Legislation Needed to Stop Widespread Practice of Workplace Discrimination, Witnesses Tell House Committee
WASHINGTON - Legislation is needed to stop widespread discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, witnesses told the House Education and Labor Committee today.
“Fully qualified individuals are being denied employment or are being fired from their jobs for completely non-work-related reasons,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the committee. “This is profoundly unfair and un-American.”
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3017), introduced by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) - who testified on behalf of the bill - and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), would prohibit employment discrimination, preferential treatment, and retaliation on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by employers with 15 or more employees. Currently, it is legal to discriminate in the workplace based on sexual orientation in 29 states and to discriminate based on gender identity in 38 states.
“Because the current patchwork of state laws leaves big gaps in coverage, federal government action is necessary to provide protection against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,” said Stuart J. Ishimaru, Acting Chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. “Protecting valued members of our workforce from discrimination should not be left solely to the states - discrimination in Washington State is just as wrong as discrimination in Florida.”
New research presented to the committee also emphasized that state government workers are just as likely to be subject to widespread employment discrimination as private sector employees. Brad Sears, executive director of the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School,presented original research and examined previous surveys that show no difference between discrimination in private industries and government agencies.
“There is a widespread and persistent pattern of unconstitutional discrimination against LGBT state government employees, as well as against local government employees,” said Sears.
In one instance, a Georgia state legislative aide was fired when a superior discovered her planned transition from a man to a woman. Although many co-workers and her immediate supervisor came to accept the transition, the head of her office immediately fired her once he was informed. Court documents filed by state of Georgia said that potential prejudices were good enough to fire an employee.
“He told me that my transition was unacceptable. Then he fired me,” said Vandy Beth Glenn. “I was escorted back to my desk, told to clean it out, and marched out of the building. No one should ever get fired for the reason I was fired, and no one should have to wonder if the law protects them.”
William Eskridge, a Yale Law School professor, testified that state and local governments have had a long history of discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender workers, including himself.
“Such employees have been excluded and harassed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity throughout the 20th century,” Eskridge said.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act would exempt any corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This religious exemption language was added to the bill in the last Congress and overwhelmingly approved by vote of 402 to 25. A number of religious organizations while not expressing support for the bill itself have nonetheless voiced support for the religious exemption provision in the bill, including the U.S. Catholic Bishops, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, and the Seventh Day Adventist Church.
“ENDA simply ensures that workers are judged and rewarded based on their qualifications and performance, rather than on irrelevant and prejudicial factors,” said Rabbi David Saperstein, the director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. “At the same time, it protects the right of religious communities to make their own employment decisions in this sensitive area.”
For more information on the hearing, click here.
# # #
Next Article