Discrimination in the Workplace - your thoughts . . .

[mulattogyrl]

Originally Posted by litAKAtor

The problem is that as a transgendered person he/she is not protected under the anti-discrimination statutes (Title VII). Title VII protects persons from discrimination based on race, sex, gender, religion, and national origin. Techinically he/she doesn't fall under any of those categories, so he/she doesn't have any legal protection . . . .

I didn't know this either. Interesting.

[litAKAtor]

I did find a case out of DC where a Federal Judge permitted a transgendered employee's claim to proceed stating that discrimination based on a person's transgendered status (which is not a protected category) was an extension of discrimination based on gender (which is a protected category). I don't know if very many courts will accept this extension of the law, but I thought it was an interesting perspective. I am thinking that eventually a case will be appealed to the Supreme Court and a decision will have to be made about whether transgendered people and even homosexual people are to be included in the anti discrimination statute . . .don't think it will be anytime soon - the Court, as it stands, is VERY conservative. . .. .

[mulattogyrl]

Originally Posted by litAKAtor

I did find a case out of DC where a Federal Judge permitted a transgendered employee's claim to proceed stating that discrimination based on a person's transgendered status (which is not a protected category) was an extension of discrimination based on gender (which is a protected category). I don't know if very many courts will accept this extension of the law, but I thought it was an interesting perspective. I am thinking that eventually a case will be appealed to the Supreme Court and a decision will have to be made about whether transgendered people and even homosexual people are to be included in the anti discrimination statute . . .don't think it will be anytime soon - the Court, as it stands, is VERY conservative. . .. .

OK, now this makes sense to me and my non-law mind, because when I see 'transgendered' I automatically think it has something to do with gender. But I guess it's not the 'gender' that's being discriminated against, but the fact that the gender is changing? Either way, this is interesting stuff, lol.

[litAKAtor]

Originally Posted by mulattogyrl

OK, now this makes sense to me and my non-law mind, because when I see 'transgendered' I automatically think it has something to do with gender. But I guess it's not the 'gender' that's being discriminated against, but the fact that the gender is changing? Either way, this is interesting stuff, lol.

Kind of. The basis for enacting the anti discrimination statute was to eliminate discrimination in employment based on characterstics that at the time were immutable - like race, gender, sex- national origin. Religion was added later. Because courts tend to interpret statutes based on Congressional intent - the belief is that when the statute was enacted, gender meant discrimination based on what you are biologically, not something you made a decision to change into. But like most laws, because our society is constantly changing, the laws tend to be interpreted to address societal changes . . .problem is that all judges don't think like this Judge in DC and tend to be pretty conservative and will go with Congress's intent when the statute was inacted . . . .

Sorry for turning this forum into a law class - but I was interested in seeing what others thought about this issue.

[unspokenone25]

Originally Posted by litAKAtor

I did find a case out of DC where a Federal Judge permitted a transgendered employee's claim to proceed stating that discrimination based on a person's transgendered status (which is not a protected category) was an extension of discrimination based on gender (which is a protected category). I don't know if very many courts will accept this extension of the law, but I thought it was an interesting perspective. I am thinking that eventually a case will be appealed to the Supreme Court and a decision will have to be made about whether transgendered people and even homosexual people are to be included in the anti discrimination statute . . .don't think it will be anytime soon - the Court, as it stands, is VERY conservative. . .. .

There's a Texas case on the subject that you might find interesting. That transgendered woman went to my law school.

[litAKAtor]

Texas? Yes, please pm me with the cite - that would be VERY interesting to read! Thanks Soror!

[Choo-ChooAKA]

A male employee at one of our sister colleges became a female employee about 10 years ago. It was big gossip news for awhile. If the district had acknowledged in any way that this was out of the norm, the perennial "any cause" advocates would have swarmed and then it would have been a distraction. As it was, well, it just was and it just is and now he is a she.

[litAKAtor]

Originally Posted by Choo-ChooAKA

A male employee at one of our sister colleges became a female employee about 10 years ago. It was big gossip news for awhile. If the district had acknowledged in any way that this was out of the norm, the perennial "any cause" advocates would have swarmed and then it would have been a distraction. As it was, well, it just was and it just is and now he is a she.

WOW! Interesting. That is what I thought - it becomes an issue is others make it an issue. If you don't make it issue then it isn't. . .

[Jody]

I live in the same county as the city manager. Despite the protests of people that don't live in Largo (there's a huge public meeting where folks that don't live in Largo get to speak) at the end of the day he/she is NOT going to have a job.

I believe that folks have a right to live their life as they see it, I also enjoy the right to live my life as I see fit as do the folks that live in that city. The folks that live in that city don't want him/her as their city manager. He/She is a contract employee, an at will worker, they don't need a reason to fire him and he isn't covered by the city's newly enacted policy that covers folks that are transgendered.

There's been alot of people that didn't like him and a lot of folks that did. Now the folks that don't like him are going to get their wish and he's going to lose his job. Again, the folks that LIVE AND VOTE in that city will ultimately decide if he keeps his job, and he won't. And as the laws don't currently protect against transgendered folks even if he sues, he's not getting his job back.


Hi choo-choo!

[litAKAtor]

Originally Posted by mulattogyrl

I didn't know this either. Interesting.

I aim to inform.