Virginia Restaurant Ordered To Pay $40K For Harassing Gay Server

(image via Valentin B. Kremer/Unsplash)

From NBC Washington:

A Virginia restaurant operator has agreed to pay $40,000 to resolve a lawsuit that claims its employees routinely harassed a gay server with homophobic epithets and taunted him about his sexuality.

A federal judge on Thursday signed off on the settlement between the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Mejia Corp., which does business as El Tio Tex-Mex Grill restaurant in Gainesville.

The commission's September 2018 lawsuit claimed restaurant employees also harassed the gay server's heterosexual friend, a busser, based on their friendship.

The settlement calls for the server and his friend to split the $40,000 payments from the company. The agreement also bars the restaurant from engaging in or condoning sex-based harassment of any employee.

The EEOC determined that the two men had legal standing to sue for discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Recent court cases have found that discrimination based on sexual orientation is covered under the prohibition of “sex” discrimination under Title VII.

16 States Ask SCOTUS To Limit LGBT Workplace Protections

Republican governors and attorneys general from 16 states have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that LGBT employees can be fired based merely on their sexual orientation and gender identity.

The states that signed onto the friend-of-the-court brief are Nebraska, Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming, Maine, Mississippi, and Kentucky.

Currently, only 20 states plus Washington, D.C. have passed laws expressly banning LGBT discrimination in the workplace.

A study by the Human Rights Campaign in 2011 showed a whopping 87% of voters erroneously believe its illegal under federal law to fire someone just for being LGBT.

Its notable that Maine and Utah, two of the 20 states that have LGBT workplace protections in place, have signed on in support of the brief.

The request to the Supreme Court comes in response to a lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of a transgender funeral home employee in Michigan, Aimee Stephens, who was fired in 2013 after sharing with her supervisor she was transitioning.

In 2017, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Harris Funeral Homes illegally discriminated against Stephens in firing her referencing Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which bans workplace discrimination based on sex.

At the time, Judge Karen Nelson Moore of the 6th Circuit wrote in the opinion that anti-trans discrimination is inherently sex based.

“[I]t is analytically impossible to fire an employee based on that employee’s status as a transgender person without being motivated, at least in part, by the employee’s sex,” she wrote. Businesses that discriminate against a worker on the basis of being “transgender or transitioning status,” is taking sex into account thus violating Title VII.

Led by Nebraska Attorney General David Bydalek, the 16 states are asking SCOTUS to overturn that appeals court decision saying Congress didn’t intend for the ban on sex discrimination in Title VII to cover bias against lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender employees.

“The States’ purpose is to note that ‘sex’ under the plain terms of Title VII does not mean anything other than biological status,” Bydalek wrote.

The Supreme Court will decide this fall whether to take up the case.

(h/t Bloomberg Law)

Podcast: Broadway, Conversion Therapy, Transgender Soldiers, LGBT Workplace Discrimination, Out Oscar Winners

In this week's podcast:

• Harvey Fierstein’s iconic play Torch Song is heading back to Broadway

• California aims to make so-called “ex-gay therapy” illegal

• Georgia lawmakers are trying to legalize discrimination against same-sex couples wanting to adopt

• South Carolina looks to label same-sex marriage as “parody” marriage

• Defense Secretary James Mattis has given Donald Trump his recommendations for transgender soldiers

• The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals says Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTs from workplace discrimination

• Anti-gay bakers in Oregon take their case to the state Supreme Court

• How many out LGBT Academy Award winners can you name?

All that and more in this episode of The Randy Report podcast.

Federal Appeals Court Rules Civil Rights Act Of 1964 Bans Anti-Gay Discrimination In Workplace

In a huge win for the LGBTQ community, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bans anti-gay discrimination.

The case examined whether Donald Zarda, a now-deceased skydiver who alleged he was fired from Altitude Express for being gay, could sue under existing civil rights law because sexual-orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.

From Dominic Holden at Buzzfeed:

The Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled Monday, “We now hold that sexual orientation discrimination constitutes a form of discrimination ‘because of . . . sex,’ in violation of Title VII.” In doing so, the court overruled a lower court — and a precedent from two previous court cases — and remanded the case to be litigated in light of their reading of Title VII.

The decision holds national implications due to its high tier in the judicial system, and because it’s seen as a litmus test of the Trump administration’s ability — or inability — to curb LGBT rights through court activism. The Justice Department had injected itself into the case even though it wasn’t a party to the lawsuit and doesn’t normally involve itself in private employment disputes.

"Sexual orientation is a function of sex and, by extension, sexual orientation discrimination is a subset of sex discrimination," the majority wrote.

In reaching its decision Monday, the court pointed out that anti-gay discrimination would not exist "but for" a person's sex. That is to say, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals would not experience this type of unequal treatment had been born a different gender, or were attracted to a different sex.

Robert A. Katzmann, the 2nd Circuit’s chief judge who authored the majority ruling, was joined by nine other judges while three judges dissented.

This ruling is also a blow to the Trump administration which was not a party to the case.

The Justice Department sent Deputy Assistant Attorney General Hashim Mooppan to take part in oral arguments in September arguing that despite Title VII employers should be able to fire workers for being gay.

Zarda had apparently told a female student as they prepared for a sky-diving jump that he was “100 percent gay” in an attempt to make the woman less anxious about the close physical contact involved in being strapped to her instructor.

The woman's boyfriend complained to the school about the encounter, and that led to Zarda's dismissal.

This ruling now allows Zarda's estate to file a discrimination lawsuit against Altitude Express.

The case was heard by all 13 eligible judges of the 2nd Circuit, known as an en banc hearing, meaning the only option for left for the haters is to head to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Major Companies Urge SCOTUS To Take Up LGBT Workplace Discrimination Case

Major American corporations have signed on to an amicus brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court urging the high court to rule that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace.

The Trump administration has taken the opposite opinion.

From the AP:

The 76 businesses and organizations - including American Airlines, Apple, eBay, Facebook, Google, Starbucks and Microsoft - filed a brief Wednesday encouraging the high court to take up the issue. They want the court to take a case out of Georgia in which a gay woman who worked as a hospital security officer says she was harassed and punished for dressing in a male uniform and wearing her hair short. Jameka Evans, who worked at Georgia Regional Hospital at Savannah from 2012 to 2013, ultimately left her job and sued.

The question in her case is whether a federal law barring workplace discrimination "because of...sex" covers discrimination against someone because of their sexual orientation. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under President Barack Obama took the view that it does. But President Donald Trump's administration has argued that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars discrimination based on gender but doesn't cover sexual orientation.

The businesses' court filing says they and their employees would benefit if the court agreed to take the case and rule that Title VII covers sexual orientation discrimination.

7th Circuit Court Of Appeals Rules Civil Rights Act Of 1964 Protects LGBTs From Workplace Discrimination

The Associated Press is reporting that the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTs from workplace discrimination.

Normally, a case would be heard by three judges on the court, but this was heard by the full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The judges ruled 8-3 that Title VII protects LGBTs in the workplace.

This is WAY huge.

The decision by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes after it threw out a July finding by three of its own judges that the law doesn’t cover sexual-orientation bias and ordered a rare rehearing by the full court, a rare session known as an en banc hearing.

It also comes as President Donald Trump’s administration has begun setting its own policies on LGBT rights. Late in January, the White House declared Trump would enforce an Obama administration order barring companies that do federal work from workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual identity. But in February, it revoked guidance on transgender students’ use of public school bathrooms, deferring to states.

The Hively case stems from a lawsuit by Indiana teacher Kimberly Hively alleging that the Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend didn’t hire her full time because she is a lesbian. The entire court reheard oral arguments in November and directed the toughest questions at a lawyer for the college who argued only Congress could extend the protections. The aggressive questions suggested the court might be willing to expand the 53-year-old landmark law.

Judge Diane Wood called it a "common-sense reality that it is actually impossible to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without discriminating on the basis of sex."

The 7th Circuit covers federal lawsuits out of Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

BREAKING: Federal court rules employers can't fire people for being gay! This is a HUGE victory! #LGBTQ https://t.co/2WKlwza48a

— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) April 4, 2017

More context: The #7thCircuit ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects employees from sexual orientation discrimination! #LGBTQ

— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) April 4, 2017

This case was heard en banc, which means it was heard by the *whole* #7thCircuit. Most cases are heard by a panel of only 3 judges. #LGBTQ

— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) April 4, 2017