Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States originates from the common law, and is codified in numerous state, federal, and regional laws. These laws prohibit discrimination based on particular qualities or «secured categories». The United States Constitution also prohibits discrimination by federal and state federal governments against their public workers. Discrimination in the economic sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, but has actually ended up being 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 number of locations, including recruiting, employing, job assessments, promo policies, referall.us training, settlement and disciplinary action. State laws often extend defense to additional classifications or adremcareers.com companies.

Under federal employment discrimination law, companies usually can not discriminate versus staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (consisting of sexual preference and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religious beliefs, [1] national origin, [1] impairment (physical or psychological, including status), [5] [6] age (for workers over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] insolvency or bad financial obligations, [9] genetic information, [10] and citizenship status (for citizens, permanent residents, 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 directly deal with work discrimination, however its restrictions on discrimination by the federal government have been held to safeguard federal civil servant.

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 includes an implicit guarantee that the Fourteenth Amendment clearly prohibits states from breaking an individual’s rights of due procedure and equal defense. In the employment context, these Constitutional arrangements would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by treating employees, former employees, or job candidates unequally because of membership in a group (such as a race or sex). Due procedure security requires that civil servant have a fair procedural procedure before they are ended if the termination is related to a «liberty» (such as the right to totally free speech) or home 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.

Employment discrimination or harassment in the economic sector is not unconstitutional since Federal and most State Constitutions do not specifically offer their respective government the power to enact civil liberties laws that apply to the economic sector. The Federal federal government’s authority to manage a personal company, consisting of civil liberties laws, originates from their power to control all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do expressly pay for some defense from public and personal work discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions just address discriminatory treatment by the federal government, consisting of a public employer.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil liberties laws that manage the economic sector are normally Constitutional under the «police powers» teaching or the power of a State to enact laws created to secure public health, safety and morals. All States need to adhere to the Federal Civil liberty laws, however States might enact civil liberties laws that use additional employment protection.

For instance, some State civil liberties laws provide protection from employment discrimination on the basis of political affiliation, although such forms of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing employment discrimination has actually established in time.

The Equal Pay Act modified the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1963. It is imposed by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. [12] The Equal Pay Act prohibits companies and unions from paying different salaries based on sex. It does not restrict other prejudiced practices in working with. It provides that where employees carry out equivalent work in the corner needing «equal skill, effort, and obligation and carried out under comparable working conditions,» they must be offered equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to companies taken part in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s workers if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a substantial quantity of interstate commerce. [citation required]

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in numerous more aspects of the work relationship. «Title VII created the Equal Job opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act». [12] It uses to a lot of employers participated in interstate commerce with more than 15 employees, labor organizations, and employment service. Title VII forbids discrimination based upon race, color, religious beliefs, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it illegal for companies to discriminate based upon secured qualities regarding terms, conditions, and advantages of employment. Employment service might not discriminate when hiring or referring applicants, and labor companies are also restricted from basing membership or union categories on race, color, religious beliefs, sex, somalibidders.com or nationwide origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act changed Title VII in 1978, specifying that unlawful sex discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions. [4] An associated statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

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

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 restricted practices are almost similar to those detailed in Title VII, except that the ADEA protects employees in companies with 20 or more employees rather than 15 or more. An employee is protected from discrimination based upon age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and restricted necessary retirement, except for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise provide large pensions). The ADEA includes specific guidelines for benefit, pension and retirement plans. [7] Though ADEA is the center of most conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history starting with the abolishment of «maximum ages of entry into employment in 1956» by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 «developed a policy versus age discrimination amongst federal professionals». [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 forbids employment discrimination on the basis of impairment by the federal government, federal specialists with contracts of more than $10,000, and programs receiving federal monetary help. [16] It requires affirmative action in addition to non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires reasonable lodging, and Section 508 needs that electronic and details technology be accessible to handicapped workers. [16]

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 prohibits discrimination by mine operators against miners who suffer from «black lung illness» (pneumoconiosis). [17]

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 «needs affirmative action for handicapped and Vietnam era veterans by federal contractors». [14]

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

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 forbids companies with more than 3 workers from victimizing anyone (other than an unauthorized immigrant) on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to eliminate discriminatory barriers versus certified people with specials needs, individuals with a record of a disability, or individuals who are concerned as having a disability. It prohibits discrimination based on real or viewed physical or psychological specials needs. It likewise requires companies to supply affordable accommodations to employees who need them due to the fact that of an impairment to get a task, perform the important functions of a task, or take pleasure in the advantages and privileges of work, unless the employer can reveal that excessive hardship will result. There are rigorous restrictions on when an employer can ask disability-related concerns or require medical evaluations, and all medical info needs to be dealt with as personal. A disability is defined under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that «considerably limits one or more significant life activities. » [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, modified in 1993, guarantee all persons equivalent rights under the law and describe the damages available 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 using people’ hereditary details when making hiring, firing, task positioning, or promo choices. [10]

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

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids work discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. This is included 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 Employment Opportunity Commission (2020 ), employment securities for LGBT individuals were patchwork; a number of states and areas clearly prohibit harassment and predisposition in work choices on the basis of sexual preference and/or gender identity, although some only cover public employees. [22] Prior to the Bostock choice, the Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translated Title VII to cover LGBT staff members; the EEOC’s figured out that transgender staff members were safeguarded under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the security to incorporate sexual preference in 2015. [24] [25]

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 work environment. Moreover, a shocking 90 percent of transgender employees report some type of harassment or mistreatment on the job.» Lots of people in the have lost their job, including Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender female who claims that her boss told her that her existence might make other people 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 couple of more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in only public work environments. [27] Some opponents of these laws believe that it would intrude on religious liberty, even though these laws are focused more on prejudiced actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually likewise identified that these laws do not infringe complimentary speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

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

The following table lists categories not safeguarded by federal law. Age is consisted of too, given that federal law only covers workers over 40.

In addition,

— District of Columbia — admission, personal look [35]- Michigan — height, weight [53]- Texas — Participation in emergency evacuation order [90]- Vermont — Birthplace [76]

Civil servant

Title VII likewise uses to state, federal, local and other public workers. Employees of federal and state federal governments have extra defenses versus employment discrimination.

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

Additionally, public employees keep their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies deserve to limitations staff members’ speech in specific ways. [93] Public employees maintain 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 concern, and their speech is not interfering with their job. [93]

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

Exceptions

Authentic occupational qualifications

Employers are typically enabled to think about attributes that would otherwise be inequitable if they are authentic occupational qualifications (BFOQ). The most typical BFOQ is sex, and the second most typical BFOQ is age. Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications can not be used for discrimination on the basis of race.

The only exception to this guideline is shown in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court rules that police surveillance can match races when needed. For example, if cops are running operations that involve private informants, or undercover agents, sending out an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, police departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can consider race-based policing and employ officers that are in proportion to the neighborhood’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the home entertainment industry, such as casting for motion pictures and television. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting staff are permitted to cast characters based on physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination declares for Disparate Treatment are uncommon in the home entertainment industry, particularly in performers. [95] This justification is special to the show business, and does not transfer to other industries, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, employers will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense reason in wage spaces in between different groups of employees. [96] Cost can be thought about when a company should balance personal privacy and safety issues with the variety of positions that a company are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, customer preference alone can not be a reason unless there is a personal privacy or security defense. [96] For example, retail facilities in rural locations can not restrict African American clerks based upon the racial ideologies of the consumer base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that manage children survivors of sexual abuse is permitted.

If a company were trying to show that employment discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there should be an accurate basis for thinking that all or considerably all members of a class would be not able to carry out the job securely and efficiently or that it is unwise to figure out qualifications on a personalized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a malevolent intention does not transform a facially inequitable policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory result. [97] Employers also carry the concern to reveal that a BFOQ is reasonably essential, and a lesser prejudiced option approach does not exist. [98]

Religious work discrimination

«Religious discrimination is treating individuals in a different way in their work because of their religious beliefs, their religions and practices, and/or their request for lodging (a change in an office guideline or policy) of their religious beliefs and practices. It also includes dealing with people in a different way in their work due to the fact that of their absence of religious belief or practice» (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, companies are prohibited from refusing to hire a private based on their religion- alike race, sex, age, and impairment. If an employee believes that they have experienced spiritual discrimination, they should address this to the alleged wrongdoer. On the other hand, workers are safeguarded by the law for reporting job discrimination and are able to submit 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 offer certain exemptions in these laws to companies or institutions that are religious or religiously-affiliated, however, to varying degrees in different locations, depending upon the setting and the context; some of these have been upheld and others reversed with time.

The most recent and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are utilizing religious beliefs against changing the body and preventative medicine as a reason to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not permit workers to make an application for religious exemptions, or reject their application might be charged by the worker with employment discrimination on the basis of religious beliefs. However, there are certain requirements for workers to present evidence that it is an all the best 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 dealt with criticism for prohibiting females from serving in battle roles. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was amended to allow them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the article posted on the PBS site, Henry Louis Gates Jr. composes about the method which black men were dealt with in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites gave the African Americans an opportunity to prove themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic website states, however, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were only enabled to work as servants; their involvement was restricted to the roles of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans desired to safeguard the nation they resided in, they were rejected the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protects the job rights of people who voluntarily or involuntarily leave employment positions to undertake military service or specific types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law likewise prohibits companies from discriminating against workers for previous or present participation or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that offer choice to veterans versus non-veterans has been declared to enforce systemic disparate treatment of females since there is a large underrepresentation of women in the uniformed services. [106] The court has actually declined this claim since there was no prejudiced intent towards females in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight victimize a secured category might still be unlawful if they produce a disparate effect on members of a safeguarded group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment practices that have a prejudiced effect, unless they are associated to task performance.

The Act needs the elimination of artificial, arbitrary, and unneeded barriers to work that operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that runs to leave out Negroes can not be shown to be connected to job performance, it is forbidden, regardless of the employer’s lack of inequitable intent. [107]

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

When preventing a diverse impact claim that alleges age discrimination, an employer, nevertheless, does not need to show necessity; rather, it should merely show that its practice is affordable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Job 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 liberty Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are included in area 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its regulations and guidelines are consisted of in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wishing to submit suit under Title VII and/or the ADA should exhaust their administrative remedies by filing an administrative problem with the EEOC prior to submitting their claim in court. [113]

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

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each agency has and enforces 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) implements the anti-discrimination arrangements of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which forbids discrimination based on 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 employment discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination versus individuals with rap sheets in the United States
Racial wage space in the United States
Gender pay space in the United States
Criticism of credit history 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 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 initial on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Questions and Answers: The Americans with Disabilities Act and Persons with HIV/AIDS». Archived from the original on July 22, 2009. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ a b «The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967». Archived from the initial on December 13, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «USERRA — Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act». DOL. Archived from the original 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 Family Doctor. 16 (1 ): 25-29. JSTOR 44066330.
^ Neumark, D (2003 ). «Age discrimination legislations in the United States» (PDF). Contemporary Economic Policy. 21 (3 ): 297-317. doi:10.1093/ cep/byg012. S2CID 38171380. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 2, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d «Guide to Disability Rights Laws». ADA.gov. December 20, 2023. Archived from the initial on November 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «30 USC Sec. 938». Archived from the initial on June 7, 2011. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ «Summary of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986». Archived from the original on May 6, 2013. Retrieved August 14, 2021.
^ «42 U.S. Code § 1981 — Equal rights under the law». LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «42 U.S. Code § 1981a — Damages in cases of 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 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, says the EEOC». The Washington Post. Archived from the original 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 original on April 28, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Burns, Crosby; Krehely, Jeff (June 2, 2011). «Gay and Transgender People Face High Rates of Workplace Discrimination and Harassment». Center for American Progress. Archived from the original on November 26, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ «Sexual Orientation 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 original 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 original on September 9, 2016. Retrieved September 9, 2016.
^ a b «Colorado Civil Rights Division 2008 Statutes» (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on May 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b «Chapter 814c Sec. 46a-60». Archived from the initial on October 17, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b «Delaware Code Online». delcode.delaware.gov. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e «District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Prohibited Acts of Discrimination» (PDF). Archived from the initial (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 original (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 original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act». Archived from the initial 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 original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b «Indiana General Assembly». iga.in.gov. Archived from the original on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Iowa Code 216.6». Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Kansas Age Discrimination in Employment Act» (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 6, 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b «Kentucky Revised Statutes 344.040» (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on October 8, 2009.
^ «Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:352». Archived from the 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 original on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b «Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16». Archived from the initial on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «M.G.L. 151B § 4». Archived from the original on July 7, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «M.G.L 151B § 1». Archived from the initial 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 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 original 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 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 versus the engagement in certain 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 original 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 Liberty 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). [permanent dead link] ^ «State of Rhode Island 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 initial 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 original on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Utah Code 34A-5-106». Archived from the initial on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b «Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act» (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on June 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ «Virginia Human Rights Act». Archived from the 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 original 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 original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «RCW 49.60.174: Evaluation of claim of discrimination-Actual or viewed HIV or hepatitis C infection». apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in work because of age of staff member or applicant-Exceptions». apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «State of West Virginia» (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d «Wisconsin Statutes Tabulation». 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 original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b «Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146». Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151». Archived from the original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451». Archived from the initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «LABOR CODE CHAPTER 22. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR TAKING PART IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION». statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on June 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ «Addressing Sexual Orientation Discrimination In Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employee’s Rights». Archived from the 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 initial on April 20, 2023.
^ a b «Federal Employee Speech & the First Amendment|ACLU of DC». www.acludc.org. November 9, 2017. Archived from the 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 initial on August 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c «When is it legal for a company to discriminate in their hiring practices based on 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 Bona Fide 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 initial on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). «Get prepared for more US women 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 Armed Forces During The Second World War|African American History Blog». The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the initial on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ a b «USERRA — Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act». DOL. Archived from the initial on December 11, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b «Personnel Adm’r of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979 )». Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ «FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and opinions». Findlaw. Archived from the initial 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 Resulting In 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 JOB OPPORTUNITY». Archived from the original on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ a b «Filing a Charge of Employment Discrimination». Archived from the initial on August 12, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ «The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 503». Archived from the initial 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 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 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, a lawyer 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 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.