Moojijobs 29 views

About Us

Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States stems from the typical law, and is codified in various state, federal, and regional laws. These laws restrict discrimination based upon particular characteristics or “safeguarded categories”. The United States Constitution also restricts discrimination by federal and state federal governments versus their public staff members. Discrimination in the private sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, however has actually ended up being subject to a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a number of locations, consisting of recruiting, working with, task assessments, employment promotion policies, training, payment and disciplinary action. State laws often extend protection to additional categories or employers.

Under federal employment discrimination law, companies typically can not victimize employees on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (consisting of sexual orientation and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religious beliefs, [1] national origin, [1] special needs (physical or psychological, including status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] personal bankruptcy or bad debts, [9] hereditary info, [10] and citizenship status (for people, irreversible locals, short-lived locals, 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 Rights Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not straight attend to work discrimination, but its restrictions on discrimination by the federal government have been held to protect federal government workers.

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 deny individuals of “life, liberty, or home”, without due process of the law. It likewise includes an implicit assurance that the Fourteenth Amendment clearly prohibits states from breaching an individual’s rights of due process and equal defense. In the employment context, these Constitutional arrangements would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their work practices by dealing with workers, former workers, or task applicants unequally due to the fact that of membership in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process protection requires that civil servant have a reasonable procedural process before they are ended if the termination is connected to a “liberty” (such as the right to totally free speech) or property interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the provision that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination bills (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 due to the fact that Federal and most State Constitutions do not specifically offer their respective federal government the power to enact civil liberties laws that use to the private sector. The Federal government’s authority to regulate a personal company, consisting of civil rights laws, originates from their power to control all commerce in between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically afford some defense from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only address inequitable treatment by the federal government, including a public company.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil liberties laws that control the economic sector are usually Constitutional under the “police powers” teaching or the power of a State to enact laws designed to safeguard public health, safety and morals. All States must comply with the Federal Civil Rights laws, but States might enact civil rights laws that provide extra work protection.

For instance, some State civil liberties laws provide security from employment discrimination on the basis of political affiliation, even though such types of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing work discrimination has established with time.

The Equal Pay Act amended 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 employers and unions from paying various earnings based on sex. It does not restrict other discriminatory practices in working with. It offers that where employees perform equal operate in the corner needing “equal ability, effort, and duty and carried out under similar working conditions,” they must be supplied equivalent pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to companies taken part in some element of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s employees if the business is engaged as a whole in a substantial quantity of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in a lot more aspects of the work relationship. “Title VII created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It applies to most companies taken part in interstate commerce with more than 15 workers, labor companies, and employment service. Title VII restricts discrimination based on race, color, religious beliefs, sex or national origin. It makes it prohibited for companies to discriminate based upon secured qualities relating to terms, conditions, and opportunities of work. Employment service might not discriminate when employing or referring candidates, and labor companies are likewise forbidden from basing subscription or union classifications on race, color, religious beliefs, sex, or national origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act changed Title VII in 1978, specifying that illegal sex discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy, giving birth, and related medical conditions. [4] A related statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

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

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and amended in 1978 and 1986, prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The prohibited practices are almost identical to those detailed in Title VII, other than that the ADEA secures employees in firms with 20 or more workers instead of 15 or more. A worker is protected from discrimination based on age if he or she is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has phased out and forbade obligatory retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that also provide large pensions). The ADEA consists of specific guidelines for benefit, pension and retirement plans. [7] Though ADEA is the center of a lot of conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history beginning with the abolishment of “optimal 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 specialists”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 forbids work discrimination on the basis of special needs by the federal government, federal professionals with contracts of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal monetary help. [16] It requires affirmative action along with non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires sensible accommodation, and Section 508 needs that electronic and details technology be accessible to disabled employees. [16]

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

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

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of insolvency or bad financial obligations. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 restricts employers with more than three workers from discriminating against anybody (except an unapproved immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to eliminate prejudiced barriers against qualified individuals with impairments, people with a record of an impairment, or individuals who are considered having a special needs. It restricts discrimination based upon genuine or perceived physical or psychological impairments. It also requires companies to provide affordable accommodations to staff members who require them because of an impairment to get a task, perform the necessary functions of a task, or delight in the advantages and advantages of employment, unless the company can reveal that undue difficulty will result. There are strict limitations on when an employer can ask disability-related concerns or need medical checkups, and all medical info must be dealt with as personal. An impairment is defined under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that “significantly limits one or more major life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Rights Acts, changed in 1993, make sure all persons equivalent rights under the law and outline the damages offered to plaintiffs in actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights 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 individuals’ hereditary details when making hiring, firing, job positioning, or promotion choices. [10]

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

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This is encompassed by the law’s prohibition of employment discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the landmark cases Bostock v. Clayton County and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Job Opportunity Commission (2020 ), employment defenses for LGBT individuals were patchwork; a number of states and localities explicitly prohibit harassment and predisposition in employment decisions on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity, although some only cover public workers. [22] Prior to the Bostock decision, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) interpreted Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s determined that transgender employees were protected under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the security to incorporate sexual preference in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and employment Jeff Krehely: “Studies reveal that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay individuals have actually experienced some kind of discrimination and harassment at the office. Moreover, a staggering 90 percent of transgender workers report some kind of harassment or mistreatment on the task.” Lots of people in the LGBT neighborhood have lost their task, employment consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender female who declares that her employer informed her that her existence may make other people feel uneasy. [26]

Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws prohibiting the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender individuals in both public and personal workplaces. A couple of more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in only public offices. [27] Some opponents of these laws believe that it would intrude on religious liberty, even though these laws are focused more on inequitable actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually likewise determined that these laws do not infringe free speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes also provide substantial defense from work discrimination. Some laws extend similar defense as supplied by the federal acts to companies who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes supply defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws supply higher protection to workers of the state or of state contractors.

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

In addition,

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

Government staff members

Title VII likewise applies to state, federal, regional and other public workers. Employees of federal and state federal governments have extra securities against employment discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 restricts discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not affect job performance. The Office of Personnel Management has actually translated this as forbiding discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. [91] In June 2009, it was revealed that the analysis would be broadened to include gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public workers keep their First Amendment rights, whereas personal employers deserve to limitations employees’ speech in particular ways. [93] Public staff members retain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a civilian (not on behalf of their company), they are speaking on a matter of public issue, and their speech is not interfering with their job. [93]

Federal employees who have work discrimination claims, such as postal workers of the United States Postal Service (USPS) need to take legal action against in the appropriate federal jurisdiction, which positions a various set of concerns for plaintiffs.

Exceptions

Bona fide occupational certifications

Employers are generally allowed to think about characteristics that would otherwise be inequitable if they are bona fide occupational credentials (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 demonstrated in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court guidelines that police security can match races when needed. For instance, if police are running operations that involve confidential informants, or undercover representatives, sending an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, authorities departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can think about race-based policing and work with officers that are proportional to the neighborhood’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the show business, such as casting for movies and tv. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting personnel are permitted to cast characters based on physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, and so on. Employment discrimination declares for Disparate Treatment are unusual in the entertainment market, particularly in performers. [95] This reason is special to the show business, 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 work discrimination. BFOQ can not be a cost reason in wage gaps in between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be thought about when a company should balance privacy and security worry about the number of positions that a company are attempting to fill. [96]

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

If a company were trying to show that work discrimination was based on a BFOQ, there need to be an accurate basis for believing that all or substantially all members of a class would be not able to carry out the job safely and effectively or that it is not practical to identify certifications on an individualized basis. [97] Additionally, lack of a malicious motive does not transform a facially inequitable policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect. [97] Employers also bring the concern to show that a BFOQ is reasonably essential, and a lower discriminatory option approach does not exist. [98]

Religious work discrimination

“Religious discrimination is treating people differently in their employment due to the fact that of their faith, their faiths and practices, and/or their ask for accommodation (a modification in a workplace guideline or policy) of their religions and practices. It likewise consists of dealing with people in a different way in their employment because of their absence of religion or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, employers are prohibited from declining to hire a private based on their religious beliefs- alike race, sex, age, and special needs. If a staff member thinks that they have actually experienced spiritual discrimination, they ought to address this to the supposed wrongdoer. On the other hand, employment staff members are protected by the law for reporting task discrimination and have the ability to file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some locations in the U.S. now have provisions that ban discrimination versus atheists. The courts and laws of the United States give specific exemptions in these laws to companies or institutions that are religious or religiously-affiliated, however, to differing degrees in different areas, depending upon the setting and the context; a few of these have actually been upheld and others reversed over time.

The most recent and employment prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the extensive rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many employees are using religious beliefs versus changing the body and preventative medication as a reason to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not allow workers to look for spiritual exemptions, or decline their application might be charged by the staff member with employment discrimination on the basis of faiths. However, there are certain requirements for workers to present proof that it is a regards held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

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

Military

The armed force has actually faced criticism for restricting ladies from serving in combat functions. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was changed to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post posted on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. blogs about the method which black males were treated in the military throughout the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites gave the African Americans a possibility to prove themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic site states, nevertheless, that when black soldiers signed up with the Navy, they were only enabled to work as servants; their participation was restricted to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans desired to defend the country they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) safeguards the job rights of people who voluntarily or involuntarily leave employment positions to undertake military service or specific kinds of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also restricts employers from victimizing workers for past or present involvement or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that provide choice to veterans versus non-veterans has actually been declared to enforce systemic disparate treatment of ladies due to the fact that there is a huge underrepresentation of women in the uniformed services. [106] The court has actually declined this claim because there was no discriminatory intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight discriminate against a secured category might still be illegal if they produce a disparate effect on members of a safeguarded group. Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 restricts employment practices that have a discriminatory impact, unless they relate to job performance.

The Act requires the removal of synthetic, approximate, and unnecessary barriers to employment that operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that operates to leave out Negroes can not be shown to be associated with job performance, it is prohibited, regardless of the employer’s lack of prejudiced intent. [107]

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

When defending versus a disparate effect claim that declares age discrimination, a company, nevertheless, does not require to show requirement; rather, it must merely show that its practice is reasonable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzes and enforces the Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Liberty 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 Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are included in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its regulations and standards are contained in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wanting to submit suit under Title VII and/or the ADA must exhaust their administrative treatments by filing an administrative problem with the EEOC prior to filing their claim in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs imposes Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which forbids discrimination versus qualified people with impairments by federal contractors and subcontractors. [114]

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

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

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

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT work discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination versus individuals with criminal records 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 original 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 initial on May 12, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b “Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended”. ADA.gov. Archived from the original on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Questions and Answers: The Americans with Disabilities Act and Persons with HIV/AIDS”. Archived from the initial 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 original on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b Rozmarin, George C (1980 ). “Employment Discrimination Laws and Their Application”. Law Notes for the General Practitioner. 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 initial 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 initial 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 initial on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981a – Damages in cases of intentional 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 original 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, states the EEOC”. The Washington Post. Archived from the initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. “EEOC: Federal law bans workplace 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 initial on November 26, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Sexual Preference Discrimination in the Workplace”. FindLaw. Archived from the original 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 initial 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 original 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 initial 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 initial (PDF) on July 23, 2009. Retrieved August 8, 2019. ^ “District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Tabulation, 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 initial 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 original 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 original 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 initial on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16”. Archived from the original on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L. 151B § 4”. Archived from the initial 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 original on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Minnesota Statutes, area 363A.08”. Archived from the original 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 original 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 initial on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “New york city Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination against the engagement in certain activities. – New York Attorney Resources – New York Laws”. law.onecle.com. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 95-28″. www.ncleg.net. Archived from the initial 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 initial (PDF) on July 18, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “2006 Ohio Revised Code -:: 4112. Civil Rights Commission”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Oklahoma Chief Law Officer|”. 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 original on August 16, 2023. Retrieved October 17, 2019.
^ “Laws Administered by the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission” (PDF). [long-term 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 initial on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Utah Code 34A-5-106”. Archived from the original on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act” (PDF). Archived from the original (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: employment 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 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 employment due to the fact that of age of staff member or applicant-Exceptions”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “State of West Virginia” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original 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 [permanent dead link] ^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b “Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146”. Archived from the original 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 TAKING PART IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the original on June 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Addressing Sexual Preference 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 original on April 20, 2023.
^ a b “Federal Employee Speech & the First Amendment|ACLU of DC”. www.acludc.org. November 9, 2017. Archived from the initial on September 21, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Liberties Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri”. www.justice.gov. March 4, 2015. Archived from the initial on August 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “When is it legal for a company to discriminate in their working with practices based upon an Authentic 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 original on March 5, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Sincerely Held or Suddenly Held Religious Exemptions to Vaccination?”. www.americanbar.org. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). “Prepare for more US women in combat”. CNN. Archived from the original 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 posted on The (January 14, 2013). “Segregation in the Army 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 original 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 original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and viewpoints”. 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 initial on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Pre 1965: Events Causing 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 initial on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ a b “Filing a Charge of Employment Discrimination”. Archived from the initial 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 original 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, an attorney and judge, argues that the U.S. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 stops working to safeguard older workers. Weak to start with, she mentions that the ADEA has 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.