Employment Non-Discrimination Act - JTIC's ENDA brocure pdf
From Whitehouse.gov…
“President Obama and Vice President Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court's recent ruling that curtails racial minorities' and women's ability to challenge pay discrimination -- on Jan. 29, 2009, President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act of 2009, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work. They will also pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.”
Brief Historical Time Line of Related Events:
July 2, 1964—Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) Prohibits and protects against employment discrimination based on color, race, religion, sex and national origin. Made law
December 15, 1967—Age in Employment Discrimination Act Prohibits and protects against employment discrimination based on age. Made law.
May 14, 1974—“Gay Rights Bill” including a provision of adding “sexual orientation” to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Introduced, but never made law.
July 26, 1990—Americans with Disabilities Act (Title I) Prohibits employment discrimination against a qualified individual with a disability. Made law.
June of 1994 thru 1996—The first version of the ENDA introduced and after a few attempts nearly passes in the Senate, failing by one vote, but never reaches the House.
Protections and Provisions of ENDA
• Prohibits employers from discriminating against someone’s actual or assumed sexual orientation or gender identity in nearly all aspects of employment, including hiring, termination, promotion, compensation, and most other terms and conditions of employment.
• Prohibits discrimination against people who associate with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered co-workers, or anyone who is perceived to be LGBT.
• Protects against retaliation for LGBT discriminatory claims.
• ENDA essentially provides the same employment protections as existing civil rights laws, including enforcement of work procedures, remedies and notification procedures.
• Protects against disparate treatment, but not disparate impact
Exemptions and General Policies
• Forbids the use of quotas and preferential treatment of any kind based on sexual orientation or gender identity
• Does not require employers to provide benefits to partners of employees (It neither requires nor forbids domestic partnership plans for benefits)
• Exempts businesses with fewer than 15 employees (as do existing civil rights employment protections)
• Specifically limits protections to employment discrimination, does not apply to housing or public accommodation discrimination
• Includes an exemption for religious organizations
• Does not apply to current military policies, nor veteran benefits.
A Few Related Statistics…
(All statistics taken from the ACLU’s 2007 document Working in the Shadows)
● 16% to 68% of LGBT people reported experiencing employment discrimination
● 15% to 57% of transgender individuals reported experiencing employment discrimination
● In 2002, gay men earned 10% to 32% less than similarly qualified heterosexual men
● In 2002, lesbians earned 5% to 14% less than the national average
● Discrimination against gay/lesbian employees translates to a loss of approximately $47 million (from training expenditures and unemployment benefits alone)
● 88% of Fortune 500 companies have sexual orientation included in their work policies, 25% include gender identity as well.
● In May of 2007, 89% of Americans believed that gays/lesbians should have equal rights in the workplace
● In 2007, 58% of Americans believe transgender employees should have equal rights in the workplace
Why "Gender Identity" is a MUST
By removing “gender identity and expression” from the protections of the ENDA, not only are members of the transgendered community not included in the protections of the ENDA, it also creates a huge loophole, failing to protect others as well.
By protecting only actual or perceived sexual orientation, behavior such as male effeminacy or female masculinity may not be protected by this. While it is arguable that “actual or perceived sexual orientation” protect against this, the removal of gender identity allows for the courts to rule that an employer has not violated the ENDA for firing someone for being too masculine or feminine, as that is not necessarily a byproduct of the employee’s sexual orientation, thereby failing to protect the very people the law is supposed to be protecting.
H.R. 3685’s religious exemption also differs, in that it exempts all religious groups completely from the proposed law. While the earlier version allowed religious groups to require their employees to comply with the major tenets of the religion, the new exemption allows religious organizations to pick and choose which tenets they may discriminate against (for example, not firing someone who has had a divorce, but firing someone LGBT). Furthermore, the religious exemption would give religiously affiliated hospitals, shelters, universities and other religiously affiliated organizations the freedom to discriminate against LGBT people.
ENDA was supposed to be introduced into the House of Representative by Barney Frank (D — Boston) in the Spring of 2009. Instead, they decided to first work on Hate Crimes legislation, and ENDA is now scheduled to be introduced in the Fall of 2009. We need to start educating people, so when the time comes for the Representatives to vote, their constituents will be informed and be able to tell them how they want them to vote!