Moving Forward: 12 States Ban Gender Identity Discrimination
Some states including Iowa, Vermont and Oregon are including Gender Identity in their non-discrimination polices at work. This progress may be slow but more and more companies are moving forward and protecting ALL their employees from discrimination.
Please see a related article below:
More States Ban Discrimination on Gender Identity, Expression
By Rebecca R. Hastings, SPHR, June 2007
The signing of legislation in Iowa, Colorado, Vermont and Oregon means that 12 states now ban discrimination based on gender identity, according to a June 2007 announcement by the Gender Public Advocacy Coalition (GenderPAC), a Washington, D.C.-based human rights organization.
In May 2007, Iowa Gov. Chet Culver and Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter signed laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity in employment. Vermont and Oregon also passed gender-inclusive non-discrimination legislation in May.
“These laws are so important not only because of their significance toward protecting all Iowa, Colorado, Vermont and Oregon residents from discrimination, but also because they set an example for the federal government and for states that lack gender-inclusive nondiscrimination laws,†said Riki Wilchins, executive director of GenderPAC, in the announcement.
Such laws exist in California, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island and the state of Washington as well as Washington, D.C.
“While celebrating the tremendous progress of state legislatures in recent years, it’s important that the federal government recognize this turning tide and implement legislation ensuring full equality for all Americans, regardless of their gender identity or expression,†added Wilchins.
The federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 (ENDA), a bipartisan piece of federal legislation, was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on April 24, 2007. This legislation would prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, according to the Human Rights Campaign, a civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality.
A version of ENDA has been introduced in Congress every year since 1994, but it made it out of committee only once, in 2002. The change in congressional leadership makes movement of ENDA more likely during the 110th Congress, but enactment is considered unlikely because of several key aspects of the legislation. Since its introduction in 2007 it has been referred to four House committees.
More than one-third of the U.S. population is now covered by a combination of state, county and municipal protections, and nearly 200 major corporations and scores of colleges and universities have also adopted gender-inclusive policies in recent years.
Rebecca R. Hastings, SPHR, is online writer/editor for SHRM.
Related Reading:
Bill Banning Sexual Orientation Bias Introduced in House, HR News, May 1, 2007
Transgender Issues Could Push Diversity Envelope for Some Employers, SHRM Online Diversity Focus Area, April 19, 2007
Is It Time To Add Gender Identity to Your EEO Policy?, SHRM Online Diversity Focus Area, May 2006
Equality’s Latest Frontier, HR Magazine, March 2003
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
This is a very useful article. Thanks for posting this.
However I don’t feel the companies are indeed “protecting ALL their employees from discrimination”. I think they are rather “projecting to protect their employees from discrimination”.
Some progress in human society are evolutionary, that is, they shall take place, because of the sheer movements of things around. New parties will declare old policies bad, new reformers will add few words to the old book, and new law shall need to amend the old laws.
But as Frederick Douglass once said, ‘all movements are not progress’, the manner in which the changes are taking place today in corporate America, its sickening to the core. In the above report, it says 200 major companies have gender-inclusive policies. This of course means not even the top 500 companies that get ranked in magazines have a policy in place, let alone implementation.
My response to the present state of corporate sector is one of disgust, not one of relief. Unfortunately, inclusiveness is still at the discretion of companies. If it were a fundamental policy, then the state and corporates would have to be forced to adopt it.
While hailing the movement towards civilization, which we have done through posting of this article, we also need to hold the same corporates accountable for the lack of radical change that is required of them to embrace, or face the wrath of majority of people (all minorities that are discriminated against collectively form the majority).
When shall we have policies that can be set in motion as rules, not just as feel-good diversity projections that are left at the mercy of reactionary administrations, ill-informed judiciary and greedy corporate class, to either implement or throw out in gesture of color and gender blindness?