy, "triads" and incest.

So why hasn't anybody called a spade a spade? Many in Middle America have come to believe homosexual values must be abhorrent, based on the right's insistence that all homosexuals are radical perverts.

Blindness to difference has allowed the right wing to invent a sinister stereotype of "homosexuals" that has only tenuous links to reality. Radical right groups generate bogus statistics by conflating gay men and lesbians (the claim that homosexuals are more likely to have STDs should more accurately say that lesbians have the lowest rates of STDs of any group) and gay men and men who molest boys (imagine if they consistently referred to men who molest girls as "straight men"). The right gets away with their smears because they have persuaded Americans that sex and desire have no role in polite society.

Continue reading "Queer 101 for the Liberals" »

Taking yet another lead on creating a safer space, New Jersey state has a progressive ruling on school sex harassment scenario.

N.J. High Court Applies Hostile Work Environment Standard to School Sex Harassment
Henry Gottlieb
New Jersey Law Journal

School districts can be held liable in damages for student-on-student gay bashing and other forms of sexual harassment if teachers know about it and fail to react promptly, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled last week.

At the same time, the court declined to impose strict liability. Instead, liability will depend on how well educators respond to such situations.

"When a student is subjected to severe or pervasive bullying on the school bus, in the classroom, or at the playground and a school district fails to adequately respond to that misconduct, that student has a right to redress," Chief Justice James Zazzali wrote for the unanimous court in L.W. v. Toms River Regional Schools, A-111. "However, school districts will be shielded from liability, when their preventive and remedial actions are reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances."

The plaintiff was a Toms River, N.J., student who complained to authorities in grammar, middle and high school that his peers abused him for years with anti-gay comments like "homo" and "faggot" and occasionally assaulted him -- treatment so bad that he felt compelled to miss classes and avoid school buses and after-school activities.

Administrators tried to deal with the problem with lectures, detentions and an occasional suspension to tormentors without effecting an end to the problem until the plaintiff transferred to an out-of-town school.

In response to a suit, the state Division on Civil Rights found that the Law Against Discrimination covered the case and it imposed $60,000 in fines on the school district.

The state Supreme Court agreed that the case was covered by the LAD and the leading case on hostile work environment sexual harassment, Lehmann v. Toys 'R' Us, Inc., 132 N.J.587.

The LAD permits a cause of action against a school district for student-on-student harassment based on an individual's perceived sexual orientation if the school district fails to reasonably address that harassment, the court said.

Continue reading "NJ Court rules against hostile schools" »

Connecticut lawmakers are considering a bill prohibiting transgender discrimination.

(Hartford-AP) State lawmakers are again considering a bill that would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity.

One transgendered woman told the legislature's Judiciary Committee of how she struggled to find a job, despite having a PhD in chemistry. Time after time, she would apply for jobs, only to be turned down after the interview.

The bill adds gender identity or expression to the law that prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, religion, age and other characteristics.

Although the same legislation passed in the Judiciary Committee last year, it died later in the legislative process. Advocates hope this will be the year that the bill finally passes.

Three years ago, the state's hate crime law was expanded to protect transgendered people, who identify and express themselves as the opposite sex.

A top NYC restaurant has been accused of harboring anti-gay bias.

Chic, elegant, and trendy, nothing screams "gay friendly" more than the upper echelon of the urban fine dining experience-at least on the surface. But for those working behind the scenes, that sleek exterior may mask a macho atmosphere that can include homophobia. As anyone who’s seen TV’s Hell’s Kitchen can attest, such sleekness often belies working conditions that enforce a rigid pecking order, a subculture of macho posturing, and even cases of outright discrimination against one group or another.

The gritty, not-very-pretty reality behind the gilded wallpaper and orchid floral arrangements at some of the finest dining spaces was revealed when a Manhattan waiter, Joseph Bassani, recently filed a lawsuit against Jean-Georges for forcing him to have simulated sex with a prostitute during a private party. Jean-Georges isn’t just any restaurant, or even any top restaurant. It has garnered the ultimate accolade, four stars from the New York Times, and is generally considered by foodies one of the top four or five restaurants in the city.

According to the lawsuit, "The prostitute, who was naked, pushed him onto the top of one of the dining room tables (and) straddled him. Bassani shut his eyes and waited for the assault to end." But that assault was allegedly only the worst of many such instances in which the waitron said he was harassed due to his sexual preference. Bassani claimed that his co-workers often called him a "whore" and that a supervisor once mockingly attributed his recent weight loss to his having contracted full-blown AIDS.

Continue reading "Top NYC Restaurant Accused of Anti-Gay Bias" »

NY Times published a story today about a top firm mired with controversies.

Gay Lawyer’s Suit Accuses Firm of Bias

By JULIE CRESWELL

An associate at one of the country’s most prestigious law firms, Sullivan & Cromwell, filed a state lawsuit in Manhattan yesterday accusing the firm of a systematic campaign of discrimination and retaliation against him because of his sexual orientation.

Aaron B. Charney, 28, who is a fourth-year associate, asserts in the lawsuit, filed in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, that several partners in Sullivan & Cromwell’s highly regarded mergers and acquisitions practice subjected him to “lewd and illegal conduct,” beginning in the fall of 2005. He is seeking a jury trial and unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

In his lawsuit, Mr. Charney accuses members of the firm of demanding he be terminated for carrying on an “unnatural” gay relationship with another Sullivan & Cromwell associate; Mr. Charney denies the relationship. The suit also contends that after he filed a formal internal complaint, members of the firm suggested that he move to a foreign office and then fabricated reviews to accuse him of overbilling clients, among other things.

While Mr. Charney has not been terminated, he says he was told he should not come to the office while an internal investigation is continuing.

Continue reading "Gay Lawyer’s Suit Accuses Firm of Bias" »

Washington Blade says among others, what caused biggest headlines were the midterm Democratic victories raising gay hopes, the gay elections, hate crimes and Mary Cheney’s pregnancy. More written by JOEY DIGUGLIELMO :

Mark Foley wasn’t the only gay story of 2006. The year will be remembered for the Democratic victories in the midterm elections, the somber 25th anniversary of AIDS and big changes in the way gays are treated by some of the world’s major religions.

In no particular order, here are the Blade’s picks for the biggest gay news stories of the year.

Democrats retake Congress

November’s midterm elections, in which Democrats won majorities in both houses of Congress after 12 years of Republican control, were viewed by many gays as a tremendous victory.

While it remains to be seen how much of a priority gay issues will be for the new Congress, members are expected to take up pro-gay legislation in 2007, including the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which calls for banning private sector employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity; and the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, which calls for giving the federal government authority to prosecute hate crimes based on a victim’s sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

At least eight other gay- or HIV-related bills have been introduced in Congress in recent years but have died in committee after Republican leaders refused to bring them up for a vote.

25th anniversary of AIDS

June 5 marked a quarter-century since AIDS was first reported by the Center for Disease Control in 1981.

Since then, activists pointed to several key developments to celebrate in the ongoing fight against the epidemic. The Ryan White CARE Act, the federal government’s largest program for providing medical treatment and support to uninsured and low-income people with HIV and AIDS, was reauthorized by Congress this month after a lengthy delay. HIV-positive people who have access to drug cocktails developed in 1996 are also living longer without AIDS than was conceivable at the disease’s outset, raising the hope that eventually HIV may become a chronic but manageable disease with which the infected can expect normal life spans.

Despite some undeniable advances, HIV and AIDS continue to wreak havoc in the U.S. among gay men, especially black gay men.

Of the more than 1 million Americans living with HIV, 74 percent are men and between 67-72 percent of them contracted the disease through gay sex, according to government statistics. National estimates suggest that 25 percent of white gay men in the U.S. are living with HIV compared to 50 percent of black gay men.

Blacks are about 12 to 13 percent of the U.S. population but account for 47 percent of Americans living with HIV.

AIDS activists are concerned that there’s a false perception among young gay men, who were either not yet born or too young to experience the toll the early years of the disease took on the gay community, that AIDS has become a manageable disease.

Continue reading "LGBT Headlines of 2006" »

Posted by Saswat Pattanayak | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Discrimination, LGBT, News

Bookmark:                                                  

Bay Windows has some hilarious quotes for this month. Well, some are pretty sad, actually. Check these out!

"I think Mary is going to be a loving soul to her child. And I’m happy for her.”
— President George W. Bush, commenting on the pregnancy of Mary Cheney, the openly lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, People magazine, Dec. 15. Cheney and her partner Heather Poe will co-parent the baby.

"Yes, he does. But he also believes that every human life is sacred and that every child who comes into this world deserves love. And he believes that Mary Cheney’s child will, in fact, have loving parents.”
— White House spokesman Tony Snow, on whether President Bush still believes that the ideal setting in which to raise a child is one with married, heterosexual parents, as he has stated in the past, The Los Angeles Times, Dec. 15.

"There were two things everyone said to me: ‘Don’t tell anyone you’re gay,’ and ‘Don’t tell them you’re 32. I couldn’t lie. And I still booked the series. If I had lied or tried to be closeted, I would have always thought, I only booked this job because I was lying.”
— Actor Eric Millegan of the FOX drama Bones, E! Online, Dec. 14.

“Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That’s why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today’s rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products.”
— Columnist Jim Rutz, alleging the dangers of soy products, WorldNetDaily.com, Dec. 12.

“I don’t see the need for new or special legislation. My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges.”
— Gov. Mitt Romney, reversing his previous position in support of federal legislation to prevent anti-gay workplace discrimination, National Review Online, Dec. 14.

“Given that Romney has been making opposition to same-sex marriage his political calling card this year, his ideological bisexuality looks as foolish in its G-rated way as that of [Ted] Haggard, the evangelical leader who was caught keeping time with a male prostitute.”
— Columnist Frank Rich on Gov. Mitt Romney’s rightward shift on gay civil rights, The New York Times, Dec. 17

"And he really is John Kerry’s successor as a candidate from Massachusetts. He’ll say anything and everything to get elected.”
— Conservative gay pundit Andrew Sullivan, on Gov. Mitt Romney’s shifting positions on social issues, AndrewSullivan.com, Dec. 14.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island stated in a press release that the Rhode Island Department of Education has not properly looked over an abstinence-only-until-marriage course of schoolwork that threatens to harm students, particularly GLBT students and those students in gay families. The course of study was developed by Heritage of Rhode Island, a family and faith-oriented organization that believes "one of the biggest hazards to our children’s futures is their sexual health and related high-risk behaviors," according to their official Web site.

One of the major problems the ACLU has with Heritage of Rhode Island’s course is that it "isolates" GLBT students and students in gay families. The reason, says the press release, is that it suggests "that marriage is responsible for better health, lower rates of injury and illness, lower rates of depression and an increased [according to Heritage’s course] ’likelihood that fathers and mothers have good relationships with their children.’"

The ACLU states that they believe this focus "appears to be a roadmap to instilling depression, if not fear, in gay and lesbian teens who cannot benefit from marriage and in other students who live in non-traditional households." Rhode Island has non-discrimination policies for GLBT youth, which this coursework "undermines," according to ACLU Rhode Island Executive Director Steven Brown. ACLU believes this curriculum also places teens in danger of having accidental pregnancies and STDs.

Continue reading "ACLU Accuses Rhode Island Department of Education of ’Isolating’ GLBT Students" »

Dr. Jillian Todd Weiss has five concerns regarding the new NJ Law:

I am concerned that "transgender" may not retain its positive, non-derogatory meaning. In an example from the transgender context, in the early 1980s, Seattle passed a trans-inclusive nondiscrimination law using the broad term (they thought): transvestite. This term has since taken a negative and more limited connotation, causing the Seattle City Council to need to revise its nondiscrimination law only about twenty years later. Terms from other contexts involving groups of people who experience discrimination that demonstrate my concern about popular terminology acquiring a negative connotation include "colored people" and "handicapped." "Transgender" may not always have a positive connotation and may
fall out of favor.

The second concern is that the bill, before the amendment, utilized the best approach for discrimination protections: it used terminology that covers all people, rather than a specific, protected group of people. American non-discrimination laws are generally framed to prohibit discrimination on the basis of certain characteristics, like sex or race, not specific examples of people within those categories, like women or African-Americans. Just as it was unnecessary and would have been inadvisable to add "Race includes black status" to race discrimination laws, this "transgender status" clarifying amendment could unintentionally have a limiting or confusing effect on interpretations of the law. Adding just this one group-based identity to the bill’s language makes the bill conceptually incoherent and inconsistent with similar laws; either problem could negatively affect the interpretation of its provisions.

Our third concern is that this language is out-of-step with other laws protecting transgender and gender non-conforming people from discrimination. Eight states have passed similar laws, and none of them use the term "transgender people" or any similar term. No other state legislature, administrative agency or court has found that this type of clarifying amendment was necessary, nor has there been confusion that transgender people are not covered by these laws. Also, in drafting the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which is expected to be introduced this Spring, the LGBT attorneys involved in drafting, including myself, specifically rejected using the term "transgender" for many of the reasons covered in this letter. For consistency throughout the nation, and for New Jersey to be in-step with the federal bill that will eventually become law, it is best that New Jersey use relatively similar language. With similar language throughout the U.S., courts can utilize each other’s interpretations to develop a common case law that all jurisdictions can draw upon. For your reference, the definitional language of the eight states is attached as an Appendix.

Our fourth concern is about the term "status." How it would be interpreted in this context is unclear. Would transgender people have to prove that they have achieved "status?" Would someone in the early stages of transition (often when discrimination occurs) qualify as having attained that status? "Status" implies a fixity that does not capture or address the reality of discrimination against transgender people.

Our fifth concern is not about New Jersey's interpretations, but is about future interpretations of other state and federal laws. Including this term in New Jersey's law could cast doubt on what is covered by laws in other jurisdictions that do not include such language. It could beg the question, are transgender people not covered if the law only includes "gender identity or expression?" From a national perspective, the language used in New Jersey could influence other jurisdictions to either adopt the same language (cause for concern by itself for the above-mentioned reasons) and/or could negatively affect the interpretation of similar laws that lack New Jersey's additional sentence.

Starting in 2004 with the Marriage Affirmation Act, which outlawed any partnership contract purporting to provide the benefits of marriage, Virginia’s conservatives crusaded for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, which passed last month and goes into effect Jan. 1. The state also does not allow for second-parent adoptions for unwed couples, rendering Poe a legal stranger to her daughter in the eyes of the law.

Washington Blade has an exclusive story: Fight or flight?
By KATHERINE VOLIN

When Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, announced her pregnancy through a spokesperson last week, reactions were mixed.

Gay rights opponents were predictably appalled at the idea of a gay couple raising a child, while supporters expressed frustration that by working on her father’s re-election campaign, Cheney had supported a political regime that would deny her own partner’s parenting rights.

Cheney, who did not respond to interview requests, is pregnant with a child due in the spring that she and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, intend to raise together. Adding to the irony of the story is that the moms-to-be live in Virginia, which has some of the most restrictive anti-gay laws in the country.

Starting in 2004 with the Marriage Affirmation Act, which outlawed any partnership contract purporting to provide the benefits of marriage, Virginia’s conservatives crusaded for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, which passed last month and goes into effect Jan. 1. The state also does not allow for second-parent adoptions for unwed couples, rendering Poe a legal stranger to her daughter in the eyes of the law.

“After Jan. 1, when the amendment becomes effective, I’m afraid to say that we suspect there will be someone whose goal is to disrupt Virginia families for one reason or another and then it’s just going to have be played out in court,” says Jay Squires, a local lawyer and head of the board of directors for Equality Virginia, a gay rights group.

Squires also says that there are concerns that “some judge some place is actually going to hold that the amendment has the effect of invalidating agreements that were legally binding.”

In the meantime, he recommends a wait-and-see approach for gay parents in Virginia regarding the implications of the amendment, but it’s possible that families will be torn apart by the Commonwealth’s new law.

SOME OF VIRGINIA’S gay parents are divided over whether they should stay or flee the state for more gay-friendly environs.

Continue reading "Gay parents face difficult choices in anti-gay Virginia" »

CNN reports that a radio talk show host has been fired following his derogatory comment about the weight and sexuality of the Green-Rainbow party candidate running for Massachusetts governor.

WRKO-AM pulled host John DePetro from the air one day after he made the comments. "In the context of what he said and the tone with which he said it, the comments were completely inappropriate, derogatory and will not be tolerated," said Jason Wolfe, the vice president of AM programming and operations for station owner Entercom Boston.

DePetro said he had called the candidate, Grace Ross, to apologize for calling her a "fat lesbian." The host, who calls himself the "Independent Man," said he made the remark because he was exasperated that Ross and independent candidate Christy Mihos were eating up time during a debate earlier in the week that included Republican candidate Kerry Healey and Democrat Deval Patrick. He said it was then that he told listeners he wished someone would "tell the fat lesbian to shut up."

Details of the report here.

Missouri Governor Matt Blunt has ignited a controversy by criticizing the Missouri State University for its anti-discrimination policy. Terming it as “unnecessary”, and “disappointing”, the state Governor said the policy of including “sexual orientation” in the school’s anti-discrimination policy was actually a “bad” decision based on “political correctness”.

Yes, this is the state of the nation today where even the highest of political representatives are vocally advocating homophobia. Responding to such a disturbing reaction of the governor, the state university president Dr Michael Nietzel has in fact gone defensive. He said the policy was just a clarification of an criterion, not an addition on its own. He even has said he appreciates the governor’s support throughout for the latter’s contribution to public higher education.

The classic dilemma in this situation is quite apparent, with on the one hand, the academia makes a progress on a desirable direction, and on the other, the direction’s facilitation largely lies with the conservative politicians who finally release the grants. No wonder, with inclusion of this anti-discrimination policy, MSU may face the funding music sometimes soon. Because for now, the board of governors who passed the resolution are yet to get over the Governor’s tunes, which rang thus:

“I do not believe today's vote was necessary and am disappointed with those who pressed for it while more pressing matters command the administration and the board's full attention. Today's decision bows to the forces of political correctness. It was unnecessary and bad."

"Missouri State University is a community of people with respect for diversity. The University emphasizes the dignity and equality common to all persons and adheres to a strict nondiscrimination policy regarding the treatment of individual faculty, staff, and students. In accord with federal law and applicable Missouri statutes, the University does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, disability, or veteran status in employment or in any program or activity offered or sponsored by the University. In addition, the University does not discriminate on any basis not related to the applicable educational requirements for students or the applicable job requirements for employees."

“In addition, the University does not discriminate on any basis (including, but not limited to, political affiliation and sexual orientation) not related to the applicable educational requirements for students or the applicable job requirements for employees.”

Sexual Orientation and Political Beliefs! More power to the university for acknowledging the attacks on gays and peaceniks. That’s looking beyond the Ivory Tower. When will the politicians emerge decent enough to look beyond the White House?

Simpson University president Larry McKinney seeks exception to the anti-discrimination bill in