Company hit hard for transgender hiring bias
November 18, 2008 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Discrimination, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Recent Decisions
Seems like the courts are always willing to expand the list of employees who can sue for bias. The latest pitfall for employers:
Transgender discrimination.
In one recent case, an employee was offered a job, and he accepted. When he got the offer, though, he told his new boss he wanted to discuss a “personal matter” — that he was in the process of becoming a woman and would soon be coming to work in women’s clothes.
The boss’s first reaction was to ask, “Why in the world would you want to do that?” Then, after a brief conversation, she told the new hire he’d given her “a lot to think about.”
The job offer was rescinded, and the applicant sued.
The court agreed that there is no federal law banning discrimination on the basis of transexuality. However, other courts have held that firing candidates because they don’t fit traditional gender stereotypes is illegal under regular gender bias law.
The judge applied that standard in this case, saying that “because gender identity is a component of sex, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is sex discrimination.”
The court refused to dismiss the case, and the company will now have to face a costly trial or pay an expensive settlement.
Cite: Schroer v. Billington
November 26th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I CANNONT REPLY ON THIS CRAP.
November 26th, 2008 at 11:44 am
OOPS CANNOT (GOT ME SO UPSET I CAN’T SPELL)
November 26th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Who cares what his/her/its sexuality is? Can this person do the job? IF the person is qualified and the hiring decision was based on the qualifications and the job offer was then rescinded because of the person’s sexuality, the new hire has a case. This type of candidate will probably become a larger part of the candidate pool moving forward in the US and Europe; this would also include women changing their sexuality. Unless the company is a faith based organization, you can’t discriminate based on sexual orientation…………..
November 26th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
I am beginning to think that our court system has gotten overly confused. The employer in this case should have been made aware of the interviewees intent to change sex. When interviewing a potential employee its safe to assume the gender one is speaking with will remain as such. In this particular case I believe the court should have denied the suit stating the job offer was under the premise that the individual was male and would remain so. Call it discrimination but transgender isn’t the real thing no matter how it dresses.
November 26th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I don’t quite know what transgender is. Will this process include his needing time off for a sex change operation? That would be my number one concern. I wouldn’t want to hire anyone that told me they would soon be having a major surgery. I would ask them to reapply for the position after they were released to come back to work.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:45 am
I agree with Nomi. You hire someone because there is work for them. If someone needs time off for a completely elective surgery they should tell the employer before accepting the position.
We have recently been hiring more men for positions that have traditionally been held by women in our company. I think it’s a great thing. Gender doesn’t matter. The time off does.
December 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am
At one time, I worked for a high end retailer, who will remain nameless, in HR. I was not the recruiter or hiring manager but a previous employee who had the transgender surgery was the perfect candidate for the job. She knew the business and presented herself (formerly himself) as a polished professional. The department manager didn’t hire her based on the transgender issue. The team in HR was saddened and not savvy enough to understand this difficult issue. We, as a company, treated this individual unfairly.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:29 am
If the person is the best qualified candidate then they should be hired and time off should be handled through the company’s time off policies, period. Who knows they might end up being the best employee ever hired. I hear some of the same bias showing through in these comments from HR professionals which saddens me…