Starttrainingfirstaid

About Us

Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States originates from the common law, and is codified in many state, federal, and regional laws. These laws prohibit discrimination based upon specific attributes or « safeguarded classifications ». The United States Constitution also prohibits discrimination by federal and state federal governments against their public workers. Discrimination in the private sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, however has actually ended up being subject to a growing body of federal and state law, consisting of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law forbids discrimination in a number of areas, consisting of recruiting, working with, task assessments, promotion policies, training, settlement and disciplinary action. State laws frequently extend protection to extra categories or employers.

Under federal work discrimination law, employers generally can not victimize staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual preference and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] faith, [1] national origin, [1] impairment (physical or mental, including status), [5] [6] age (for workers over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] bankruptcy or uncollectable bills, [9] hereditary details, [10] and citizenship status (for residents, permanent residents, momentary residents, 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 directly resolve work discrimination, but 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 federal governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has a specific requirement that the federal government does not deprive people of « life, liberty, or residential or commercial property », without due process of the law. It likewise consists of an implicit guarantee that the Fourteenth Amendment clearly forbids states from breaking an individual’s rights of due procedure and equivalent protection. In the work context, these Constitutional provisions would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their work practices by treating employees, previous staff members, or job candidates unequally due to the fact that of membership in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process protection needs that civil servant have a reasonable procedural process before they are terminated if the termination is related to a « liberty » (such as the right to complimentary speech) or home interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the clause that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination costs (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 expressly offer their respective federal government the power to enact civil rights laws that use to the personal sector. The Federal federal government’s authority to regulate a private service, including civil liberties laws, comes from their power to manage all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically afford some protection from public and private work discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions just attend to inequitable treatment by the federal government, including a public employer.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that control the private sector are normally Constitutional under the « authorities powers » teaching or the power of a State to enact laws developed to secure public health, security and morals. All States should abide by the Federal Civil Rights laws, but States may enact civil liberties laws that use extra employment protection.

For example, some State civil rights laws use defense from employment discrimination on the basis of political association, despite the fact that such types of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing work discrimination has developed with time.

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 companies and unions from paying various incomes based upon sex. It does not forbid other discriminatory practices in working with. It offers that where employees carry out equal operate in the corner requiring « equivalent skill, effort, and responsibility and carried out under similar working conditions, » they need to be offered equivalent pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to companies taken part in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s workers if the business is engaged as a whole in a substantial quantity of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in much more aspects of the employment relationship. « Title VII produced the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act ». [12] It uses to the majority of employers participated in interstate commerce with more than 15 employees, labor organizations, and employment service. Title VII forbids discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it prohibited for employers to discriminate based upon safeguarded qualities relating to terms, conditions, and advantages of employment. Employment companies may not discriminate when hiring or referring applicants, and labor companies are also restricted from basing subscription or union categories on race, color, religious beliefs, sex, or national origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, defining that unlawful sex discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy, giving birth, and associated 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 « forbids discrimination by federal contractors and subcontractors on account of race, color, religious beliefs, sex, or nationwide origin [and] needs affirmative action by federal contractors ». [14]

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and changed in 1978 and 1986, restricts employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The forbidden practices are nearly similar to those detailed in Title VII, other than that the ADEA safeguards employees in firms with 20 or more workers instead of 15 or more. A worker is protected from discrimination based upon age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and restricted mandatory retirement, except for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise offer big pensions). The ADEA includes specific standards for benefit, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of most discussion of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history starting with the abolishment of « optimal ages of entry into work in 1956 » by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 « developed a policy against age discrimination among federal professionals ». [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of special needs by the federal government, federal specialists with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs receiving federal monetary support. [16] It needs affirmative action along with non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 needs affordable accommodation, and Section 508 needs that electronic and info technology be available to handicapped staff members. [16]

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 restricts discrimination by mine operators versus miners who experience « black lung disease » (pneumoconiosis). [17]

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 « needs affirmative action for disabled and Vietnam age veterans by federal professionals ». [14]

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of personal bankruptcy or bad financial obligations. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits companies with more than 3 employees from victimizing anybody (except an unapproved immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to get rid of inequitable barriers against certified 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 disabilities. It also requires companies to provide sensible lodgings to employees who require them since of an impairment to request a job, perform the essential functions of a task, or enjoy the advantages and benefits of employment, unless the employer can show that unnecessary hardship will result. There are strict restrictions on when a company can ask disability-related concerns or require medical checkups, and all medical info should be treated as confidential. A disability is defined under the ADA as a mental or physical health condition that « significantly restricts several major life activities.  » [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, amended in 1993, make sure all persons equivalent rights under the law and detail the damages readily 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 employers from utilizing people’ genetic information when making hiring, shooting, task placement, or promo decisions. [10]

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

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. This is encompassed by the law’s restriction of work 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 securities for LGBT individuals were patchwork; several states and localities explicitly prohibit harassment and predisposition in employment decisions on the basis of sexual preference 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 workers; the EEOC’s identified that transgender staff members were safeguarded under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the defense to encompass sexual preference in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: « Studies show that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay people have experienced some type of discrimination and harassment at the workplace. Moreover, a shocking 90 percent of transgender workers report some type of harassment or mistreatment on the task. » Many individuals in the LGBT community have lost their task, consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender female who declares that her boss told her that her presence might make other individuals feel unpleasant. [26]

Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws banning the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender people in both public and private offices. A few more states ban LGBT discrimination in just public workplaces. [27] Some opponents of these laws believe that it would intrude on spiritual liberty, although these laws are focused more on discriminatory actions, not beliefs. Courts have also recognized that these laws do not speech or religious liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes likewise offer substantial defense from work discrimination. Some laws extend comparable protection as provided by the federal acts to employers who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes offer defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws provide higher protection to employees of the state or of state professionals.

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

In addition,

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

Civil servant

Title VII likewise applies to state, federal, local and other public employees. Employees of federal and state governments have extra protections against work discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 restricts discrimination in federal work on the basis of conduct that does not impact task efficiency. The Office of Personnel Management has interpreted this as forbiding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. [91] In June 2009, it was revealed that the analysis would be broadened to consist of gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public employees keep their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies can limitations workers’ speech in specific ways. [93] Public employees maintain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a private 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]

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

Exceptions

Bona fide occupational certifications

Employers are usually permitted to consider qualities that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are bona fide occupational credentials (BFOQ). The most typical BFOQ is sex, and the 2nd most typical BFOQ is age. Authentic 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 law enforcement security can match races when required. For example, if authorities are running operations that involve 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 in proportion to the neighborhood’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not use in the entertainment industry, such as casting for movies and television. [95] Directors, producers and casting personnel 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 show business, particularly in entertainers. [95] This justification is unique to the show business, and does not move to other markets, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, companies will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense reason in wage gaps between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be considered when an employer must stabilize privacy and safety interest in the variety of positions that a company are trying to fill. [96]

Additionally, client preference alone can not be a validation unless there is a personal privacy or security defense. [96] For example, referall.us retail establishments in rural locations can not restrict African American clerks based on the racial ideologies of the client base. But, matching genders for staffing at facilities that handle children survivors of sexual abuse is permitted.

If a company were trying to prove that work discrimination was based on a BFOQ, there need to be a factual basis for adremcareers.com believing that all or significantly all members of a class would be unable to perform the job securely and efficiently or that it is not practical to identify qualifications on an individualized basis. [97] Additionally, lack of a malicious motive does not convert a facially discriminatory policy into a neutral policy with an inequitable result. [97] Employers likewise carry the burden to show that a BFOQ is reasonably needed, and a lower prejudiced alternative technique does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

« Religious discrimination is dealing with people in a different way in their work because of their religious beliefs, their spiritual beliefs and practices, and/or their request for lodging (a change in a work environment guideline or policy) of their religions and practices. It likewise consists of treating individuals in a different way in their employment because of their absence of faith or practice » (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission, employers are restricted from refusing to hire an individual based upon their religious beliefs- alike race, sex, age, and impairment. If a worker thinks that they have experienced religious discrimination, they need to address this to the supposed offender. On the other hand, staff members are secured by the law for reporting task discrimination and have the ability to submit charges with the EEOC. [100] Some locations in the U.S. now have stipulations that prohibit discrimination versus atheists. The courts and laws of the United States provide certain exemptions in these laws to businesses or organizations that are religious or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to varying degrees in different locations, depending on the setting and the context; some of these have been maintained and others reversed in time.

The most current and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are utilizing faiths against changing the body and preventative medicine as a justification to not get the vaccination. Companies that do not allow employees to request spiritual exemptions, or decline their application may be charged by the employee with employment discrimination on the basis of religions. However, there are certain requirements for employees to present proof that it is a seriously held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 clearly allows discrimination against members of the Communist Party.

Military

The armed force has dealt with criticism for prohibiting females from serving in fight roles. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was changed to permit them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post posted on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. writes about the way in which black guys were treated in the military throughout the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites provided the African Americans an opportunity to prove themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic website states, nevertheless, that when black soldiers signed up with the Navy, they were just permitted to work as servants; their participation was restricted to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wanted to defend the country they lived in, they were rejected the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) safeguards the task rights of individuals who voluntarily or involuntarily leave work positions to carry out military service or certain types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law likewise forbids employers from discriminating versus employees for past or present involvement or subscription in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that offer choice to veterans versus non-veterans has actually been alleged to impose systemic diverse treatment of females due to the fact that there is a large underrepresentation of females in the uniformed services. [106] The court has declined this claim because there was no inequitable intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight victimize a safeguarded classification may still be prohibited if they produce a diverse influence on members of a protected group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 restricts employment practices that have a discriminatory impact, unless they are associated to job performance.

The Act requires the elimination of synthetic, approximate, and unnecessary barriers to work that operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that operates to omit Negroes can not be shown to be related to task performance, it is forbidden, regardless of the company’s lack of inequitable intent. [107]

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

When defending against a disparate impact claim that alleges age discrimination, a company, however, does not require to demonstrate requirement; rather, it needs to just reveal that its practice is affordable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Job 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 included in section 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 fit under Title VII and/or the ADA must exhaust their administrative treatments by submitting an administrative grievance with the EEOC prior to filing their lawsuit in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs enforces Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which forbids discrimination versus qualified people with disabilities by federal professionals and subcontractors. [114]

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each firm has and implements its own policies that apply to its own programs and to any entities that get financial assistance. [16]

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) imposes the anti-discrimination arrangements of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which prohibits discrimination based upon citizenship status or nationwide origin. [115]

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

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination against persons with criminal records in the United States
Racial wage gap in the United States
Gender pay space in the United States
Criticism of credit report 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 initial 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 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 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 initial 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 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 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 initial 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 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 original on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. « EEOC: Federal law prohibits work environment predisposition versus 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 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 original 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 initial 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 initial 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 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 original (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.
^ 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 initial on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b « Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2 ». Archived from the original 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 initial 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 original 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 initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ « Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:312 ». Archived from the initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ « Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311 ». Archived from the initial 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 Rights Act » (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c « Minnesota Statutes, section 363A.08 ». Archived from the initial 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 original on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b « NRS: CHAPTER 613 – EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES ». www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the initial on December 24, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b « Section 354-A:7 Unlawful Discriminatory Practices ». Archived from the original 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 inequitable 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 original on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b « New York 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 original 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 Rights Commission ». Justia Law. Archived from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ « Oklahoma Attorney General Of The United States| ». www.oag.ok.gov. Archived from the initial 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). [permanent dead link] ^ « State of Rhode Island General Assembly ». www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 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 perceived HIV or liver disease 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 work because of age of employee 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 original on November 3, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [long-term dead link] ^ « 22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3 » (PDF). Archived from the original (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 initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ « Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451 ». Archived from the original 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 original 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 City 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 original 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 employing practices based on a Bona Fide Occupation Qualification? ». University of Cincinnati Law Review Blog. April 27, 2016. Archived from the initial 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 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 initial 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 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 females in combat ». 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 posted 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 initial 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 original 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 Leading to the Creation of EEOC ». Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 initial on August 2, 2009. Retrieved August 1, 2009.
^ « A Summary 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 safeguard older workers. Weak to start with, she states that the ADEA has actually been devitalized 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.