Zobrazení zdroje stránky Employment Discrimination Law In The United States

<br>Employment discrimination law in the United States originates from the common law, and is codified in various state, federal, and regional laws. These laws forbid discrimination based upon particular attributes or "secured classifications". The United States Constitution likewise forbids discrimination by federal and state governments against their public workers. Discrimination in the personal sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, however has become based on a growing body of federal and state law, consisting of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law restricts discrimination in a variety of locations, consisting of recruiting, working with, task evaluations, promo policies, training, settlement and disciplinary action. State laws often extend security to additional categories or employers.<br><br><br>Under federal employment discrimination law, employers usually can not discriminate versus staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual orientation and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] faith, [1] national origin, [1] impairment (physical or mental, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for workers over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] insolvency or uncollectable bills, [9] hereditary information, [10] and citizenship status (for residents, long-term homeowners, short-term residents, refugees, and asylees). [11]<br><br>List of United States federal discrimination law<br><br><br>Equal Pay Act of 1963<br>Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964<br>Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964<br><br><br>Title IX<br><br><br><br><br>Constitutional basis<br><br><br>The United States Constitution does not directly address work discrimination, however its restrictions on discrimination by the federal government have been held to secure federal government employees.<br><br><br>The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution restrict the power of the federal and state governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has an explicit requirement that the federal government does not deny individuals of "life, liberty, or residential or commercial property", without due procedure of the law. It likewise contains an implicit warranty that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly restricts states from [https://powerstack.co.in breaking] a person's rights of due procedure and equal security. In the work context, these Constitutional arrangements would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by treating employees, previous workers, or task candidates unequally due to the fact that of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process defense needs that federal government staff members have a reasonable procedural procedure before they are terminated if the termination is related to a "liberty" (such as the right to free speech) or residential or commercial property interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the stipulation that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination expenses (so they are not unconstitutional under Tenth Amendment) is Section 5 of Fourteenth Amendment.<br><br><br>Employment discrimination or harassment in the economic sector is not unconstitutional due to the fact that Federal and most State Constitutions do not expressly offer their respective government the power to enact civil rights laws that use to the private sector. The Federal federal government's authority to control a personal service, consisting of civil liberties laws, comes from their power to manage all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically manage some security from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only attend to inequitable treatment by the government, consisting of a public employer.<br><br><br>Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that manage the economic sector are normally Constitutional under the "authorities powers" doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws designed to secure public health, security and morals. All States must follow the Federal Civil Rights laws, however States may enact civil rights laws that offer additional employment protection.<br><br><br>For instance, some State civil rights laws offer defense from work discrimination on the basis of political association, despite the fact that such types of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.<br><br><br>History of federal laws<br><br><br>Federal law governing work discrimination has developed gradually.<br><br><br>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 restricts employers and unions from paying different incomes based upon sex. It does not forbid other discriminatory practices in hiring. It provides that where employees perform equivalent operate in the corner requiring "equal ability, effort, and responsibility and performed under similar working conditions," they must be offered equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to employers engaged in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of a company's workers if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a substantial quantity of interstate commerce. [citation required]<br><br>Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in a lot more aspects of the employment relationship. "Title VII developed the Equal Job opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act". [12] It uses to most employers engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 staff members, labor organizations, and employment companies. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, faith, sex or national origin. It makes it unlawful for employers to discriminate based upon safeguarded attributes relating to terms, conditions, and  [https://wiki.lafabriquedelalogistique.fr/Discussion_utilisateur:ShawneeFreed30 employment] benefits of employment. Employment companies might not discriminate when working with or referring applicants, and labor organizations are likewise prohibited from basing membership or union classifications on race, color, faith, sex, or nationwide origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act modified Title VII in 1978, defining that illegal sex discrimination consists of 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]<br><br>Executive Order 11246 in 1965 "prohibits discrimination by federal professionals and subcontractors on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin [and] requires affirmative action by federal specialists". [14]<br><br>The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and modified in 1978 and 1986, prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The prohibited practices are nearly identical to those laid out in Title VII, except that the ADEA protects workers in firms with 20 or more employees instead of 15 or more. A staff member is safeguarded from discrimination based upon age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has phased out and prohibited mandatory retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that also provide big pensions). The ADEA contains specific standards for benefit, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of most conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history beginning with the abolishment of "optimal ages of entry into employment in 1956" by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 "established a policy against age discrimination among federal professionals". [15]<br><br>The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 forbids employment discrimination on the basis of special needs by the federal government, federal specialists with contracts of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal financial assistance. [16] It requires affirmative action as well as non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires reasonable accommodation, and Section 508 requires that electronic and infotech be available to handicapped employees. [16]<br><br>The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 restricts discrimination by mine operators versus miners who struggle with "black lung illness" (pneumoconiosis). [17]<br><br>The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 "requires affirmative action for handicapped and Vietnam age veterans by federal specialists". [14]<br><br>The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 restricts work discrimination on the basis of bankruptcy or uncollectable bills. [9]<br><br>The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 forbids companies with more than 3 workers from discriminating versus anyone (except an unauthorized immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]<br><br>The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to eliminate discriminatory barriers versus qualified individuals with impairments, people with a record of an impairment, or people who are considered having a special needs. It restricts discrimination based on real or viewed physical or mental impairments. It also requires employers to offer reasonable accommodations to workers who require them because of a special needs to make an application for a task, perform the necessary functions of a job, or delight in the advantages and opportunities of work, unless the company can show that undue difficulty will result. There are stringent restrictions on when a company can ask disability-related questions or need medical assessments, and all medical info needs to be treated as personal. A special needs is defined under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that "considerably limits several major life activities. " [5]<br><br>The Nineteenth Century Civil Rights Acts, changed in 1993, ensure all persons equivalent rights under the law and describe the damages available to plaintiffs 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]<br><br>The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 bars companies from using people' genetic information when making hiring, firing, task placement, or promotion decisions. [10]<br><br>The proposed US Equality Act of 2015 would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. [21] As of June 2018 [update], 28 US states do not clearly consist of sexual preference and 29 US states do not clearly consist of gender identity within anti-discrimination statutes.<br><br><br>LGBT work discrimination<br><br><br>Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids 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 [https://werkindemode.nl Job] Opportunity Commission (2020 ), work securities for LGBT people 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 Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translated Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC's figured out that transgender employees were protected under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the security to include sexual orientation in 2015. [24] [25]<br><br>According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: "Studies reveal that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay people have actually experienced some type of discrimination and harassment at the office. Moreover, a staggering 90 percent of transgender employees report some type of harassment or mistreatment on the task." Lots of people in the LGBT community have lost their job, consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender female who claims that her manager informed her that her existence might make other individuals feel unpleasant. [26]<br><br>Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws banning the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender individuals in both public and personal work environments. A few more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in just public offices. [27] Some opponents of these laws believe that it would invade spiritual liberty, despite the fact that these laws are focused more on prejudiced actions, not beliefs. Courts have also identified that these laws do not infringe free speech or religious liberty. [28]<br><br>State law<br><br><br>State statutes likewise provide substantial defense from work discrimination. Some laws extend similar security as provided by the federal acts to companies who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes offer security to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws offer higher security to staff members of the state or of state contractors.<br><br><br>The following table lists  not safeguarded by federal law. Age is consisted of also, because federal law just covers employees over 40.<br><br><br>In addition,<br><br><br>- District of Columbia - admission, personal appearance [35]- Michigan - height, weight [53]- Texas - Participation in emergency evacuation order [90]- Vermont - Place of birth [76]<br><br>Civil servant<br><br><br>Title VII also uses to state, federal, regional and other public workers. Employees of federal and state federal governments have additional securities against employment discrimination.<br><br><br>The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 forbids discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not affect [https://gamingjobs360.com job] efficiency. The Office of Personnel Management has actually translated this as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. [91] In June 2009, it was revealed that the interpretation would be broadened to consist of gender identity. [92]<br><br>Additionally, public employees maintain their First Amendment rights, whereas personal companies deserve to limitations workers' speech in particular ways. [93] Public workers retain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a personal resident (not on behalf of their company), they are speaking on a matter of public issue, and their speech is not interfering with their task. [93]<br><br>Federal workers who have work discrimination claims, such as postal employees of the United States Postal Service (USPS) must sue in the proper federal jurisdiction, which presents a various set of issues for plaintiffs.<br><br><br>Exceptions<br><br><br>Bona fide occupational certifications<br><br><br>Employers are normally enabled to consider attributes that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ). The most typical BFOQ is sex, and the 2nd most common BFOQ is age. Authentic Occupational Qualifications can not be used for discrimination on the basis of race.<br><br><br>The only exception to this rule is demonstrated in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court rules that law enforcement surveillance can match races when essential. For circumstances, if authorities are running operations that include private informants, or undercover representatives, sending 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 race-based policing and employ officers that are proportionate to the community's racial makeup. [94]<br><br>BFOQs do not use in the entertainment industry, such as casting for motion pictures and television. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting staff are allowed to cast characters based on physical attributes, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination claims for Disparate Treatment are uncommon in the show business, specifically in entertainers. [95] This justification is unique to the entertainment industry, and does not transfer to other industries, such as retail or food. [95]<br><br>Often, companies will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be a cost validation in wage gaps between different groups of employees. [96] Cost can be thought about when an employer must balance personal privacy and security worry about the number of positions that an employer are trying to fill. [96]<br><br>Additionally,  [https://trademarketclassifieds.com/user/profile/2717903 employment] consumer preference alone can not be a validation unless there is a personal privacy or safety defense. [96] For circumstances, retail establishments in rural areas can not restrict African American clerks based upon the racial ideologies of the consumer base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that manage kids survivors of sexual assault is permitted.<br><br><br>If an employer were attempting to prove that employment discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there should be an accurate basis for thinking 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 unwise to figure out certifications on a personalized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a sinister intention does not convert a facially prejudiced policy into a neutral policy with an inequitable effect. [97] Employers likewise bring the concern to reveal that a BFOQ is reasonably necessary, and a lesser prejudiced option approach does not exist. [98]<br><br>Religious employment discrimination<br><br><br>"Religious discrimination is dealing with people in a different way in their work due to the fact that of their religious beliefs, their faiths and practices, and/or their request for lodging (a change in a work environment guideline or policy) of their spiritual beliefs and practices. It also consists of treating individuals in a different way in their work since of their absence of religious belief or practice" (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, employers are prohibited from refusing to employ a private based upon their religion- alike race, sex, age, and impairment. If an employee believes that they have experienced religious discrimination, they need to resolve this to the alleged transgressor. On the other hand, employees are secured by the law for reporting job discrimination and are able to file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some locations in the U.S. now have stipulations that prohibit discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States give certain exemptions in these laws to organizations or organizations that are religious or  [https://vetlek.ru/forum/profile.php?id=35114 employment] religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to varying degrees in various locations, depending on the setting and the context; a few of these have actually been maintained and others reversed over time.<br><br><br>The most current and pervasive example of Religious Discrimination is the extensive rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many employees are using religious beliefs versus altering the body and preventative medication as a reason to not get the vaccination. Companies that do not enable workers to make an application for spiritual exemptions, or decline their application might be charged by the employee with work discrimination on the basis of spiritual beliefs. However, there are certain requirements for workers to present proof that it is a truly held belief. [101]<br><br>Members of the Communist Party<br><br><br>Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 explicitly allows discrimination against members of the Communist Party.<br><br><br>Military<br><br><br>The military has faced criticism for forbiding women from serving in battle roles. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was [https://recruitment.talentsmine.net modified] to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post published on the PBS site, Henry Louis Gates Jr. blogs about the method which black men were treated in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, during that time the whites offered the African Americans an opportunity to show themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic website states, nevertheless, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were just allowed to work as servants; their involvement was restricted to the roles of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wished to protect the nation they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.<br><br><br>The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) secures the job rights of individuals who voluntarily or involuntarily leave work positions to undertake military service or particular types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law likewise prohibits companies from discriminating against employees for past or present involvement or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that provide preference to veterans versus non-veterans has been alleged to impose 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 due to the fact that there was no inequitable intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]<br><br>Unintentional discrimination<br><br><br>Employment practices that do not directly discriminate against a protected category might still be unlawful if they produce a diverse influence on members of a safeguarded group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment practices that have a prejudiced impact, unless they are associated to job performance.<br><br><br>The Act requires the elimination of artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary barriers to work that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that operates to leave out Negroes can not be revealed to be associated with job performance, it is restricted, regardless of the employer's absence of prejudiced intent. [107]<br><br>Height and weight requirements have actually been determined by the EEOC as having a diverse influence on nationwide origin minorities. [108]<br><br>When protecting against a diverse impact claim that alleges age discrimination, a company, however, does not need to show need; rather, it needs to just show that its practice is affordable. [citation required]<br><br>Enforcing entities<br><br><br>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) interprets and enforces 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 Liberty Act of 1991. [109] The Commission was established by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement arrangements are consisted of in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and standards are included in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wishing to submit match under Title VII and/or the ADA should tire their administrative remedies by submitting an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior  [https://trademarketclassifieds.com/user/profile/2826463 employment] to filing their claim in court. [113]<br><br>The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs imposes Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which restricts discrimination against qualified people with impairments by federal professionals and subcontractors. [114]<br><br>Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each firm has and imposes its own regulations that use to its own programs and to any entities that receive financial assistance. [16]<br><br>The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) imposes the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which restricts discrimination based on citizenship status or nationwide origin. [115]<br><br>State Fair Employment Practices (FEP) offices take the role of the EEOC in administering state statutes. [113]<br><br>Employment Non-Discrimination Act<br>LGBT employment discrimination in the United States<br>Employment discrimination versus persons with criminal records in the United States<br>Racial wage gap in the United States<br>Gender pay gap in the United States<br>Criticism of credit scoring systems in the United States<br><br><br>References<br><br><br>^ 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.<br>^ a b "The Equal Pay Act of 1963". Archived from the original on April 5, 2020. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020 ).<br>^ a b "Pregnancy Discrimination Act". Archived from the original on May 12, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.<br>^ a b "Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended". ADA.gov. Archived from the original on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "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.<br>^ a b "The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967". Archived from the initial on December 13, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "USERRA - Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act". DOL. Archived from the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b 11 U.S.C. § 525<br>^ a b "Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008" (PDF). gpo.gov. May 21, 2008. Archived (PDF) from the initial on November 6, 2018. Retrieved January 6, 2015.<br>^ 8 U.S.C. § 1324b<br>^ 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.<br>^ "Family and Medical Leave Act". Archived from the initial on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.<br>^ a b Rozmarin, George C (1980 ). "Employment Discrimination Laws and Their Application". Law Notes for the Family Doctor. 16 (1 ): 25-29. JSTOR 44066330.<br>^ 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.<br>^ a b c d "Guide to Disability Rights Laws". ADA.gov. December 20, 2023. Archived from the original on November 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "30 USC Sec. 938". Archived from the initial on June 7, 2011. Retrieved July 21, 2009.<br>^ "Summary of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986". Archived from the original on May 6, 2013. Retrieved August 14, 2021.<br>^ "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.<br>^ "42 U.S. Code § 1981a - Damages in cases of deliberate discrimination in employment". LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)". Archived from the original on June 17, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.<br>^ Tilcsik, András (January 1, 2011). "Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against 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.<br>^ "In Landmark Ruling, Feds Add Transgendered to Anti-Discrimination Law:: EDGE Boston, MA". Edgeboston.com. April 25, 2012. Archived from the initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.<br>^ Carpenter, Dale (December 14, 2012). "Anti-gay discrimination is sex discrimination, says the EEOC". The Washington Post. Archived from the initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.<br>^ Tatectate, Curtis. "EEOC: Federal law prohibits workplace bias versus gays, lesbians, bisexuals|Miami Herald Miami Herald". Miamiherald.com. Archived from the original on April 28, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Workplace". FindLaw. Archived from the original on May 7, 2021. Retrieved March 1, 2015.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "Code of Alabama 25-1-21". Archived from the original on July 23, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ 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.<br>^ 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.<br>^ a b "Colorado Civil Rights Division 2008 Statutes" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on May 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Chapter 814c Sec. 46a-60". Archived from the initial on October 17, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ a b "Delaware Code Online". delcode.delaware.gov. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ 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.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act". Archived from the original on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ a b "Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2". Archived from the initial on August 14, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Idaho Commission on Human Rights: Age Discrimination"". Archived from the original on February 21, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c "Illinois Human Rights Act". Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Indiana General Assembly". iga.in.gov. Archived from the original on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Iowa Code 216.6". Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Kansas Age Discrimination in Employment Act" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 6, 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Kentucky Revised Statutes 344.040" (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on October 8, 2009.<br>^ "Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:352". Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:312". Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311". Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Title 5, Chapter 337: HUMAN RIGHTS ACT". www.mainelegislature.org. Archived from the original on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16". Archived from the initial on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "M.G.L. 151B § 4". Archived from the initial on July 7, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "M.G.L 151B § 1". Archived from the initial on June 4, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c "Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c "Minnesota Statutes, section 363A.08". Archived from the initial on September 6, 2015. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ " § 213.055 R.S.Mo". Archived from the original on May 23, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Montana Code Annotated 49-2-303". Archived from the original on September 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ a b "Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act". Archived from the initial on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ a b "NRS: CHAPTER 613 - EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES". www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the original on December 24, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Section 354-A:7 Unlawful Discriminatory Practices". Archived from the original on January 2, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c d "New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (N.J.S.A. 10:5 -12)".<br>^ a b c "2006 New Mexico Statutes - Section 28-1-7 - Unlawful discriminatory practice". Justia Law. Archived from the original on September 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c "New york city State Executive Law, Article 15, Section 296". Archived from the initial on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ a b "New york city Labor Law Section 201-D - Discrimination against the engagement in certain activities. - New York City Attorney Resources - New York Laws". law.onecle.com. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ " § 95-28". www.ncleg.net. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ " § 95-28". www.ncleg.net. Archived from the initial on December 15, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c d "North Dakota Human Rights Act" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 18, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ "2006 Ohio Revised Code -:: 4112. Civil Liberty Commission". Justia Law. Archived from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Oklahoma Chief Law Officer|". www.oag.ok.gov. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b c "Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 659A". Archived from the original on August 16, 2023. Retrieved October 17, 2019.<br>^ "Laws Administered by the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission" (PDF). [permanent dead link] ^ "State of Rhode Island General Assembly". www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the original on October 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "South Carolina Human Affairs Law". Archived from the original on May 6, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ "Tennessee State Government - TN.gov". www.tn.gov. Archived from the original on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "LABOR CODE CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION". statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Utah Code 34A-5-106". Archived from the initial on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ a b "Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on June 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.<br>^ "Virginia Human Rights Act". Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "RCW 49.60.172: Unfair practices with regard to HIV or hepatitis C infection". apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "RCW 49.60.174: Evaluation of claim of discrimination-Actual or perceived HIV or hepatitis C infection". apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in work since of age of employee or applicant-Exceptions". apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "State of West Virginia" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ 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.<br>^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [permanent dead link] ^ "22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.<br>^ "22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5" (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.<br>^ a b "Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146". Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151". Archived from the original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451". Archived from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "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.<br>^ "Addressing Sexual Orientation Discrimination In Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employee's Rights". Archived from the original on January 14, 2007.<br>^ 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.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "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.<br>^ a b c "When is it legal for an employer to discriminate in their employing practices based upon a [https://www.bridgewaystaffing.com 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.<br>^ a b c "CM-625 Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications". US EEOC. January 2, 1982. Archived from the initial on December 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977 )". Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.<br>^ "Religious Discrimination - Workplace Fairness". www.workplacefairness.org. Archived from the initial on November 12, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.<br>^ "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.<br>^ "Sincerely Held or Suddenly Held Religious Exemptions to Vaccination?". www.americanbar.org. Archived from the initial on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.<br>^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). "Get all set for more US women in battle". CNN. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.<br>^ 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 World War II|African American History Blog". The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the initial on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.<br>^ a b "USERRA - Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act". DOL. Archived from the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.<br>^ 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.<br>^ "FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions". Findlaw. Archived from the initial on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.<br>^ "Shaping Employment Discrimination Law". Archived from the original on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.<br>^ "Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws". Archived from the initial on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.<br>^ "Pre 1965: Events Resulting In the Creation of EEOC". Archived from the original on August 26, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.<br>^ "42 U.S. Code § 2000e-5 - Enforcement arrangements". LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 1, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.<br>^ "PART 1614-- FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL JOB OPPORTUNITY". Archived from the original on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.<br>^ a b "Filing a Charge of Employment Discrimination". Archived from the initial on August 12, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.<br>^ "The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 503". Archived from the original on August 2, 2009. Retrieved August 1, 2009.<br>^ "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.<br>External links<br><br><br>Directory of state labor departments, from the U.S. Department of Labor<br>Disability Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission<br>Sex-Based Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission<br>Your Rights At Work (Connecticut).<br>- 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 fails to secure older workers. Weak to begin with, she specifies that the ADEA has been devitalized by the U.S. Supreme Court.<br>- Tweedy, Ann E. and Karen Yescavage, Employment Discrimination Against Bisexuals: An Empirical Study, 21 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L.<br>