U.S. House Passes Equality Act Expanding Federal Protections to LGBTQ Employees

The Unites States House of Representatives recently passed the Equality Act, which expands employment protections to LGBTQ employees under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Employers May Be Held Liable for Workplace Sex Gossip

A federal appeals court has held that false rumors about a female employee sleeping with her male boss for a promotion can subject an employer to liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”).

Campbell Litigation, P.C.February 14, 2019Title VII, Hostile Work, Sex Discrimination, sexual harassment, Civil Rights Act of 1964Comment

Always Check Whether a Plaintiff’s Claim is Timely: Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Employment Discrimination Case Filed Six Days Late

Under Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), and most state anti-discrimination statutes, employees may file a lawsuit no later than 90 days after receiving notice from the administrative agency that the investigation has concluded (a “Notice of Right to Sue”). Courts strictly enforce the 90-day limitations periods, which in Title VII, ADA, and ADEA cases are “condition precedent to suit,” and, in the case of many state anti-discrimination acts, are jurisdictional, meaning a plaintiff’s failure to file within 90 days will strip the court of jurisdiction to hear a claim.

Federal Appeals Court Rejects Employee’s Claim of Sex Discrimination Based on Her Son’s Gender Dysphoria

This week, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee could not bring a sex discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) based on alleged harm to her son. In Tovear v. Essentia Health, the plaintiff employee and her son, who was diagnosed with gender dysphoriawere was enrolled in her employer’s health insurance plan. The employer’s insurance plan categorically excluded coverage for gender reassignment services and surgeries, and accordingly denied the plaintiff’s requests that her son get coverage for medications and gender reassignment surgery. The plaintiff claimed that her employer engaged in unlawful sex discrimination by refusing to cover the requested treatment.

INCLUSION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION AS A TITLE VII PROTECTION RIPE FOR SUPREME COURT REVIEW

On April 4, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (which covers Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin) ruled that sexual orientation is a protected status under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). With this significant ruling, the Seventh Circuit has created a split among U.S. Circuit Courts, making the issue ripe for a definitive ruling by the Supreme Court.

Campbell Litigation, P.C.April 13, 2017Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Gorsuch, Colorado, discriminationComment

The Rocky Mountain Employer