The Employment Non Discrimination Act

Since the beginning of their existence and in today’s society, the community of LGBT workers are not being treated fairly or getting their fair share that they deserve in the workplace. They are victims to high rates of workplace discrimination. Instead of being judged as workers and what they bring to their jobs and how they work, they are being judged by their sexual preferences and appearance. Being a gay or transgender worker causes them to be mistreated, not judged for the actual workers they are, and most importantly, halts a majority of them in better career and job opportunities. Although under federal law it is illegal to fire someone who is either gay or transgender, they are still either being denied employment or being terminated from their jobs because of their gender category or sexual orientation.

Employment Law helps to govern the relationships between the employee and the employer with relations to guidelines.

The Eros Lodge and the Eros Bar and Grill, under the scope of the law, are directly involved in interstate commerce. They are a public hotel and restaurant and open to both local citizens and citizens traveling from out of state. While their clientele may consist primarily of locals, it does not mean that out-of-state travels cannot or would not stay there. Mr. Bates, the owner, did not say he didn’t rent to travelers from out of state, he only said he wouldn’t rent to same-sex couples. However, since interstate commerce is defined as travel, trade, traffic, transportation, or communication among several states, his establishments fall under its domain – and therefore have no right to be excluded from the Equal Access Act. Discriminating against

Former president of the United States, Obama, approved an executive mandate banning the discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity of federal employees from the governments' contractors. Additionally, The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, declared, safeguarding employees on the bases of sex, must also involve the comprehension of the embodiment for the protection of transgender people. However, the association, not recognized by the Court of the United States, have not granted their declared protections in a consistent manner across the nation, producing in an absence of the given freedoms for the working LGBTQ community (Beyond Marriage Equality: A Blueprint for Federal Non-Discrimination Protections,

In this essay I am going to explain how the Equality Act (2010) P4 and assess how the act promotes anti-discriminatory practice M2. I will also be evaluating how successful the Equality Act (2010) is in promoting anti-discriminatory practise.D1

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of “race, color, sex, religion, and national origin” (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, & Langvardt, 2012, p. 24). This law also includes discrimination due to sexual orientation. This was not addressed in the original law, but sexual orientation cases have been won under this law. Such is the case of, Heller v Columbia Edgewater Country Club, 195 F. Supp. 2d 1212 (D. Or. 2002) (Joslin, n.d.). This lawsuit was due to a lesbian 's employer used derogatory comments, toward her, in which the court ruled in her favor. Kate 's allegation of discrimination if proved, can be filed with the company 's Human Resource department. If that does not resolve the issue, she can file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Sexual harassment is considered to be a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which applies to all U.S. employers with 15 or more employees (some state laws may provide additional worker protections). Anyone affected by the offensive conduct in question, not just the person to whom it is directed, may be a victim.

This bill allows Christians to do all the discriminating. For example: Say a friend you know is a baker. If baking a cake is a violation of your religious beliefs, then why did he become a baker. Your friend baking this cake has nothing to do with the gay wedding. The cake is being made for an event no matter what the cake is for. Your friend who is the baker is not attending, approving, or have anything to do with the wedding. The argument is absurd!

The bill is controversial. Supporters said that faith-based agencies should be protected from facing penalty for adhering to their faith tenets, such as by refusing to place children in certain potential foster families, or placing children in religious schools. Opponents argued this bill would give religious agencies the license to discriminate against individuals such as those in the LGBT community.

Title VII of the Civils Rights Act of 1964 is a U.S. federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. Title V11 applies to private and public universities, local, state and federal governments, labor organizations and employment agencies. Today, the conversation surrounding discrimination has increasingly been based on race and gender and has emerged as an issues that many employers are trying to address in workforce development. Unfortunately, there are other groups that have similar attention or protection under U.S. laws and if so, they are still facing discrimination. LGBT employees are a group that has received minimal attention when it

The Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling essentially ensures that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 applies to closely-held corporations; in this case, the corporation in question is owned and operated by a single family. (The RFRA was an act passed by Congress in 1993 to protect religious values (244); however, due to it being a direct alteration of the First Amendment (197), the Supreme Court decided to partially remove the RFRA, keeping federal rights of protection.) The owners of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. argued that the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act “imposes a substantial burden on religious exercise”, which is in direct contradiction with the RFRA; their defiance of the ACA would have netted them as much as half a billion dollars per year in fines and penalties.

In 1964 the Civil Rights Act Title VII was passed. This law prohibited employers from discriminating in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin (AAUW, 2016). The Act enforces that it is the obligation of the employer utilize reasonable accommodation for the religious practices of employees after the informs what his or her particular religious needs. The employer has a right to refuse a specific need if an undue hardship can be proven (LLI, 1992).

We believe that our opposing team makes good points about the Fair Work Act being about compliance however my partner and I firmly believe that the Fair Work Act does not only involve compliance but goes above and beyond to include cooperation and cooperation mechanisms between employers and employees. It is this concept that we will be trying to defend today, as we refer to several of the Fair Work Act policies to support our argument.

This act is much like the ADA, the only difference is that the Rehabilitation Act is that it focuses on the federal government. “The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was the first “rights” legislation to prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities. However, this law applied to programs conducted by Federal agencies, those receiving federal funds, such as colleges participating in federal student loan programs, Federal employment, and employment practices of businesses with federal contracts” (The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 2011). Section 501 demands affirmative action and bans discrimination in employment by Federal agencies. Section 505 includes steps managing solutions and attorney's expenditures under Section 501 (The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 2011).

M. V. Lee Badgett mentions in his article “What Obama Should Do About Workplace Discrimination,” that this would make a great first step on what concerns banning workplace discrimination against homosexuals by federal contractors. If the government, the structural system of our country, is not only willing to accept all but pose as a model of approval towards all kinds of sexual orientations, then so should we, the people, who make part of the nation. Discrimination against this group of people is unfortunate, but extremely common nowadays; more and more individuals are being harassed, not compensated with adequate wages, and/or fired from their jobs because of the way they sexually identify themselves. This strikes a fear in gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees who feel as though they must produce more than the average worker in order to not be affected or expelled from their jobs, often leading them to not take illness days off, vacations, and to perhaps be more productive than the majority of their colleagues. Badgett explains that by issuing an executive order against workplace discrimination, President Obama will be able to gradually bring back equality to the nation, providing parallel opportunities for all and reducing stress, fear, as well as death and unemployment rates in the gay community.