“Leaving the language as it is could result in devastating consequences for transgender and queer lives.”
Historically, LGBTQ+ Americans have not been given the same opportunities in the workforce as their cisgender and heterosexual counterparts. Currently, no federal law exists that protects queer Americans from discrimination in the workplace on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. If given the opportunity to ask a presidential candidate a single question, I’d ask the following: how do you plan to revise Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be inclusive and protective of LGBTQ+ workers?
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that was implemented to protect the workplace rights of disenfranchised African Americans and women. The law states, “It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer… to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (“Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Know Your Rights”). Despite all of this, sexual orientation and gender identity are nowhere to be found among the list. It is because of this that 46% of LGBTQ+ workers report that they are still closeted in the workplace, with 17% of workers saying that concealing their sexual orientation is exhausting, and 13% saying the same about their gender identity (“Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Workplace Issues: Quick Take”). According to Katherine Turk of The Washington Post, 48 members of Congress and 15 state attorney generals believe that “the concepts of ‘sex,’ ‘sexual orientation,’ and ‘gender identity’” have different, more ambiguous meanings, than they did in 1964. Turk goes on to mention that, “[Title VII] was open to so many different interpretations because sex could be defined in many ways: as a matter of innate biology, of sexual desire, and of rigid sex roles” (Turk, “The Supreme Court must extend the Civil Rights Act’s protections to LGBTQ employees”).
The importance of the “sex clause” of Title VII became clearer upon the institution of the EEOC, or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which was put in place to regulate Title VII. Within the first two years, the EEOC was slated with over 4,000 discrimination complaints under the umbrella of the sex provision in the Civil Rights Act. That number rose to 81,000 complaints in just 4 years since the EEOC’s implementation. The inconsistencies in how “sex” is defined in terms of the Civil Rights Act have caused many people to take their cases to court. As Turk articulated it, “workers and activists [seize] upon the ambiguities to demand and win protections that respect how sex discrimination means different things to differently situated workers” (Turk, “The Supreme Court must extend the Civil Rights Act’s protections to LGBTQ employees”). This influx of discrimination cases to the EEOC proves that the word “sex” in Title VII could easily be interpreted to “protect LGBTQ+ Americans without distorting the intent of Congress” (Turk, “The Supreme Court must extend the Civil Rights Act’s protections to LGBTQ employees”).
The safety of LGBTQ+ people in the workplace hangs in the balance if the ambiguities of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not cleared up. There are two ways to go about this issue: the Supreme Court may broaden their interpretation of Title VII to include LGBTQ+ workers, or the future President can properly adjust the language to ensure that no ambiguities are left to interpretation. According to Catalyst, 20% of LGBTQ+ workers have been discriminated against when applying for jobs on the basis of sexual discrimination or gender identity. This number continues to rise with homophobic and transphobic politicians blocking pro-LGBTQ+ interpretations of Title VII. Leaving the language as it is could result in devastating consequences for transgender and queer lives.
Works Cited
“Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Workplace Issues: Quick Take.” Catalyst , 17 June 2019, www.catalyst.org/research/lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-workplace-issues/.
“Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Know Your Rights.” American Association of University Women , AAUW, www.aauw.org/what-we-do/legal-resources/know-your-rights-at-work/title-vii/.
Turk, Katherine. “Perspective | The Supreme Court Must Extend the Civil Rights Act’s Protections to LGBTQ Employees.” The Washington Post , WP Company, 9 Oct. 2019, www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/10/08/supreme-court-must-extend-civil-rights-a cts-protections-lgbtq-employees/.