Search form

Department of Justice Releases Memorandum Restricting Transgender Worker Protection under Title VII

By Michelle E. Phillips and Mariah H. McGrogan
  • October 5, 2017

On October 4, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed the Department of Justice’s position that gender identity is protected as part of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against sex discrimination — taking a position that is contrary to current guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

In a memorandum released to all U.S. Attorneys (“Revised Treatment of Transgender Employment Discrimination Claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964”), Sessions stated that “… Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on gender identity, per se,” expressly reversing the position taken by former Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama Administration. Accordingly, the Department will take the position that gender identity is not covered under Title VII in all pending and future matters, except where controlling lower-court precedent dictates otherwise. In these scenarios, Sessions instructs that the issues should be preserved for potential further review.

The memorandum leaves significant questions regarding how transgender and other gender non-conforming individuals are covered by Title VII. While it acknowledges that Title VII bars sex stereotypes, the memorandum stated, “Title VII is not properly construed to proscribe employment practices (such as sex-specific bathrooms) that take account of the sex of the employee but do not impose different burdens on similarly situated members of each sex.” Under this language, it is possible that transgender and gender non-conforming individuals would be protected from discrimination, but an employer would not be obligated to provide accommodations for their gender identity (such as allowing an individual to use the bathroom or locker room consistent with their gender identity).

The EEOC

Moreover, the EEOC is primarily responsible for enforcing Title VII. The Department’s position is contrary to the current guidance from the EEOC, which has stated definitively that it interprets, and will enforce accordingly, Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination as encompassing employment discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. (See our article, EEOC: Title VII Prohibits Employment Discrimination Based on Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation.) At present, this position remains unchanged, although the EEOC has stated that it is reviewing the Department’s memorandum.

Best Practices

Claims asserting Title VII violations on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation have grown exponentially in recent years. According to the EEOC’s statistics, the agency received 1,768 charges in 2016 that alleged sex discrimination related to sexual orientation and/or gender identity/transgender status. This represented an increase from 1,412 charges filed in 2015, and 1,100 in 2014.

These numbers are not likely to decrease any time soon. While the EEOC’s position remains unchanged on the coverage of gender identity under Title VII, it is important that employers continue to update and maintain policies that include gender identity/expression and sexual orientation as protected groups. It is equally important to train and educate the workforce, particularly Human Resource professionals and front-line supervisors, on how to lead by example and prevent any forms of harassment based on gender identity/expression and sexual orientation.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, as well as the EEOC, mandates that employers allow transgender employees to use the bathroom that corresponds to that employee’s gender identity. Employers may choose to offer a single-stall, separate bathroom facility to all employees, including those individuals who identify as transgender or are in the process of transitioning. However, employers may not mandate that transgender employees use separate bathroom facilities.

Additionally, gender identity is included as a protected class under 19 state and several hundred local anti-discrimination laws. The Department of Justice’s position leaves these laws unchanged.

Please contact your Jackson Lewis attorney to discuss these developments and what they mean for your organization.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

October 17, 2017

Governor Brown Has Signed 'Ban the Box' Legislation into Law for California

October 17, 2017

Effective January 1, 2018, California will be the next jurisdiction to implement statewide “ban the box” legislation.  On October 14, 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Assembly Bill 1008, which prohibits pre-offer inquiries regarding applicants’ conviction histories and regulates employers in their decisions to deny... Read More

October 4, 2017

Retail Industry Workplace Law Update – Fall 2017

October 4, 2017

Oregon Enacts Scheduling Legislation Oregon has become the first U.S. state to regulate employer scheduling practices in the retail, food service, and hospitality industries. Read full article… States Strengthen Protections for Pregnant Workers Employers should plan to comply with changes to Connecticut, Massachusetts, and... Read More

September 27, 2017

Supreme Court Preview: 2017-2018 Term

September 27, 2017

The U.S. Supreme Court will begin its 2017-2018 Term with no shortage of cases significant to employers and businesses. Cases to watch involve questions about employment arbitration agreements, Dodd-Frank Act’s protections of internal whistleblowers, and state laws barring discrimination against LGBTQ people. Arbitration Agreements... Read More