What states have laws that prohibit discrimination against employees (public and private) because of sexual orientation?
The states that prohibit such discrimination are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Which states prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation for public employees only?
These states are Alaska, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
Does Title VII apply to just intentional discrimination?
Title VII applies to more than just intentional discrimination—sometimes referred to as disparate treatment—treating people differently based on a protected class (race, sex,
LegalSpeak: Legislative Proposal— Employment Non-Discrimination Act
a) Employer Practices—It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer—
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify the employees or applicants for employment of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment or otherwise adversely affect the status of the individual as an employee, because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation.
color, etc.). However, Title VII sometimes also prohibits even unintentional discrimination that works an adverse impact—called disparate impact—on certain classes of people.
What are the two main types or theories of discrimination?
The two legal terms used to describe types of discrimination are (1) disparate treatment and (2) disparate impact. Disparate treatment refers to an employer intentionally treating an employee differently based on race, gender, religion, disability, age, or some other protected category. For example, let's say that two employees—a male and a female—both commit the same offense of reading personal email excessively on company time. Then, the employer suspends the male employee but only issues a verbal warning to the female employee. The male employee may claim that he was subjected to disparate treatment based on sex. When employers apply their rules and regulations inconsistently to different employees, it raises the possibility that certain employees were subjected to disparate treatment discrimination.
Disparate impact discrimination is different. It refers to facially neutral employment policies that work an adverse impact on a protected class.
What is an example of an employer policy that would be considered disparate impact?
If an employer adopted a minimum height and weight requirement on police officers, that would work a disparate impact based on sex. If the employer says that all police officers must be at least five-feet, five-inches tall and weigh at least 140 pounds, more
LegalSpeak: California law prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation: Cal. Gov. Code 12920.
It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that it is necessary to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or abridgment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, or sexual orientation.
It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment for these reasons foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the state of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advancement, and substantially and adversely affects the interest of employees, employers, and the public in general.
Further, the practice of discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, disability, or sexual orientation in housing accommodations is declared to be against public policy.
It is the purpose of this part to provide effective remedies that will eliminate these discriminatory practices.
This part shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for the protection of the welfare, health, and peace of the people of this state.
women than men would be excluded. Such a policy would work a disparate impact upon female workers and could constitute unlawful sex discrimination—even if the discrimination was not based upon bad intent.