Following a 2020 Supreme Court ruling, federal law protects lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBTQ+) individuals from workplace discrimination. Before this nationwide ruling, such protections were inconsistent, with federal law only covering federal employees, while the District of Columbia and 20 states had enacted their own laws to protect both public and private employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation and, in most of those states, gender identity.

Legal Protections for LGBTQ+ Individuals in the Workplace

A landmark 2020 Supreme Court decision extended the protections of the Civil Rights Act to the private sector, establishing that federal law now prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Google

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals in any aspect of employment based on their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The act also forbids segregating or classifying employees in ways that would limit their opportunities. Notably, Title VII contains provisions for bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQs), which serve as exceptions allowing for employment decisions based on religion, sex, or national origin if these traits are essential for a specific job.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020, April 22). Psychology (2nd ed.). OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction

OpenStax Psychology (2nd ed.) Textbook

Following World War II, concerns about the fairness of employment tests led to research on their potential for ethnic and gender bias, though findings were often mixed. The passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act provided a legal framework for these concerns, making non-discriminatory hiring practices a legal requirement and intensifying the scrutiny of testing methods.

Fairness and Bias in Employment Testing

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 is an amendment to the Civil Rights Act that specifically prohibits employment discrimination against a woman due to pregnancy. This protection applies to all aspects of employment, including hiring, pay, and termination, as long as the individual is capable of performing the necessary job functions.

Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978

Immutable characteristics are traits of an individual, such as skin color or hair texture, that are considered fundamental to their identity. Under anti-discrimination laws like Title VII, employers are prohibited from making employment decisions based on these characteristics.

Immutable Characteristics

The Supreme Court's decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. established a key principle under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act: employers cannot use job requirements, such as a high school diploma, if they disproportionately disadvantage a specific racial group and are not proven to be essential for performing the job.

Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Ruling

In a significant 2011 case, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed a class-action lawsuit filed by female employees against Walmart for alleged gender discrimination in pay and promotions. The Court ruled against the plaintiffs, denying their ability to sue as a collective group. While a legal setback for the employees, the case brought widespread public attention to the issue of gender discrimination in the workplace.

Walmart Gender Discrimination Class-Action Case (2011)

Bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQs) are specific job requirements that legally permit employers to hire based on characteristics that would otherwise be discriminatory, such as religion, national origin, age, or sex. Sex or gender is the most common basis for a BFOQ defense. These exceptions to anti-discrimination laws are permitted under acts like the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. However, race is never considered a BFOQ, though the First Amendment may protect artistic works that require an actor of a specific race. Most BFOQ claims are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, with court decisions shaping future policy.

Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications (BFOQs)

A private religious school is hiring a new teacher for its world history class. The school's administration has a policy of only hiring teachers who are active members of its specific faith, regardless of the subject they teach. An applicant who is highly qualified to teach history but does not belong to the school's faith is rejected solely on this basis. Analyze this hiring decision. Is the school's policy likely to be considered a legally permissible exception to the general rules against employment discrimination? Explain your reasoning.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After