Union, New Jersey, Legal Blog

There is a long history of the battle between workers and employers in establishing basic rights and protections for employees. While an individual has little power against a company, the basis of most laws focuses on protecting a class of workers from discriminatory actions in hiring practices as well as treatment in the workplace. For instance, one of the earliest efforts involved child labor in the early part of the 20th century. Although New Jersey and many other states have laws protecting the LGBTQ community, the issue is on the October slate of cases for the Supreme Court to decide.

Historically, employment discrimination cases have been pursued primarily under federal law. One of the seminal pieces of legislation in that regard is the Civil Rights Act's Title VII, which prohibits employment discrimination due to 'race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." Legal experts point out that, previously, under the Obama administration, the government's position was that LGBTQ discrimination was covered under Title VII as a form of sex discrimination.

LGBT workers continue to face discrimination on the job in New Jersey, even when they are in high-powered and highly compensated positions. For example, one former Goldman Sachs banker is suing the Wall Street firm after being fired. A leader in the company's LGBT network, the man says that he was fired in retaliation for his claims about discriminatory treatment and homophobia in the workplace. The lawsuit accuses the investment bank of paying "lip service" to diversity and LGBT equality while discrimination continues in practice on the job.

The openly gay former banker said that he received positive performance reviews and continuing promotions for eight years at the bank, a positive trajectory that slowed and stopped when he complained about workplace discrimination based on his sexual orientation. He says that he was subject to retaliation for complaining to the company's employee relations team about a number of incidents in the workplace. For example, he says that he was excluded from a key conference call with a client because a supervisor said that he "sounded too gay." He said that shortly after this report, he received a negative performance evaluation that was unwarranted and unexpected, followed thereafter by his termination from the job.

Older New Jersey employees who are concerned about workplace age discrimination should be aware of a proposed law that would make it easier to pursue monetary damages in the event of wrongful termination or demotion. POWADA, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, is a proposed law that seeks to make it less complicated to show that an employer committed age discrimination. Since a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2009 that sided heavily with employers, it has been more difficult for victims of age discrimination to successfully seek damages.

The Supreme Court's decision changed the law so that an employee who was discriminated against has to show that age was the only reason why they were fired or demoted. It is relatively easy for an employer to argue that they would have fired the employee anyway. Under POWADA, employers would not be able to easily argue their way out of a wrongful termination suit.

LGBT workers in New Jersey may be intrigued to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in several key cases concerning protections for workers against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The high court will hear three cases from Michigan, Georgia, and New York in which workers sued the companies that fired them; they allege that they were discriminated against for being LGBT. Two men, including a government employee and a skydiving instructor, said they were fired because they were gay. A transgender woman said she lost her job at a funeral home after she announced her transition.

The cases have moved to federal appeals courts, where several have found that LGBT workers are protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans sex discrimination. Appeals courts in New York and Chicago have found that gays and lesbians are protected under this provision, and a court in Cincinnati has done the same for transgender workers. However, another federal appeals court in Atlanta has ruled that the provision does not apply to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.