Lunawork 4 views

Something About Company

Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States derives from the typical law, and is codified in numerous state, federal, and local laws. These laws prohibit discrimination based on particular qualities or “secured categories”. The United States Constitution also restricts discrimination by federal and state governments against their public workers. Discrimination in the economic sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, but has become based on a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a variety of locations, consisting of recruiting, working with, job examinations, promo policies, training, payment and disciplinary action. State laws typically extend security to additional classifications or employers.

Under federal employment discrimination law, companies normally can not discriminate versus staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual preference and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religious beliefs, [1] nationwide origin, [1] impairment (physical or psychological, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or affiliation, [8] insolvency or bad financial obligations, [9] genetic details, [10] and citizenship status (for residents, long-term citizens, short-term homeowners, refugees, and asylees). [11]

List of United States federal discrimination law

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Civil Liberty Act of 1964 Title VI of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not directly attend to employment discrimination, however its restrictions on discrimination by the federal government have actually been held to protect federal civil servant.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution restrict the power of the federal and state federal governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has an explicit requirement that the federal government does not deprive individuals of “life, liberty, or home”, without due procedure of the law. It likewise contains an implicit assurance that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly prohibits states from violating a person’s rights of due process and equivalent security. In the work context, these Constitutional provisions would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by dealing with staff members, previous staff members, or task candidates unequally since of membership in a group (such as a race or sex). Due procedure security needs that government staff members have a reasonable procedural procedure before they are ended if the termination is connected to a “liberty” (such as the right to free speech) or home interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the provision that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination expenses (so they are not unconstitutional under Tenth Amendment) is Section 5 of Fourteenth Amendment.

Employment discrimination or harassment in the economic sector is not unconstitutional because Federal and most State Constitutions do not specifically offer their particular government the power to enact civil rights laws that apply to the economic sector. The Federal federal government’s authority to regulate a personal company, consisting of civil rights laws, originates from their power to manage all commerce in between the States. Some State Constitutions do expressly pay for some defense from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only attend to prejudiced treatment by the government, consisting of a public employer.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that control the private sector are typically Constitutional under the “cops powers” doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws created to protect public health, security and morals. All States need to adhere to the Federal Civil Rights laws, however States may enact civil liberties laws that offer additional employment defense.

For instance, some State civil liberties laws provide protection from employment discrimination on the basis of political association, even though such kinds of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil liberties laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing employment discrimination has established gradually.

The Equal Pay Act modified the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1963. It is enforced by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. [12] The Equal Pay Act prohibits companies and unions from paying various salaries based on sex. It does not restrict other discriminatory practices in employing. It offers that where employees perform equal operate in the corner needing “equal skill, effort, and responsibility and performed under similar working conditions,” they should be provided equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to companies participated in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s employees if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a considerable quantity of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 restricts discrimination in a lot more aspects of the employment relationship. “Title VII produced the Equal Job opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It applies to a lot of companies participated in interstate commerce with more than 15 staff members, labor organizations, and employment service. Title VII forbids discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it illegal for employers to discriminate based upon secured qualities concerning terms, conditions, and opportunities of work. Employment service might not discriminate when hiring or referring candidates, and labor companies are likewise forbidden from basing subscription or union categories on race, color, religion, sex, or nationwide origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act changed Title VII in 1978, defining that unlawful sex discrimination consists of discrimination based on pregnancy, giving birth, and related medical conditions. [4] An associated statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

Executive Order 11246 in 1965 “forbids discrimination by federal professionals and subcontractors on account of race, color, religion, sex, or nationwide origin [and] requires affirmative action by federal contractors”. [14]

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), employment enacted in 1968 and amended in 1978 and 1986, restricts employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The restricted practices are almost similar to those described in Title VII, other than that the ADEA protects workers in companies with 20 or more workers instead of 15 or more. An employee is safeguarded from discrimination based upon age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has phased out and forbade necessary retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that also offer large pensions). The ADEA contains explicit guidelines for advantage, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of many conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history beginning with the abolishment of “maximum ages of entry into work in 1956” by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 “developed a policy against age discrimination among federal contractors”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of disability by the federal government, federal professionals with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal monetary help. [16] It needs affirmative action along with non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 needs sensible accommodation, and Section 508 requires that electronic and infotech be accessible to disabled workers. [16]

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 restricts discrimination by mine operators versus miners who experience “black lung disease” (pneumoconiosis). [17]

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 “requires affirmative action for disabled and Vietnam age veterans by federal specialists”. [14]

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of personal bankruptcy or uncollectable bills. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 forbids companies with more than three workers from victimizing anyone (other than an unauthorized immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to eliminate inequitable barriers against qualified individuals with specials needs, individuals with a record of a disability, or people who are considered as having a special needs. It restricts discrimination based upon genuine or perceived physical or psychological specials needs. It likewise requires companies to provide affordable accommodations to employees who require them because of an impairment to look for a job, perform the important functions of a job, or take pleasure in the benefits and benefits of employment, unless the employer can show that unnecessary difficulty will result. There are rigorous constraints on when a company can ask disability-related questions or require medical assessments, and all medical info should be treated as private. An impairment is specified under the ADA as a mental or physical health condition that “significantly limits one or more significant life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Rights Acts, amended in 1993, ensure all persons equal rights under the law and describe the damages readily available to complainants in actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. [19] [20]

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 bars employers from utilizing people’ hereditary details when making hiring, shooting, job placement, or promotion choices. [10]

The proposed US Equality Act of 2015 would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. [21] Since June 2018 [update], 28 US states do not explicitly consist of sexual orientation and 29 US states do not clearly include gender identity within anti-discrimination statutes.

LGBT work discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids work discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. This is incorporated by the law’s restriction of employment discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the landmark cases Bostock v. Clayton County and employment R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2020 ), employment protections for LGBT people were patchwork; several states and areas explicitly restrict harassment and bias in employment choices on the basis of sexual preference and/or gender identity, although some only cover public employees. [22] Prior to the Bostock choice, the Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translated Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s figured out that transgender employees were secured under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the protection to encompass sexual orientation in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: “Studies reveal that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay individuals have experienced some kind of discrimination and harassment at the workplace. Moreover, a shocking 90 percent of transgender workers report some type of harassment or mistreatment on the job.” Many people in the LGBT community have actually lost their job, including Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender woman who claims that her employer informed her that her existence may make other individuals feel unpleasant. [26]

Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws prohibiting the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender people in both public and personal work environments. A few more states ban LGBT discrimination in only public work environments. [27] Some challengers of these laws think that it would intrude on religious liberty, although these laws are focused more on prejudiced actions, employment not beliefs. Courts have actually likewise identified that these laws do not infringe complimentary speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes also provide extensive protection from employment discrimination. Some laws extend comparable protection as supplied by the federal acts to companies who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes offer defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws offer greater protection to workers of the state or of state contractors.

The following table lists categories not secured by federal law. Age is included too, considering that federal law just covers employees over 40.

In addition,

– District of Columbia – enlisting, individual look [35]- Michigan – height, weight [53]- Texas – Participation in emergency situation evacuation order [90]- Vermont – Place of birth [76]

Civil servant

Title VII likewise uses to state, federal, regional and other public workers. Employees of federal and state federal governments have additional securities versus work discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 prohibits discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not affect task efficiency. The Office of Personnel Management has analyzed this as restricting discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. [91] In June 2009, it was announced that the analysis would be broadened to consist of gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public staff members retain their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies deserve to limitations staff members’ speech in particular methods. [93] Public staff members maintain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a private person (not on behalf of their employer), they are speaking on a matter of public concern, and their speech is not interfering with their task. [93]

Federal staff members who have employment discrimination claims, such as postal employees of the United States Postal Service (USPS) should take legal action against in the appropriate federal jurisdiction, which presents a different set of problems for complainants.

Exceptions

Bona fide occupational certifications

Employers are generally permitted to think about characteristics that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are authentic occupational certifications (BFOQ). The most typical BFOQ is sex, and the second most typical BFOQ is age. Authentic Occupational Qualifications can not be utilized for discrimination on the basis of race.

The only exception to this rule is shown in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court rules that police surveillance can match races when necessary. For circumstances, if police are running operations that involve confidential informants, or undercover agents, sending out an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, cops departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can think about and work with officers that are in proportion to the community’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the show business, such as casting for motion pictures and tv. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting staff are enabled to cast characters based on physical attributes, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, and so on. Employment discrimination declares for Disparate Treatment are rare in the show business, specifically in performers. [95] This reason is distinct to the home entertainment industry, and does not move to other markets, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, companies will use BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory employment discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense reason in wage spaces between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be considered when an employer should balance personal privacy and security interest in the number of positions that a company are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, client preference alone can not be a justification unless there is a personal privacy or security defense. [96] For example, retail facilities in rural areas can not prohibit African American clerks based on the racial ideologies of the client base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that handle kids survivors of sexual abuse is allowed.

If a company were attempting to show that employment discrimination was based on a BFOQ, there must be an accurate basis for believing that all or significantly all members of a class would be not able to carry out the job safely and efficiently or that it is impractical to identify certifications on a customized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a sinister intention does not transform a facially prejudiced policy into a neutral policy with an inequitable effect. [97] Employers likewise carry the concern to show that a BFOQ is reasonably required, and a lower discriminatory alternative approach does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

“Religious discrimination is dealing with individuals in a different way in their employment since of their religion, their faiths and practices, and/or their ask for accommodation (a modification in a workplace guideline or policy) of their religions and practices. It also includes dealing with individuals differently in their work because of their absence of religion or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, companies are forbidden from refusing to employ a private based on their faith- alike race, sex, age, and special needs. If a worker thinks that they have actually experienced religious discrimination, they ought to address this to the alleged transgressor. On the other hand, workers are safeguarded by the law for reporting task discrimination and are able to file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some places in the U.S. now have stipulations that ban discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States give specific exemptions in these laws to companies or organizations that are spiritual or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to varying degrees in different locations, depending upon the setting and the context; some of these have actually been supported and others reversed with time.

The most current and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the extensive rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many workers are utilizing religious beliefs against changing the body and preventative medication as a reason to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not allow staff members to get spiritual exemptions, or decline their application might be charged by the worker with work discrimination on the basis of faiths. However, there are particular requirements for staff members to present evidence that it is a best regards held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly permits discrimination versus members of the Communist Party.

Military

The military has faced criticism for forbiding females from serving in fight functions. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was amended to allow them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the short article posted on the PBS site, Henry Louis Gates Jr. composes about the method in which black guys were dealt with in the military throughout the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites offered the African Americans an opportunity to prove themselves as Americans by having them participate in the war. The National Geographic website states, nevertheless, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were only enabled to work as servants; their participation was limited to the roles of mess attendants, stewards, employment and cooks. Even when African Americans wished to protect the nation they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protects the job rights of people who voluntarily or involuntarily leave work positions to undertake military service or certain types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also forbids employers from victimizing staff members for previous or present participation or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that provide preference to veterans versus non-veterans has been alleged to impose systemic diverse treatment of ladies due to the fact that there is a large underrepresentation of females in the uniformed services. [106] The court has declined this claim because there was no prejudiced intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight discriminate against a safeguarded category might still be unlawful if they produce a disparate influence on members of a secured group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits work practices that have a discriminatory effect, unless they relate to task efficiency.

The Act needs the removal of synthetic, approximate, and unneeded barriers to work that operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, an employment practice that operates to omit Negroes can not be shown to be associated with task performance, it is restricted, notwithstanding the employer’s absence of inequitable intent. [107]

Height and weight requirements have actually been recognized by the EEOC as having a disparate effect on nationwide origin minorities. [108]

When safeguarding versus a diverse impact claim that declares age discrimination, a company, however, does not require to show requirement; rather, it must merely show that its practice is affordable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) interprets and imposes the Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title I and V of the Americans With Disabilities Act, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991. [109] The Commission was established by the Civil liberty Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are included in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its regulations and guidelines are included in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wishing to submit fit under Title VII and/or the ADA must tire their administrative solutions by submitting an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to filing their lawsuit in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs enforces Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits discrimination versus certified individuals with specials needs by federal contractors and subcontractors. [114]

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each firm has and imposes its own regulations that apply to its own programs and to any entities that receive financial assistance. [16]

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) enforces the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which restricts discrimination based on citizenship status or national origin. [115]

State Fair Employment Practices (FEP) workplaces take the role of the EEOC in administering state statutes. [113]

See also

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT work discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination against persons with rap sheets in the United States
Racial wage gap in the United States
Gender pay gap in the United States
Criticism of credit history systems in the United States

References

^ a b c d e “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. US EEOC. Archived from the initial on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “The Equal Pay Act of 1963”. Archived from the initial on April 5, 2020. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020 ).
^ a b “Pregnancy Discrimination Act”. Archived from the original on May 12, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b “Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended”. ADA.gov. Archived from the initial on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Questions and Answers: The Americans with Disabilities Act and Persons with HIV/AIDS”. Archived from the original on July 22, 2009. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ a b “The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967”. Archived from the initial on December 13, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the initial on December 11, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b 11 U.S.C. § 525
^ a b “Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008” (PDF). gpo.gov. May 21, 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 6, 2018. Retrieved January 6, 2015.
^ 8 U.S.C. § 1324b
^ a b Blankenship, Kim M (1993 ). “Bringing Gender and Race in: U.S. Employment Discrimination Policy”. Gender and Society. 7 (2 ): 204-226. doi:10.1177/ 089124393007002004. JSTOR 189578. S2CID 144175260.
^ “Family and Medical Leave Act”. Archived from the initial on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b Rozmarin, George C (1980 ). “Employment Discrimination Laws and Their Application”. Law Notes for the Family Doctor. 16 (1 ): 25-29. JSTOR 44066330.
^ Neumark, D (2003 ). “Age discrimination legislations in the United States” (PDF). Contemporary Economic Policy. 21 (3 ): 297-317. doi:10.1093/ cep/byg012. S2CID 38171380. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 2, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “Guide to Disability Rights Laws”. ADA.gov. December 20, 2023. Archived from the initial on November 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “30 USC Sec. 938”. Archived from the initial on June 7, 2011. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ “Summary of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986”. Archived from the original on May 6, 2013. Retrieved August 14, 2021.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981 – Equal rights under the law”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981a – Damages in cases of deliberate discrimination in work”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)”. Archived from the initial on June 17, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ Tilcsik, András (January 1, 2011). “Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination versus Openly Gay Men in the United States”. American Journal of Sociology. 117 (2 ): 586-626. doi:10.1086/ 661653. hdl:1807/ 34998. JSTOR 10.1086/ 661653. PMID 22268247. S2CID 23542996. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “In Landmark Ruling, Feds Add Transgendered to Anti-Discrimination Law:: EDGE Boston, MA”. Edgeboston.com. April 25, 2012. Archived from the original on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Carpenter, Dale (December 14, 2012). “Anti-gay discrimination is sex discrimination, says the EEOC”. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. “EEOC: Federal law bans work environment bias versus gays, lesbians, bisexuals|Miami Herald Miami Herald”. Miamiherald.com. Archived from the initial on April 28, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Burns, Crosby; Krehely, Jeff (June 2, 2011). “Gay and Transgender People Face High Rates of Workplace Discrimination and Harassment”. Center for American Progress. Archived from the original on November 26, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Sexual Preference Discrimination in the Workplace”. FindLaw. Archived from the initial on May 7, 2021. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ Lowndes, Coleman; Maza, Carlos (September 23, 2014). “The Top Five Myths About LGBT Non-Discrimination Laws Debunked”. Media Matters for America. Archived from the initial on June 17, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Code of Alabama 25-1-21”. Archived from the initial on July 23, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b c “Alaska Statutes: AS 18.80.220. Unlawful Employment Practices; Exception”. touchngo.com. Archived from the original on December 6, 2022. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e f “Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)”. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. CA.gov. 2010. Archived from the initial on September 9, 2016. Retrieved September 9, 2016.
^ a b “Colorado Civil Rights Division 2008 Statutes” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on May 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Chapter 814c Sec. 46a-60”. Archived from the original on October 17, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Delaware Code Online”. delcode.delaware.gov. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e “District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Prohibited Acts of Discrimination” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 23, 2009. Retrieved August 8, 2019. ^ “District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Table of Contents, General Provisions” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 30, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes:-> 2008-> Ch0760-> Section 10: Online Sunshine”. www.leg.state.fl.us. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the original on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2”. Archived from the original on August 14, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Idaho Commission on Human Rights: Age Discrimination””. Archived from the original on February 21, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Illinois Human Rights Act”. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Indiana General Assembly”. iga.in.gov. Archived from the initial on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Iowa Code 216.6”. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Kansas Age Discrimination in Employment Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 6, 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Kentucky Revised Statutes 344.040” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on October 8, 2009.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:352”. Archived from the initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:312”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Title 5, Chapter 337: HUMAN RIGHTS ACT”. www.mainelegislature.org. Archived from the original on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16”. Archived from the initial on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L. 151B § 4”. Archived from the original on July 7, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L 151B § 1”. Archived from the original on June 4, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Minnesota Statutes, section 363A.08”. Archived from the initial on September 6, 2015. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 213.055 R.S.Mo”. Archived from the initial on May 23, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Montana Code Annotated 49-2-303”. Archived from the original on September 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the initial on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “NRS: CHAPTER 613 – EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES”. www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the initial on December 24, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Section 354-A:7 Unlawful Discriminatory Practices”. Archived from the initial on January 2, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (N.J.S.A. 10:5 -12)”.
^ a b c “2006 New Mexico Statutes – Section 28-1-7 – Unlawful discriminatory practice”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on September 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “New York State Executive Law, Article 15, Section 296”. Archived from the original on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “New York Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination versus the engagement in specific activities. – New York Attorney Resources – New York City Laws”. law.onecle.com. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 95-28″. www.ncleg.net. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 95-28″. www.ncleg.net. Archived from the initial on December 15, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “North Dakota Human Rights Act” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 18, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “2006 Ohio Revised Code -:: 4112. Civil Liberty Commission”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Oklahoma Attorney General|”. www.oag.ok.gov. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 659A”. Archived from the initial on August 16, 2023. Retrieved October 17, 2019.
^ “Laws Administered by the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission” (PDF). [permanent dead link] ^ “State of Rhode Island General Assembly”. www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the initial on October 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “South Carolina Human Affairs Law”. Archived from the original on May 6, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “Tennessee State Government – TN.gov”. www.tn.gov. Archived from the original on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the original on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Utah Code 34A-5-106”. Archived from the initial on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on June 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “Virginia Human Rights Act”. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “RCW 49.60.180: Unfair practices of employers”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on November 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.60.172: Unfair practices with regard to HIV or hepatitis C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.60.174: Evaluation of claim of discrimination-Actual or viewed HIV or liver disease C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in work due to the fact that of age of staff member or applicant-Exceptions”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “State of West Virginia” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “Wisconsin Statutes Table of Contents”. docs.legis.wisconsin.gov. Archived from the original on November 3, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [long-term dead link] ^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b “Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146”. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151”. Archived from the original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451”. Archived from the initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 22. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR PARTICIPATING IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on June 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Addressing Sexual Orientation Discrimination In Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employee’s Rights”. Archived from the original on January 14, 2007.
^ Rutenberg, Jim (June 24, 2009). “New Protections for Transgender Federal Workers (Published 2009)”. The New York Times. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023.
^ a b “Federal Employee Speech & the First Amendment|ACLU of DC”. www.acludc.org. November 9, 2017. Archived from the original on September 21, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri”. www.justice.gov. March 4, 2015. Archived from the original on August 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “When is it legal for a company to discriminate in their hiring practices based upon a Bona Fide Occupation Qualification?”. University of Cincinnati Law Review Blog. April 27, 2016. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “CM-625 Authentic Occupational Qualifications”. US EEOC. January 2, 1982. Archived from the original on December 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b “United Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187 (1991 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Religious Discrimination – Workplace Fairness”. www.workplacefairness.org. Archived from the original on November 12, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Questions and Answers about Religious Discrimination in the Workplace”. www.eeoc.gov. January 31, 2011. Archived from the initial on March 5, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Sincerely Held or Suddenly Held Religious Exemptions to Vaccination?”. www.americanbar.org. Archived from the initial on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). “Prepare yourself for more US ladies in fight”. CNN. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ http://www.militaryaerospace.com/blogs/mil-aero-blog/2012/12/conspicuous-gallantry-doris-miller-at-pearl-harbor-was-one-of-world-war-ii-s-first-heroes.html Archived May 30, 2023, at the Wayback Machine [1] ^ Gates, Henry Louis; Root, Jr|Originally published on The (January 14, 2013). “Segregation in the Armed Forces During The Second World War|African American History Blog”. The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the original on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ a b “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the initial on December 11, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b “Personnel Adm’r of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and opinions”. Findlaw. Archived from the original on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Shaping Employment Discrimination Law”. Archived from the original on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws”. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Pre 1965: Events Leading to the Creation of EEOC”. Archived from the initial on August 26, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 2000e-5 – Enforcement provisions”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 1, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “PART 1614– FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL JOB OPPORTUNITY”. Archived from the original on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ a b “Filing a Charge of Employment Discrimination”. Archived from the original on August 12, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 503”. Archived from the original on August 2, 2009. Retrieved August 1, 2009.
^ “An Overview of the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices”. Archived from the initial on May 31, 2009. Retrieved July 30, 2009.
External links

Directory of state labor departments, from the U.S. Department of Labor
Disability Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Sex-Based Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission
Your Rights At Work (Connecticut).
– Barnes, Patricia G., (2014 ), Betrayed: The Legalization of Age Discrimination in the Workplace. The author, a lawyer and judge, argues that the U.S. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 stops working to secure older workers. Weak to start with, she mentions that the ADEA has actually been eviscerated by the U.S. Supreme Court.
– Tweedy, Ann E. and Karen Yescavage, Employment Discrimination Against Bisexuals: An Empirical Study, 21 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L.