by Tammy Binford
On August 19, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) announced a new directive related to its decision to update its enforcement actions regarding gender identity and transgender discrimination.
On June 30, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced it would update its enforcement protocols and guidance to reflect that the full protection of federal antidiscrimination laws applies to claims of gender identity or transgender status.
The OFCCP enforces contractual promises of affirmative action and equal employment opportunity required of federal employers and contractors. The new directive—DIR 2014-02—explains that the OFCCP will adhere to the existing framework under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for proving sex discrimination when investigating potential discrimination based on gender identity or transgender status.
That framework stems from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) 2012 decision in Macy v. Holder. In the Macy case,the EEOC found that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on biological sex or gender stereotyping.
The new directive, which takes effect immediately, says that in compliance evaluations and complaint investigations, the OFCCP will investigate and seek to remedy discrimination that is related to an individual’s gender identity or transgender status.
Click here for more information on HRHero’s August 26 webinar on gender identity discrimination. For more information or to register for HRHero’s October 30 webinar on the OFCCP’s new LGBT regulations, click here.
LGBT should not be discriminated simply because of LGBT. However, LGBT is caused by birth-defects of the sexual endocrine. If LGBT simply wanted fair employment, there would be no issue, but they have made it quite clear that they want far more than that. They want to force us, and our children, to regard homosexuality as being Darwinistically (biologically) normal. It is not.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to separate the legal issue of fair employment from the social issue of biological normalcy. Inevitably, a member of LGBT will cry discrimination because some heterosexual is unwilling to accept that homosexuality is biologically normal. This could happen, for example, during “sensitivity training”, whereupon the heterosexual is expect to complete some type “final exam” where it is expected that a question such as “homosexuality is just as normal as heterosexuality – True or False?” is to be answered. This will pit the heterosexuals conscience against a lie.
This is why we need to get to the truth (whatever it is). No person should be forced to say something against his/her conscience, especially when it would be a lie.
It’s good to see that NotAfraidOfTheTruth supports equal employment opportunity for all. The “science” s/he references is by no means universally accepted, and concepts of what is “normal” or “abnormal” are not helpful ways to to approach workplace issues, whether we are dealing with LGBT, minority, or disability issues, or religious accommodations. The key is respecting each individual and what he or she can contribute. Good workplace training programs never would have the kind of “final exam” question that NotAfraidOfTheTruth hypothesizes, as smart employers recognize that it is not their place to shape the personal beliefs, whether religious, political or social, of their workers. Instead, quality workplace training emphasizes the intrinsic worth of each individual and his or her ability to contribute to attainment of the goals of the enterprise.