Workplace Discrimination

Workplace Discrimination
Student’s Name
Institution
Workplace Discrimination
The state and federal laws of the United States have clauses that protect and prohibit any form of discrimination in a workplace, be it based on race, sex, religion, age, disability, or even genetic orientation. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) of the U.S. federal government identifies unfair treat, harassment, retaliation, disclosure of confidential information, and even denial of promotion or change to a conducive workplace as workplace discrimination (EEOC.gov, n.d.). Sexual orientation had not been previously captured well as a sex factor when it comes to discrimination, and it took the intervention of the US Supreme Court milestone ruling to encompass the LGBT employees in the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (SHRM, 2020).
The landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court followed two cases before the court: Bostock v. Clayton County and Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC. The case Bostock v. Clayton County presented instances where an employee was fired primarily for being gay or participating in activities that empower the LGBT community (Supreme Court, n.d.). Gerald Bostock, for instance, was fired by Clayton County for simply participating in a softball league associated with gays. The county claimed that Bostock’s participation was unbecoming of a county employee (Supreme Court, n.d.). Donald Zarha opened up about being gay and was fired immediately by the Altitude Express. In Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC, the EEOC filed a lawsuit against Harris Funeral Homes after a long-time employee with transgender attributes, Aime Stephens, presented a complaint to the commission alleging that she had been fired unlawfully, citing sexual discrimination. In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court held that the Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts protects LGBT against discrimination.
The contentious issues in the cases were the definition of sexual discrimination and whether sexual orientation and transgender status qualify as elements of sexual discrimination. The Court had a responsibility to reiterate Congress’ position...