WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION – employeerightsnews.com

Workplace discrimination Dave Ramsey’s ‘righteous living’: Inside the conflict over religion and sexuality at Ramsey Solutions

Employnews — Wed, 28 Dec 2022 07:03:30 +0000

Workplace discrimination

This content is only available to USA TODAY subscribers.

Access all subscriber-only stories

One month for free

Your subscription includes access to:

Exclusive, subscriber-only content and weekly email newsletters.

Our most popular newsletter, Daily Briefing, to keep you updated on the day’s top stories.

Full access on your desktop, tablet and mobile device.

The eNewspaper, a digital replica of the print edition.

Original reporting that provides diverse perspectives on news and issues of today.

We know you have many choices and appreciate you investing in us and the future of journalism.

Employee rights workplace bully workplace discrimination workplace retaliation fmla flsa americans with disabilities act amendment act employee termination employment discharge sexual harassment workplace violence workplace safety Whistleblowers reveal pattern of sexual harassment, sexual misconduct at FBI: ‘Sounds like Sodom and

Employnews — Wed, 02 Nov 2022 15:40:37 +0000

Employee rights workplace bully workplace discrimination workplace retaliation fmla flsa americans with disabilities act amendment act employee termination employment discharge sexual harassment workplace violence workplace safety

A hostile work environment of sexual harassment and retaliation against female agents who complain about it have persisted at the FBI for more than a year after FBI Director Christopher A. Wray pledged to fix the problem, according to several whistleblowers.

The latest complaints turned up the heat on Mr. Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland. Lawmakers began scrutinizing them after whistleblowers unleashed a flood of accusations that the FBI had politicized investigations and its leadership had turned a blind eye to widespread misconduct at field offices.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, blasted Mr. Wray and Mr. Garland for failing to hold accountable senior FBI officials accused of sexual harassment and other sexual misconduct.

“Lawful, protected whistleblower disclosures provided to my office include allegations and records that show hundreds of FBI employees have retired or resigned because of sexual misconduct allegations against them and that they did so in order to avoid accountability,” Mr. Grassley said in a letter Wednesday. “The allegations and records paint a disgraceful picture of abuse that women within the FBI have had to live with for many years. This abuse and misconduct is outrageous and beyond unacceptable.”

Mr. Grassley fumed about the reports of unchecked sexual harassment at the nation’s top law enforcement agency.

“If the Justice Department and FBI can’t ensure the equal application of the law within its own ranks, how can they be trusted to apply the law equally against the American people? Further, the 2022 Justice Department document notes that Director Wray and Deputy Director [Paul] Abbate have not aggressively moved to solve the sexual misconduct problems at the FBI,” he wrote.

According to an FBI whistleblower disclosure sent to the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Wray and Mr. Abbate allowed FBI executives and senior managers accused of sexual misconduct to remain in their positions and refused to take action against them or delayed action for years.

The whistleblower’s attorney briefed The Washington Times on the details of the disclosure.

“Mr. Wray and Mr. Abbate should have immediately taken both performance measures and administrative misconduct measures against executives involved in sexual misconduct while working,” the lawyer said. “Instead, Mr. Wray and Mr. Abbate have allowed other executives to continue their misconduct and/or retaliate against victims and witnesses, while the subordinate employees have no immediate recourse to stop the offenders. Mr. Wray’s and Mr. Abbate’s refusal to act and protect their female employees has threatened the health and safety of the women in the FBI.”

The FBI employee, who is willing to testify before Congress, requested that lawmakers mandate that the FBI release the names of Senior Executive Service members found to have committed sexual misconduct including harassment, assault or inappropriate touching.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the whistleblower charges is that similar accusations more than a year ago did not result in a change in the culture at the FBI.

The bureau was scrutinized in June 2021 after an Associated Press investigation revealed a series of sexual assault and harassment accusations against senior officials who were allowed to “quietly avoid discipline and retire or transfer even after the claims were substantiated.”

Earlier last year, the FBI settled a harassment, discrimination and retaliation lawsuit by a high-ranking woman serving as an FBI agent. Her attorney said the FBI agreed to pay more than $1.2 million, which included $1 million for attorneys’ fees and costs based on three years of litigation.

Mr. Abbate told AP that the agency would not put up with sexual misconduct by its personnel and that those who do so should be scared because “we’re coming for them.”

“That’s a strong approach, a forceful shift, and we mean it. And it’s coming from the top,” Mr. Abbate said. “Individuals who engage in this type of misconduct don’t belong in the FBI, and they certainly should not have supervisory oversight of others. Period.”

FBI officials touted a 24-hour tip line to report abuse and a working group of senior executives to review policies and protocols on harassment and victim support and more immediate action to investigate accusations and terminate or at least demote employees who have engaged in misconduct. Officials also claimed to have extended the bureau’s victim services division to support employees who were victims of internal misconduct.

An FBI whistleblower disclosure this year shows the hotline is nonexistent.

According to the disclosure, a female FBI employee said her call to the hotline was answered by the FBI headquarters Strategic Information & Operations Center. “The operator had never heard about any special FBI sexual harassment hotline,” she said.

Another female FBI agent said in a disclosure to Congress that she was sexually harassed by a boss.

“This ASAC routinely telephoned the female employee after 8 pm and forced the female agent to talk with him, referring to her as ‘baby doll.’”

In a statement to The Times, the FBI said: “FBI employees — regardless of rank or title — are expected to foster a workplace that’s respectful, professional, and free from offensive, inappropriate, or harassing behavior. We are committed to ensuring allegations of misconduct are thoroughly reviewed, that full investigations are initiated where appropriate, and that we take swift and appropriate actions — including, where warranted, immediate reassignment of those in supervisory positions during investigation and adjudication.”

The FBI statement continued: “Due process and fair investigation are important. But we won’t hesitate to impose severe sanctions where misconduct is substantiated, including revocation of security clearances and dismissal from duty.”

Lawmakers were shocked by the hostile work environment for women at the FBI despite Mr. Wray’s pledge of reform.

“It sounds like Sodom and Gomorrah up there,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

Workplace discrimination Southwest pilot sues after coworker exposed himself, watched pornography during flight

Employnews — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 19:10:43 +0000

Workplace discrimination

A Southwest Airlines pilot is suing the airline, her union and a former co-worker who pleaded guilty over a 2020 incident in which he exposed his genitals and watched pornography during a flight.

Christine Janning alleges in the lawsuit that the airline retaliated against her after she reported the former pilot, Michael Haak, to the company and the FBI. She claims that the airline kept her grounded and that the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association conspired with Southwest Airlines and did not support her after the incident.

Janning is suing Haak on accusations of sexual assault. He pleaded guilty to intentionally committing a lewd, indecent or obscene act and was sentenced to probation and a $5,000 fine. Haak admitted at the time that after a flight from Philadelphia to Orlando, Florida, reached its cruising altitude, Haak got out of the pilot’s seat, disrobed and watched pornography on a laptop, according to a news release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District of Maryland.

Janning filed the lawsuit last week in Orange County, Florida. Court documents say Janning alleges that Haak said there was “something” he wanted to do on the flight before retiring, then bolted the door of the cockpit, exposed himself and watched pornography. Janning alleges Haak took several photos and videos of himself and encouraged her to also take photos, which she did “in order to create a record.”

Travel: United Airlines to stop service at JFK airport temporarily, starting in late October

Arrest made at gate: Unruly passenger sucker punches AA flight attendant

Haak’s attorney, Michael Salnick, told USA TODAY that Janning asked Haak if there was something he wanted to do before he retired, “and that’s how he ended up flying naked.” At his sentencing hearing last year, Haak called the incident “a consensual prank.”

Janning accused Haak of masturbating after exposing himself. Salnick denied the accusation.

Among other allegations, Janning also claimed that after reporting the incident in November 2020, she was told that because Haak had retired, Southwest’s investigation was closed. She then went to the FBI, which charged the former pilot.

Janning said she was grounded for more than three months, which cost her a portion of her salary. She said she also was required to take “unnecessary” training before working again.

She also claimed that her union, the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, did not advocate on her behalf, though its leaders did write a letter to Haak’s judge that said he had a “spotless” record.

USA TODAY has reached out to the union for comment. Southwest Airlines, in a statement to USA TODAY, said that “Southwest Airlines takes all matters related to workplace conduct very seriously, with a well-defined policy and process for harassment, sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation claims.”

“Our corporate Culture is built upon treating others with mutual respect and dignity, and we plan to vigorously defend against allegations made in this recent complaint.”

Contributing: The Associated Press

Workplace discrimination Facing workplace discrimination? EEOC might put you on its low-priority list from Day 1.

Employnews — Tue, 05 Oct 2021 14:23:18 +0000

Workplace discrimination

This content is only available to USA TODAY subscribers.

Subscribe for as low as $4.99 per month.

Your subscription includes access to:

Exclusive, subscriber-only content and weekly email newsletters.

Our most popular newsletter, Daily Briefing, to keep you updated on the day’s top stories.

Full access on your desktop, tablet and mobile device.

The eNewspaper, a digital replica of the print edition.

Original reporting that provides diverse perspectives on news and issues of today.

We know you have many choices and appreciate you investing in us and the future of journalism.

This content is only available to USA TODAY subscribers.

Subscribe for as low as $4.99 per month.

Your subscription includes access to:

Exclusive, subscriber-only content and weekly email newsletters.

Our most popular newsletter, Daily Briefing, to keep you updated on the day’s top stories.

Full access on your desktop, tablet and mobile device.

The eNewspaper, a digital replica of the print edition.

Original reporting that provides diverse perspectives on news and issues of today.

We know you have many choices and appreciate you investing in us and the future of journalism.

Workplace discrimination Trump says he moved to end racial sensitivity training in federal agencies ‘because it’s racist’

Employnews — Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:18:21 +0000

Workplace discrimination

In an election year like no other, the first debate between President Donald Trump and his Democratic challenger, Joe Biden, could be a pivotal moment in a race that has remained stubbornly unchanged in the face of historic tumult. (Sept. 29)

AP Domestic

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump said at Tuesday’s first presidential debate that he moved to end racial sensitivity training that addresses white privilege and critical race theory at federal agencies because “it’s racist.”

Trump’s administration moved to halt employee training at federal agencies on topics that include “white privilege” and “critical race theory” earlier this month.

“I ended it because a lot of people were complaining that they were asked to do things that were absolutely insane, that it was a radical revolution that was taking place in our military, in our schools all over the place,” Trump said during the first presidential debate Tuesday night.

The president claimed racial sensitivity training taught people to “hate our country.”

Presidential debate live: Chris Wallace tells Trump to stop interrupting Biden, repeatedly

Biden: ‘I’ve benefited’ from being white, offers stark contrast to Trump on race

“We have to go back to the core values of this country. They were teaching people that our country is a horrible place, it’s a racist place, and they were teaching people to hate our country, and I’m not gonna allow that,” he said.

— Bloomberg (@business) September 30, 2020

Former Vice President Joe Biden shot back that racial insensitivity training helped to make people aware of what’s demeaning to others.

“It’s a little bit like how this guy and his friends looked down on so many people, they look down their nose on people like Irish Catholics like me and grew up in Scranton and looked down on people who don’t have money,” Biden said. “They look down on people who are of a different faith, they look down on people who are (a) different color.”

More: Trump executive order on diversity training roils corporate America

“He’s the racist,” Biden also said of Trump during a back-and-forth over Trump’s decision to expand the ban on racial sensitivity training to federal contractors.

Trump’s Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping targets workplace training that is “rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country.”

It instructs corporations to halt any training “that inculcates in its employees any form of race or sex stereotyping or any form of race or sex scapegoating” or risk having their government contracts canceled.

Corporate anti-racism initiatives have surged following the deaths of George Floyd and other African Americans who have died this year at the hands of police.

‘Will you shut up, man?‘: Testy exchanges on health care, Supreme Court among debate top moments

Floyd, a black man, died in Minneapolis police custody after a white officer pinned him to the ground under his knee. His death sparked demonstrations against police brutality and racial discrimination in cities across the United States.

The president’s decision to expand the ban on anti-racism training to federal contractors is fueling fears the White House order will deal a crippling setback to corporate efforts to increase workplace equality and address race and gender disparities.

Contributing: Maureen Groppe, Jessica Guynn

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/09/29/presidential-debate-trump-claims-he-moved-end-racial-sensitivity-training-federal-agencies-because-i/3583361001/

Workplace discrimination George Floyd and corporate America: 34 companies to release government workforce diversity data

Employnews — Wed, 30 Sep 2020 02:14:41 +0000

Workplace discrimination

Jessica Guynn, USA TODAY
Published 1:34 p.m. ET Sept. 29, 2020 | Updated 1:43 p.m. ET Sept. 29, 2020

Companies across the country have been speaking out against racism, but less than 2% of top executives at 50 largest companies are Black.

USA TODAY

Nearly three dozen major U.S. companies including Amazon, General Motors, Target and Wells Fargo have agreed to share the diversity reports they file each year with the federal government.

The disclosures from 34 Standard & Poor’s 100 companies are the result of a campaign by New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer following the killing of George Floyd, a Black man who died under the knee of a white policeman in Minneapolis.

“By publicly disclosing the demographics of employees by race, gender, and ethnicity – including leadership roles and senior management – these companies will provide crucial information for shareowners to better understand diversity and workforce practices – and identify areas for growth,” Stringer, who advises the city’s public retirement funds, said in a statement.

Some companies including BlackRock, Chevron, Target and Verizon have begun releasing the reports.

George Floyd and corporations: Why are there still so few Black executives in America?

‘Un-American’? Trump executive order on diversity training roils corporate America

George Floyd protests lead to reckoning: Black employees speak out on racism and discrimination in the workplace

News organizations including USA TODAY have fought for the disclosure of this demographic information. Only in recent years have some of the nation’s top companies opened up about the persistent lack of diversity in their ranks, particularly at the highest levels.

The EEO-1 report, which provides a breakdown by race and gender in 10 job categories, is the “gold standard” for diversity disclosure, Stringer said.

A USA TODAY analysis showed that, while corporations and boardrooms have added African Americans over the decades, the executive suite has not, even at companies that have diverse boards.

USA TODAY reviewed the most recent proxy statements for the 50 largest companies in the Standard & Poor’s 100 as of July 15, including some of the world’s most influential consumer brands such as Apple and Facebook.

Nearly all – 48 – issued statements in support of the Black community following Floyd’s death May 25, an unprecedented outpouring after decades of corporate silence.

Yet corporate America’s top ranks look nothing like the country they serve. Of the 279 top executives listed in the proxy statements, only five, or 1.8%, were Black, including two who recently retired.

Many of these megacompanies are still led by all-white executives in the top five slots listed on proxy statements – the CEO, the chief financial officer and three other top-paid executives. In some cases, companies also list other top-paid officers who recently left. In all 279 listed executives appear on the 50 proxy statements examined by USA TODAY.

EEO-1 reports shed light on stubborn patterns of exclusion and discrimination. Any company with 100 or more employees as well as some federal contractors are required to submit the report to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Raw data offers “standardized, quantitative, relevant and comparable employment data across companies and industries,” Stringer’s announcement said. “Disclosing only percentage representations prohibits meaningful, year-over-year comparisons.”

Target’s report, for example, shows that 40 of its 777 executive or senior level employees were Black or 5.1% and 50 were Hispanic or Latino or 6.4%. At Chevron, 32 out of 971 executive or senior level employees were Black or 3.3% and 60 were Hispanic or Latino or about 6.2%.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/09/29/amazon-target-chevron-wells-fargo-diversity-workforce-data-eeo-1/3574530001/

Workplace discrimination New survey: 65% doubt Hollywood’s sexual harassers will be held accountable; only 23% report misconduct

Employnews — Tue, 29 Sep 2020 21:18:29 +0000

Workplace discrimination

Rasha Ali, USA TODAY
Published 2:05 p.m. ET Sept. 29, 2020 | Updated 2:10 p.m. ET Sept. 29, 2020

Documentary “On the Record” explores heavy burden on women of color. (May 26)

AP Entertainment

Three years after Harvey Weinstein’s sexual assault scandal launched the #MeToo movement, most workers in Hollywood say harassers still aren’t being held accountable and they need a better way to report sexual misconduct in the workplace.

A new survey from The Hollywood Commission released Tuesday that found 65% of respondents said they didn’t believe someone in power (for example, a producer or director) would be held accountable for harassing someone with less authority. Women (28%) were less likely than men (45%) to believe harassers would be held accountable, and white (36%) and Black respondents (34%) had a more favorable view of accountability than Hispanic or Latin workers (29%).

Only 23% of workers in Hollywood said they had reported harassing behavior to a supervisor; only 9% had reported such behavior to human resources departments and 4% to legal departments. However, more than 90% requested accountability resources.

The Hollywood Commission surveyed almost 10,000 women and men working or who have sought work in the entertainment industry.

“Things have improved, but not nearly enough,” Anita Hill, who chairs the commission, told The Associated Press. “People don’t believe their complaints will be taken seriously, they don’t believe that something will happen to people who are found to be harassers. And they DO believe there will be retaliation – whether you’re a victim or a bystander, there’s a belief you will be retaliated against if you complain.”

The 94% Project: USA TODAY’s sexual harassment in Hollywood survey, explained

In response to the survey, the Hollywood Commission is creating a platform where those who feel like they’ve experienced sexual harassment, misconduct, discrimination or bullying can report incidents anonymously. The platform, expected to launch in the first quarter of 2021, will allow people to report immediately or conditionally. A conditional report will notify the person if more people launch a complaint against the same aggressor and give them the option of releasing their identity and becoming involved in an investigation.

“We had to step in and do something,” Hill said of the new initiatives. “We had an obligation to respond.”

Hill, a professor of social policy and gender studies at Brandeis University, said there are factors unique to the entertainment industry that make sexual harassment particularly hard to combat.

For one thing, it’s a highly transient work force. “People are moving around from system to system” or production to production, she said. “There are very limited structures for reporting … and there are no structures for sharing information.”

#MeToo: New survey casts a wide net to quantify Hollywood harassment culture

She noted the system is by nature hierarchical. “Everything is based on who you know, and who can vouch for you,” Hill said. “If you’ve got a powerful person that you’ve worked with and … they spread rumors or denigrate your work, it can have a powerful effect, and people know that.”

The Hollywood Commission was formed in late 2017, shortly after the allegations against Weinstein rocked the industry and forced a reckoning with sexual misconduct in the workplace. Hill, a prominent voice against sexual harassment ever since her 1991 accusations against then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, was named head of the group.

Contributing: The Associated Press

Harvey Weinstein: Court rules the movie mogul had ‘coercive power’ over Ashley Judd, she can sue for sexual harassment

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Last Slide Next Slide

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2020/09/29/anita-hill-hollywood-commission-unveil-sexual-harassment-survey-reporting-platform/3573640001

Workplace discrimination Ruth Bader Ginsburg becomes first woman to lie in state: 8 other strides she made for women

Employnews — Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:15:04 +0000

Workplace discrimination

Three of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s most lasting legacies in the fight for equality

Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked to advance equal rights for women long before she was on the Supreme Court. Here are three of her most lasting legacies.

USA TODAY

Even in death, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is making history for women.

The Supreme Court associate justice, a driving force for gender equality in the United States who died last week at age 87, will be the first woman to lie in state Friday in the the U.S. Capitol. Thirty-four men have been so honored since 1852.

The honor comes after Ginsburg lay in repose at the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday and Thursday, a final visit to the high court she served for 27 years.

During those decades, Ginsburg helped act as a voice for women – and men – in countless ways, from education to workplace discrimination and health care.

She famously co-founded the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU as a lawyer, and brought and argued the cases that led the high court to affirm protections against gender discrimination.

Though it would be impossible to list every triumph that Ginsburg helped achieve, we’re looking back to trace some of the impact she’s had on women’s lives in America.

Here are just some of the contributions she made for women, both on a legal and personal level.

In the 1996 United States v. Virginia case, Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion that it is unconstitutional for schools funded by taxpayer dollars to bar women.

“There is no reason to believe that the admission of women capable of all the activities required of (Virginia Military Institute) cadets would destroy the institute rather than enhance its capacity to serve the ‘more perfect union,’ ” Ginsburg wrote.

Speaking to USA TODAY, women’s rights attorney Gloria Allred described Ginsburg’s opinion in the case as “groundbreaking.”

“She was clear that state-sponsored educational institutions could not exclude women on account of their gender,” Allred explained.

Ginsburg paved the way for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which passed in 1974 and allowed women to apply for credit cards and mortgages without a male co-signer.

Naomi Mezey, law professor and co-founder of the Gender+ Justice Initiative at Georgetown University, told USA TODAY that Ginsburg’s work surrounding women’s financial independence laid a base for further issues of equality and independence.

Athia Hardt, a former Arizona Republic reporter and current consultant with Hardt and Associates, told USA TODAY about her personal experience with a bank telling her she could no longer have her account in her name after she married, but instead needed to be under “Mrs. Charles Case.”

“I said, ‘I’m not taking his name,’ and they said, ‘That doesn’t matter,’ ” she recalled, saying she felt “both frustrated and angry at the system.”

In a post to her Facebook page following Ginsburg’s death, Hardt shared her story and encouraged other women to do the same as a way to “honor RBG with our memories of something we encountered before she changed the world.”

Gloria Feldt, author and former president of Planned Parenthood, was another woman to share her experience on the Facebook post.

“I had been employed full time for several years and was earning more than my ex. I went to buy a car and couldn’t get a loan without my husband’s signature,” she wrote. “That was my tipping point to feminist activism.”

In 2007, Ginsburg famously dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision on the pay discrimination case Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

“When she was in the minority, she was a powerful voice in dissent in ways that changed the game,” said Emily Martin, general counsel at the National Women’s Law Center in Washington. “For example, when five justices ruled against Lilly Ledbetter in her pay discrimination case, Justice Ginsburg’s call to action inspired the public and Congress to change the law and strengthen equal pay protections.”

She was a crucial vote on the current court to keep Roe v. Wade. Even though she had doubts about the way the monumental case was decided, she was in no doubt about women’s right to choose.

Randall Kessler, a family law and trial lawyer in Atlanta, says Ginsburg was an indispensable brick in the legal wall that has protected Roe v. Wade since the 1970s, and not just on the Supreme Court.

“Now she’s gone, it means pro-choice proponents are scared to death of the unknown,” Kessler says. “They believe (her death and replacement) will empower state legislatures to pass new laws or reintroduce those laws already struck down by the Supreme Court.”

In 1972, Ginsburg argued that excluding a pregnant woman from the Air Force, like in the case of Struck v. Secretary of Defense, is sex discrimination.

“It was standard 50 years ago for women to be fired from their jobs when they were pregnant,” Mezey explained. “(Ginsburg) herself hid her pregnancy while she was teaching at a law school in order not to be told that she couldn’t teach.”

But as a litigator and on the Supreme Court, Martin explained, Ginsburg changed “what was possible for women in the U.S.”

Mezey added that Ginsburg was able to identify and help address stereotypes, both positive and negative, that “nonetheless end up creating self-fulfilling prophecies of unequal distribution of work.”

“In her life – including as a daughter, a woman, a lawyer and a mother herself– she actually saw so much of what turned out to be profoundly unjust and unequal,” Mezey said.

During the 1979 case Duren v. Missouri, jury duty was optional for women in several states because it was viewed to be a burden for women whose role was seen as the “center of home and family life.” Ginsburg, who represented Billy Duren in the case, argued that women should serve on juries on the basis that they are valued the same as men.

In a 2009 interview with USA TODAY, Ginsburg upheld this notion, saying, “Women belong in all places where decisions are being made. … It shouldn’t be that women are the exception.”

The 2015 case Obergefell v. Hodges, which allowed queer women and the rest of the LGBTQ community the right to same-sex marriages in all 50 states, ended in a 5-4 ruling. Without Ginsburg, the outcome may have been different.

Imani Rupert-Gordon, the executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, told USA TODAY that Ginsburg’s impact on queer women spans far beyond just the issue of gay marriage.

“She really was responsible for helping us expand the concept of gender discrimination,” she said. “It’s those same types of principles that led to the intellectual foundation that would extend discrimination protections to other considerations like gender identity and sexual orientation, which is important in general but especially important to LGBTQ people.”

Mezey added that in Ginsburg’s gender advocacy, she “opened up space for protection of people on the basis of gender identity.”

More: Supreme Court grants federal job protections to gay, lesbian, transgender workers

Though Ginsburg left her mark on the legal world, she also had a lasting influence on women on an individual level by being an example of a powerful woman in her writing, speaking and work as a judge.

And Ginsburg’s impact on empowerment didn’t stop with her generation or the next – she’s continued to energize young women. Her rise as a pop culture icon has inspired books, movies and even Halloween costumes for young girls.

A child in a Supergirl costume pays respects as Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg lies in repose in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 23.

ALEX BRANDON, POOL

“That grief is about her, about people’s connection to her,” said Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the ACLU who heads its newly renamed Ruth Bader Ginsburg Center for Liberty. “I’m thinking about what an icon she became in the last 20 years – I own an RBG bracelet because someone sent it to me! I can’t think of any other justice who became a pop culture icon in that particular way.”

Hardt says Ginsburg’s legacy has also taught others to “continue to do the hard work.”

“She really kept going on the good fight for her whole life,” she said. “She really is a heroine.”

In an interview with USA TODAY in 2013, Ginsburg exemplified this ideal, insisting she would continue working even as others pressured her to step down as the oldest justice on the court.

“As long as I can do the job full-steam, I would like to stay here,” she said. “I have to take it year by year at my age, and who knows what could happen next year? Right now, I know I’m OK.”

Contributing: Richard Wolf; photo illustrations by Veronica Bravo

More: ‘I Dissent’: Six books to read about Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

‘RBG’: How Ruth Bader Ginsburg became a legit pop-culture icon

Workplace discrimination Women in President Donald Trump’s White House earn 69 cents for every $1 paid to male staffers

Employnews — Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:17:13 +0000

Workplace discrimination

During the Republican National Convention last month, the high-ranking women in President Donald Trump’s White House tried to make the case for his commitment to gender equality.

Outgoing adviser Kellyanne Conway called him “a champion for women.” Brooke Rollins, acting director of the Domestic Policy Council, said Trump has more women on his top team “than any president before.”

A video flashed through images of women who advise the president, including his daughter Ivanka and his daughter-in-law, Lara. A voiceover intoned, “President Trump has proven that when the stakes are highest, he is proud to entrust many of our nation’s most crucial jobs to women.”

The rhetoric belies the reality in the Trump White House, particularly when it comes to the gender pay gap, a measure of parity.

An analysis by The 19th of the 2020 median salaries in the Trump White House found a $33,300 chasm between the salary for male staffers ($106,000) and the salary for female staffers ($72,700).

Women make nearly 69 cents on the male $1 – worse than the national gender pay gap of 82 cents on the dollar.

The numbers reflect what economists call the “raw” gender pay gap, meaning they don’t adjust for experience, education, title or other factors. The national figure is also a reflection of the raw gender pay gap. Neither is a full representation of the entire picture, leaving out the complexities of occupational segregation and the challenges of access that plague women trying to move up to positions of leadership.

But stacked against each other, they do show a persisting pay gap between men and women. (The Trump administration does not appear to have any staffers who identify as nonbinary, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality).

“To avoid addressing structural and institutional gender discrimination in terms of pay equity, the go-to is to talk about position and title when, in fact, that’s not what’s driving pay inequity,” said C. Nicole Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “It’s decisions that are being made from the top down about the valuing of women’s work and how much they should be paid.”

The issue of pay inequity has plagued past administrations, too. Women in President Barack Obama’s White House were paid 84 to 89 cents for every $1 paid to male staffers, though that gap was narrower than the national gender pay gap in those years.

The gender pay gap widened from 89 cents on the dollar in 2016, the final year Obama was in office, to 63 cents the first year Trump was in office, according to an analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

The Trump White House salaries are current as of June 26. The numbers have been reported annually to Congress on July 1 since 1995. The White House did not comment on the gender pay gap but provided data on average salaries, which have increased by 7.1% for female staffers from 2017 to 2020, while decreasing for male staffers by 0.6%.

In a statement, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the president “implements policies that empower women across the country.” She highlighted some of the milestones during the Trump administration, including a historic low unemployment rate for women in 2019 (though female unemployment has hit a historic high during the coronavirus pandemic); the passage of paid family leave for federal employees; the passage of a child care tax credit (which has been criticized for not helping those most in need); and the establishment of the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative, led by Ivanka Trump.

The White House noted that half of the senior leaders in the National Security Council are women.

“President Trump has taken unprecedented action to support women and girls,” McEnany said.

The Trump administration said it has more women in senior positions than any other president. An analysis by The 19th of its commissioned officers – assistants, deputy assistants and special assistants to the president (the highest rank) – found that about 40% of staffers with that ranking in the Trump White House are women.

In the 2016 Obama White House, which had a larger overall staff, the gender split in top positions was 50–50.

A Brookings Institution analysis of top advisers across administrations found that the 2017 Trump administration had women in 23% of its “A” team positions, what Brookings defines as the most influential staff members. That’s less than the 2009 Obama administration, the 2001 George W. Bush administration and the 1993 Bill Clinton administration.

Opinion: COVID-19: Dithering in Congress will set women, children – and our GDP – back a generation

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign did not provide its salary breakdown by gender but said 59% of its full-time staffers are female and 56% of its senior staffers are women.

Mark Perry, an economist and scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has closely tracked the gender gap figures, said some of the disparity in pay in various administrations can be explained by looking at the spread of male and female staffers by seniority.

Federal guidelines dictate the salary brackets by type of position, so men and women performing similar jobs can expect to be paid about the same.

More women are hired into entry-level positions, Perry said, which is in line with the increased number of women who graduate college compared with men – nearly 58% last year.

“More women than men have the college degrees that would get them the credentials to get a job at the White House as a low-paid staff person,” Perry said.

At the higher end, there are more men than women who have advanced degrees and decades of experience in politics, he said.

“That labor market for people with 30 years continuous experience in Washington … there were just naturally more men than women in that labor market,” Perry said.

That paints an incomplete picture, Mason said.

“There is no absence of qualified women,” Mason said, adding that the Obama administration made a stronger commitment to hiring women in senior leadership positions.

In 2016, more women than men earned $100,000 or more in the Obama White House – about 53% of six-figure earners compared with nearly 47% who were men. In 2020, the gender split among the highest earners in the Trump White House is 37% female and 63% male.

Among the top female earners in the White House are Conway, Rollins, McEnany, aide Hope Hicks and the first lady’s chief of staff, Stephanie Grisham, who all made $183,000. Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, do not take a salary in their White House roles.

Among the lower earners, Mason said, there is some discretion as to what aides get paid – even within federal income brackets.

“That is probably the biggest explanation for the widening of the gap within administrations,” she said.

Then there’s the talent pool. Fewer women are Republican than men, and fewer conservative women work in politics, a challenge in terms of getting Republican women elected to office. But that doesn’t explain entirely the issue for the 400-plus positions available at the White House – there are enough qualified women to fill those spots, said Kelly Dittmar, director of research and scholar at the Center for American Women and Politics at the Eagleton Institute of Politics.

The argument in terms of hiring is often that there are certain people in the top positions simply because the best person was chosen for the job from a limited selection.

That argument resonated during the Republican National Convention’s appeal to women.

“I don’t want a job because of my gender,” adviser Kimberly Guilfoyle said. “I want the job because I’m the best person for that position.”

It’s a different ideological approach from the Democratic Party’s sentiment that a demographic identity provides its own value.

“If you’re talking about who you want at the decision-making tables in the White House, you would put a value on women’s voices not because of their biological sex but because that gender identity brings with it a distinct lived experience and perspective as women in a society in which gender is one axis of inequity and power,” Dittmar said.

There’s also a partisan difference as to whether the gender wage gap is an issue that requires urgency or whether it’s a myth.

“If you can just say the gender wage gap isn’t a thing or discount it in other ways, you don’t even get into the nitty gritty of the data,” Dittmar said.

Trump hasn’t made closing the gender pay gap a major priority, though it is a priority for Ivanka Trump. The president tried to roll back measures designed to increase transparency on pay data. In 2017, the Trump administration stopped the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from collecting pay data on gender and race from companies with 100 or more employees – a rule instituted during the Obama administration to illuminate inequalities in pay. A federal judge ruled last year that the Trump administration failed to prove the move would put undue burden on employers and ordered the EEOC to continue collecting the data.

“The Trump administration has shown no interest in taking steps to close the racial and gender wage gap impacting working women across this country,” said Emily Martin, vice president of education and workplace justice at the National Women’s Law Center, one of the groups that sued the Trump administration over its freeze on collection of the pay data. “It’s no surprise that the wage gap is not only larger in the White House than the rest of the country but is moving in the wrong direction.”

The president signed an executive order in 2017 that rolled back the Obama administration’s Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces executive order, which required companies with federal contracts to comply with 14 labor and civil rights laws, including a paycheck transparency rule. The Trump administration’s main concern with eliminating the order centered on a provision that required federal contractors to report labor violations, something Republicans in Congress argued could be used as “blackmail” in labor union negotiations.

Going into the 2020 election, the president has made a more direct push to highlight his support of women. On the centennial of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which gave some women the right to vote, Trump issued a proclamation making Aug. 26 Women’s Equality Day.

“Recognizing that women contribute to the strength and security of our Nation, my Administration will always make supporting women and working families a top priority,” the president wrote.

In polls, Trump trails Biden on the female vote by double digits.

The Republican National Convention attempted to close that margin, featuring a lineup with numerous female speakers who spoke about the president’s commitment to women.

The rhetoric, Mason said, doesn’t match the president’s priorities.

“Women across America need to ask some tough questions,” Mason said. “Do the president’s positions, views and behaviors reflect their values?”

Contributing: Amanda Becker

This story was published in partnership with The 19th, a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/09/23/women-trumps-white-house-earn-69-cents-every-1-male-staff/5826935002/

Find New & Used Cars

Workplace discrimination Can I get my job back after a layoff? Ask HR

Employnews — Tue, 22 Sep 2020 20:19:30 +0000

Workplace discrimination

Johnny C. Taylor Jr., Special to USA TODAY
Published 7:00 a.m. ET Sept. 22, 2020

Johnny C. Taylor Jr., a human resources expert, is tackling your questions as part of a series for USA TODAY. Taylor is president and CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management, the world’s largest HR professional society.

The questions are submitted by readers, and Taylor’s answers below have been edited for length and clarity.

Have a question? Do you have an HR or work-related question you’d like me to answer? Submit it here.

Question: I was laid off due to the loss of revenue from the COVID-19 pandemic. I was wondering if my employer was hiring again (my same position) do I automatically get my job back?

– Anonymous

Johnny C. Taylor Jr.: I’m sorry to hear you lost your job. It’s a difficult situation that so many hard-working Americans know all too well.

Unfortunately, there’s no guarantee you will get your job back, even if your company is hiring for the same position. Unless you signed a contract or an agreement, employers are not required to rehire laid-off workers.

However, that doesn’t mean it’s impossible to get rehired at your company. Employers frequently rehire laid-off workers for myriad reasons: It tends to be more cost-effective than recruiting and hiring someone out of network, and it also demonstrates loyalty to solid employees.

You don’t mention how long you were at your company, but when rehiring, many organizations consider an employee’s tenure, job performance, and whether the layoff was part of a reorganization or just a slowdown in business. Plus, it sounds like your layoff was due to the financial impact of COVID-19, not your work ethic or performance.

If you received a layoff notice, do your research. Check to see if it mentions anything about being rehired. I also recommend reaching out to the company’s HR team for additional guidance on rehire policies and practices.

Find out what the business practice is and if they plan to recall any workers. Share your interest in other opportunities within the organization, even if they may be a bit different from your prior role. This will demonstrate dedication – and that you’re flexible and agile.

And for some good news: We’re continuing to see more businesses reopen as the economy recovers. Keep your head up and don’t be too hard on yourself. I hope you can find a position that’s a good fit for you soon!

Job seekers: Are résumés and cover letters obsolete? Ask HR

Flu season: Can shots be required for employees? Ask HR

Q:Can an employee cite a religious exemption to not wear a mask? We currently have a mask and vaccination requirement for our staff and if someone is not vaccinated and there is an outbreak, they can be sent home for the duration of the outbreak. Can we do the same for those that claim exemption from masks?

– Anonymous

Taylor: Thanks for asking this timely question. Yes, an employee can cite a religious exemption to not wear a mask.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal to discriminate against a person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This would include their ability to wear a face mask.

That said, we’ve heard it from public health officials and key federal agencies: Wearing a mask is a critical way to mitigate the spread of the virus. It’s common sense for employers to encourage workers to wear protective gear – not only to protect themselves but others around them.

If an employee cannot or does not want to wear a mask due to a religious belief, I strongly recommend discussing this request with the employee and provide an alternative measure, if feasible. However, in some situations, requested accommodations may pose an undue hardship on the employer’s business. In those cases, you may not have to accommodate them.

Remember, though, if an employee claims religious discrimination, your organization may need to demonstrate the undue hardship to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) which enforces Title VII.

Even though you may have a requirement to send someone home for not wearing a mask, I advise starting a candid conversation with them first, then decide a course of action. Maybe you can come up with a solution such as teleworking or a staggered schedule that enforces workplace health and safety concerns while bearing in mind the rights of an employee.

Be well!

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/2020/09/22/can-employee-get-rehired-same-job-after-being-laid-off-ask-hr/5859870002/