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 local laws. These laws forbid discrimination based upon certain qualities or “protected classifications”. The United States Constitution likewise forbids discrimination by federal and state governments against their public staff members. Discrimination in the economic sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, but has ended up being based on a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law restricts discrimination in a number of areas, including recruiting, working with, task examinations, promotion policies, training, payment and disciplinary action. State laws typically extend security to extra classifications or companies.

Under federal work discrimination law, employers generally 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] national origin, [1] impairment (physical or psychological, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] bankruptcy or bad debts, [9] hereditary info, [10] and citizenship status (for residents, long-term residents, temporary locals, refugees, and asylees). [11]

List of United States federal discrimination law

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Civil Rights 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, however its prohibitions on discrimination by the federal government have actually been held to safeguard federal civil servant.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution limit the power of the federal and state governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has a specific requirement that the federal government does not deny individuals of “life, liberty, or home”, without due process of the law. It also includes an implicit warranty that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly restricts states from breaking a person’s rights of due process and equivalent defense. In the work context, these Constitutional arrangements would restrict the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by dealing with workers, previous employees, or job candidates unequally since of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due procedure defense requires that federal government staff members have a fair procedural process before they are ended if the termination is connected 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 clause 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 personal sector is not unconstitutional since Federal and most State Constitutions do not expressly offer their particular government the power to enact civil rights laws that apply to the personal sector. The Federal federal government’s authority to regulate a personal service, including civil liberties laws, comes from their power to regulate all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do expressly manage some security from public and personal employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions just address discriminatory treatment by the government, consisting of a public employer.

Absent of an arrangement in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that control the economic sector are usually Constitutional under the “authorities powers” teaching or the power of a State to enact laws developed to protect public health, safety and morals. All States must adhere to the Federal Civil liberty laws, however States might enact civil rights laws that use additional work security.

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

History of federal laws

Federal law governing work discrimination has actually 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 employers and unions from paying various earnings based on sex. It does not forbid other prejudiced practices in hiring. It offers that where workers carry out equivalent operate in the corner requiring “equivalent ability, effort, and duty and performed under comparable working conditions,” they need to be offered equivalent pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to employers 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 significant amount of interstate commerce. [citation required]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in numerous more aspects of the work relationship. “Title VII developed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It uses to the majority of companies engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 workers, labor companies, and employment service. Title VII forbids discrimination based on race, somalibidders.com color, religion, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it illegal for companies to discriminate based upon safeguarded qualities regarding terms, conditions, and benefits of work. Employment agencies might not discriminate when working with or referring candidates, and labor companies are likewise forbidden from basing membership or union classifications on race, color, religious beliefs, sex, or nationwide origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, specifying that unlawful 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]

Executive Order 11246 in 1965 “prohibits discrimination by federal specialists 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), enacted in 1968 and modified in 1978 and 1986, forbids employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The forbidden practices are almost similar to those laid out in Title VII, other than that the ADEA safeguards employees in companies with 20 or more workers rather than 15 or more. An employee is safeguarded from discrimination based on age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and forbade compulsory retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that also supply large pensions). The ADEA includes explicit guidelines for benefit, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of most conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer 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 “established a policy against age discrimination among federal specialists”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of special needs by the federal government, federal contractors with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal financial assistance. [16] It needs affirmative action as well as non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires reasonable lodging, and Section 508 requires that electronic and infotech be available to disabled employees. [16]

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

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 “needs affirmative action for handicapped and Vietnam period veterans by federal contractors”. [14]

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of insolvency or bad debts. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits employers with more than 3 staff members from victimizing anybody (other than an unapproved immigrant) on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to eliminate prejudiced barriers against qualified people with impairments, individuals with a record of a disability, or individuals who are concerned as having an impairment. It forbids discrimination based upon real or perceived physical or psychological disabilities. It likewise requires employers to offer sensible lodgings to workers who require them because of a disability to look for a task, perform the important functions of a job, or take pleasure in the advantages and opportunities of employment, unless the employer can show that unnecessary difficulty will result. There are strict restrictions on when a company can ask disability-related concerns or require medical checkups, and all medical information needs to 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 significant life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, amended in 1993, guarantee all individuals equivalent rights under the law and detail the damages 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 companies from using people’ genetic info when making hiring, firing, job positioning, or promo decisions. [10]

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

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 restricts 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 R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Job Opportunity Commission (2020 ), employment protections for LGBT individuals were patchwork; a number of states and areas clearly forbid harassment and bias in employment choices on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity, although some only cover public staff members. [22] Prior to the Bostock decision, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translated Title VII to cover LGBT workers; the EEOC’s identified that transgender staff members were safeguarded under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the protection to include sexual orientation in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: “Studies show that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay individuals have experienced some form of discrimination and harassment at the office. Moreover, an incredible 90 percent of transgender workers report some form of harassment or mistreatment on the task.” Many individuals in the LGBT community have actually lost their job, consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender lady who declares that her employer told her that her existence might make other individuals feel uncomfortable. [26]

Almost half of the United States also have state-level or municipal-level laws banning the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender people in both public and private work environments. A few more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in only public workplaces. [27] Some opponents of these laws think that it would invade spiritual liberty, even though these laws are focused more on prejudiced actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually likewise determined that these laws do not infringe totally free speech or religious liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes also provide substantial security from employment discrimination. Some laws extend comparable defense as provided by the federal acts to employers who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes provide defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws provide greater defense to workers of the state or of state contractors.

The following table lists classifications not protected by federal law. Age is consisted of too, considering that federal law just covers workers over 40.

In addition,

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

Title VII likewise applies to state, federal, regional and other public staff members. Employees of federal and state governments have additional protections against employment discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 prohibits discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not impact 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 interpretation would be broadened to include gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public workers keep their First Amendment rights, whereas private employers have the right to limitations employees’ speech in specific methods. [93] Public employees retain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a civilian (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 employees who have employment discrimination claims, such as postal workers of the United States Postal Service (USPS) need to sue in the appropriate federal jurisdiction, which positions a various set of issues for complainants.

Exceptions

Authentic occupational qualifications

Employers are usually permitted to consider characteristics that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are bona fide occupational credentials (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the 2nd 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 rules that law enforcement monitoring can match races when required. For example, if authorities are running operations that involve confidential informants, or undercover agents, 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 employ officers that are proportional to the community’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not use in the show business, such as casting for films and television. [95] Directors, producers and casting personnel are enabled to cast characters based on physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination claims for Disparate Treatment are unusual in the home entertainment industry, particularly in entertainers. [95] This justification is special to the show business, and does not move to other industries, 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 an expense reason in wage gaps in between different groups of employees. [96] Cost can be considered when a company needs to balance privacy and security worry about the variety of positions that an employer are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, consumer preference alone can not be a reason unless there is a personal privacy or security defense. [96] For circumstances, retail establishments 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 handle kids survivors of sexual assault is permitted.

If a company were trying to prove that work discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there must be an accurate basis for thinking that all or significantly all members of a class would be unable to perform the task safely and effectively or that it is impractical to determine credentials on a customized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a malicious motive does not transform a facially prejudiced policy into a neutral policy with a prejudiced effect. [97] Employers also carry the concern to reveal that a BFOQ is reasonably needed, and a lesser prejudiced alternative technique does not exist. [98]

Religious work discrimination

“Religious discrimination is dealing with people in a different way in their work because of their religious beliefs, their religions and practices, and/or their ask for lodging (a change in an office guideline or policy) of their spiritual beliefs and practices. It likewise consists of treating people in a different way in their work because of their absence of faith or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission, companies are restricted from refusing to employ a private based on their faith- alike race, sex, age, and disability. If a staff member believes that they have experienced religious discrimination, they ought to resolve this to the supposed transgressor. On the other hand, workers are secured 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 provisions that ban discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States give certain exemptions in these laws to companies or institutions that are spiritual or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to varying degrees in different areas, depending on the setting and the context; some of these have been upheld and others reversed over time.

The most recent and pervasive example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are using religious beliefs against altering the body and preventative medication as a validation to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not permit workers to use for religious exemptions, or decline their application may be charged by the staff member with employment discrimination on the basis of religions. However, there are certain requirements for staff members to present proof that it is a genuinely held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

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

Military

The military has dealt with criticism for restricting women from serving in fight functions. In 2016, however, the law was modified to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post posted on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. discusses the method in which black men were treated in the military throughout the 1940s. According to Gates, during that time the whites gave the African Americans a chance to show themselves as Americans by having them participate in the war. The National Geographic site states, however, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were only enabled to work as servants; their involvement was limited to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans desired to defend the nation they resided in, they were rejected the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) safeguards the job rights of individuals who willingly or involuntarily leave work positions to carry out military service or specific kinds of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also restricts employers from discriminating against staff members for previous or present participation or subscription in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that offer choice to veterans versus non-veterans has been alleged to impose systemic diverse treatment of women because there is a vast underrepresentation of females in the uniformed services. [106] The court has actually declined this claim because there was no prejudiced intent towards females in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight discriminate versus a protected classification may still be illegal if they produce a disparate effect on members of a safeguarded group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids work practices that have a discriminatory effect, unless they are related to job efficiency.

The Act requires the removal of synthetic, arbitrary, and unnecessary barriers to work that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that runs to exclude Negroes can not be revealed to be connected to task performance, it is restricted, regardless of the company’s lack of discriminatory intent. [107]

Height and weight requirements have been determined by the EEOC as having a disparate influence on national origin minorities. [108]

When resisting a disparate effect claim that declares age discrimination, a company, nevertheless, does not need to show requirement; rather, it must merely reveal that its practice is sensible. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzes and implements 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 developed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement arrangements are contained in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and standards are consisted of in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wanting to submit match under Title VII and/or the ADA need to exhaust their administrative remedies by filing an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to filing their claim in court. [113]

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

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each agency has and implements its own guidelines that use to its own programs and to any entities that get monetary support. [16]

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 forbids discrimination based upon citizenship status or nationwide origin. [115]

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

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

References

^ a b c d e “Title VII of the Civil Liberty 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 original 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 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 original 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 initial 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 original 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 initial on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981a – Damages in cases of intentional discrimination in employment”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)”. Archived from the original on June 17, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ 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 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 predisposition against 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 Orientation 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 liberty 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 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 initial on August 14, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Idaho Commission on Human Rights: Age Discrimination””. Archived from the initial on February 21, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Illinois Human Rights Act”. Archived from the original 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 initial on October 6, 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Kentucky Revised Statutes 344.040” (PDF). Archived from the initial (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 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 liberty 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 original 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 prejudiced practice”. Justia Law. Archived from the original 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 Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination against the engagement in specific activities. – New York Attorney Resources – New York Laws”. law.onecle.com. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 referall.us General Assembly”. www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the original 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 initial 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 original 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 respect 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 perceived HIV or hepatitis C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in employment since 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 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 initial 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 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 initial 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 Preference Discrimination In Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employee’s Rights”. Archived from the initial 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 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 an employer to discriminate in their employing 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 initial 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 original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Religious Discrimination – Workplace Fairness”. www.workplacefairness.org. Archived from the initial 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 females in battle”. 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 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 initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and viewpoints”. Findlaw. Archived from the initial on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Shaping Employment Discrimination Law”. Archived from the initial on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Federal Equal Job Opportunity (EEO) Laws”. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Pre 1965: Events Causing the Creation of EEOC”. Archived from the original on August 26, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 2000e-5 – Enforcement arrangements”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 1, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “PART 1614– FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 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 Introduction 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 Job Opportunity Commission
Sex-Based Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Employment 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 secure older employees. Weak to start with, she specifies 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.