Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

[Rockinonahigh]

I thought my counselor would be up on this but he just gave me the oh well look and didnt even care.I have no idea how to contact anyone about this so dont know what to do if anything about this.Heck I couldnt even get anyone to back me on an sexual harrasment prob at one of the casinos I worked at three years ago..I had to quit the job to get away from this nut case.I followed all the right steps to deal with it but didnt do any good.Sometimes I feel like a target that says kick me.Note today im feeling mighty puny cause of may back being out again..yes, im haveing a bad day.

[Thinker]

Good grief...

http://www.southfloridagaynews.com/e...bout-enda.html

[Thinker]

Some good news...

http://www.bilerico.com/2010/05/enda...dy_to_pass.php

[Thinker]

If you don't know your Congress members' positions on ENDA, you can find out here...

http://www.rallycongress.com/the-bil...tions-on-enda/


And here is a quick way to contact Congress and encourage them to pass a fully-inclusive ENDA...

http://www.rallycongress.com/the-bilerico-project/

[Jess]

http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/...osi-prote.html

[MsTinkerbelly]

What Happened to ENDA? The Williams Institute Panel TONIGHT at WeHo Library
Cross-posted from LGBTPOV.com

By Karen Ocamb

The issue of marriage rights for same sex couples has dominated our national conversation since Karl Rove used antigay initiatives to drive evangelicals to the ballot box for George W. Bush’s re-election in 2004. The Prop 8 wars and the recent victories and ballot referendums in a number of states since then have lead many to believe that marriage equality is the top priority for LGBT people.

The reality is that the top priority for many LGBT Americans is finding and securing a job, especially one with discrimination protections based on gender identity, as well as sexual orientation. The question about the status of the languishing Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) surfaced in early January when the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) won a $155,000 settlement against DynCorp International LLC, a military contractor and aircraft maintenance company, based in a sex-based workplace discrimination case. After considerable pressure lead by Tico Almeida, a civil rights attorney and founder of Freedom to Work who started the petition signed by 50,000 people on Change.org, DynCorp added sexual orientation and gender identity to its workplace non-discrimination policies.

“It’s terrific that DynCorp has moved to protect its LGBT employees, but let’s also remember that dozens of other government contractors do not protect their workers from anti-LGBT harassment and discrimination,” Almeida said in a press release. “An executive order outlawing discrimination at federal contractors on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is sitting at the White House. President Obama should take this opportunity, in the wake of DynCorp’s decision, to make sure that no government contractor uses taxpayer money to fund anti-LGBT harassment or discrimination.”

The news that an ENDA-like bill was “sitting at the White House” prompted a new petition to Obama – and a number of stories: I criticized Obama for not including the need for ENDA in his State of the Union address; Chris Geidner at Metro Weekly wrote “From Partner Benefits to Affirmative Action, Proposed Contractor Executive Order Specifics Discussed;” and The Williams Institute’s M.V. Lee Badgett wrote an op-ed for the New York Times: “What Obama Should Do About Workplace Discrimination.”

Wednesday night, Feb. 22, from 6:15-8:00pm The Williams Institute and the City of West Hollywood are presenting an important panel discussion on the topic: “What Happened to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)” in the Community Room at the New West Hollywood Library, 625 N. San Vicente Boulevard. (Free validated parking at the parking structure on El Tovar Place off Robertson Boulevard in between Melrose Avenue and Santa Monica Blvd).

The Williams Institute speakers are: Christy Mallory, Legal Research Fellow; Ilan H. Meyer, Williams Senior Scholar of Public Policy; Jennifer C. Pizer, Legal Director and Arnold D. Kassoy Senior Scholar of Law; and Brad Sears, Assistant Dean & Executive Director, Roberta A. Conroy Scholar of Law and Policy. Freedom to Work’s Tico Almeida will also be there but is not an “official” speaker.

Much of the discussion will focus on a new study by Mallory. Here’s a quick brief from The Williams Institute:



Local ordinances that require city and county contractors to prohibit sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination protect thousands of workers without burdening governments or businesses, according to a new study from the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute.

“This study provides evidence that a federal executive order that similarly barred discrimination could protect millions of workers while not overburdening federal contractors or the U.S. government,” said the study’s co-author, Christy Mallory, Legal Fellow, Williams Institute.

Currently, only 21 states and the District of Columbia include sexual orientation or gender identity in their statewide non-discrimination laws, and no federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in the private sector. A federal executive order that prohibited such discrimination could protect up to 16.5 million workers.

The local governments in the study reported widespread compliance among contractors and very little, if any, resistance to adopting LGBT-related employment policies. Further, no locality reported that any employees had filed complaints of sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination after the policies were implemented.

“Their responses indicate businesses were willing to adopt these policies in order to contract with cities like Raleigh and Indianapolis,” said Mallory. She continued, “This demonstrates that contractors accept the possibility of government enforcement, even when no state law imposes similar requirements.”

The survey responses also indicate that the laws are not burdensome or costly for the agencies to implement and enforce. No locality reported that it had to hire additional staff to enforce these ordinances, or that there was any cost associated in adding sexual orientation and gender identity to existing non-discrimination policies and practices.

“Our analysis shows that concerns about these laws have not been born out,” said Brad Sears, Roberta A. Conroy Senior Scholar of Law & Policy and Williams Institute Executive Director, “the agencies reported no disruption to the contracting process as a result of passing these ordinances—for themselves or their contractors. In short, its business as usual after a locality has decided to add these protections for LGBT people.”

The study evaluated data from 29 city and county government agencies that require local government contractors to adopt sexual orientation and gender identity employment non-discrimination policies. Some cities and counties also require local government contractors to take further steps to protect LGBT workers, such as posting inclusive Equal Employment opportunity policies, training managers and employees to prevent harassment and discrimination, and including the LGBT community in outreach and recruitment efforts.

[MsTinkerbelly]

White House says instead of contractor nondiscrimination order we need to “build support for passage of ENDA”By Scottie Thomaston

Activists in the LGBT community have been pushing for an employment non-discrimination bill for decades upon decades. We’ve built up an organizational structure, changed hearts and minds, disseminated facts about the need for one, got lots of legislators on-board over the years and we have been keeping up pressure nonstop. The first time a non-discrimination bill for gay people was introduced in Congress was 38 years ago, in 1974. That bill didn’t go anywhere and for years they kept trying. In 1996, ENDA was voted on in the Senate for the first time and it failed, while at the same time Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act.

In 2006, there were promises that ENDA would receive floor votes and get passed through Congress, finally, with leaders like Nancy Pelosi saying it is a priority. Then, in 2010, it was determined there would be no action on ENDA until after repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. And finally, now that Republicans control the House and Democrats have a small majority in the Senate and may lose even more seats in November, it is increasingly unlikely anyone will attempt to pass anything through at this point.

For years, LGBT people have been asked – warned at some points – to have patience, to accept pragmatic steps toward equality, because we shouldn’t push too hard, ask for too much too soon. And we resisted for quite a long time on that, because equality shouldn’t have to come in pieces simply because politicians worry that taking concrete steps to affirm our humanity and equality might upset the right wing.

But, then we finally agreed: there is indeed a pragmatic step toward equality the White House could take. And we would welcome it. The White House could add LGBT people to an existing executive order on nondiscrimination of government contractors. Adding a set of people to an existing EO covering a small subset of workers and companies is not a huge leap. The polls even bear out that it has a lot of support from the American people – in fact even ENDA itself is enormously popular, and a lot of Americans even think we already passed it. The good thing about adding LGBTs to that executive order is it puts a foot in the door for future passage of ENDA – when nothing terrible happens after we’re receiving nondiscrimination protections, people will be less inclined to fight passage of a bill extending those protections to more of the LGBT community.

So then, how did the White House respond?

This way:


“The President is dedicated to securing equal rights for LGBT Americans and that is why he has long supported an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would prohibit employers across the country from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

“The President is committed to lasting and comprehensive change and therefore our goal is passage of ENDA, which is a legislative solution to LGBT employment discrimination — just as the President pressed for legislative repeal of DADT.”

And White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said:


“Our position hasn’t changed since we started talking about this last week. At this time, we believe that the right approach is to build support for passage of [Employment Non-Discrimination Act] legislation. And I think an example of why this approach can be most effective is the way that we approached the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ So, there is no change.”

First of all, since LGBT activists have been “build[ing]” support for passage of the bill for over forty years, one wonders how much longer we need to wait for even a small piece of what ENDA would offer. We fought for decades, didn’t see any movement at all, and so we instead pushed for a sensible update to an already existing amendment. Now, the White House seems to be saying, “no, go back to the first thing you were doing.” Or do they not realize that we didn’t just start organizing at the beginning of this administration?

Secondly, I guess he’s talking about the legislative repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell that was going to be pushed back until after 2011 until a judge ruled it unconstitutional and servicemembers and other activists chained themselves to the White House fence. That was a bill that originally arrived in a different form, then the nondiscrimination part was stripped from the bill, then it was placed in the NDAA and voted down a couple of times, and finally at the last moment barely got cloture as a standalone bill at the last minute in a lame duck session of Congress. And now, of course, almost all the Republican candidates have promised for months that they will reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, through an executive order or through going to Congress to ask for a vote. Despite the talk of an enduring solution, any Republican president can reverse it. That would likely be unpopular, but it is not an impossible thing for them to do because of some bulletproof legislative solution.

We have been building support for passage of ENDA for so long, and we really would have liked to see a pragmatic step taken in that direction, since we have a Republican-led House and passage of ENDA is completely inconceivable at this point in time.

[Nadeest]

I agree. The President could have taken a dramatic step towards fairness, and made it a campaign issue to distinguish himself and his campaign from the Republicans. If he had framed it as a simple matter of right and wrong, I think that he would have won a large amount of voters. He would also have been able to point out to all, just how much the Republicans are using simple hatred of others that are not like themselves, as part of the party platform.

[TheresaD]

Originally Posted by Rockinonahigh

Excuse me for rainng on the enda act,but I have my doubts about its ablaity to do a thing in real life for ppl with disablities or anything else cause last year I was hired by a local company and they knew about my disablity as well as my sexuality wich wasnt the issue beleave it or not.They hired me full knowing about my disablity and even voiced that I may not be able to handle the job,then hired me anyway..a week later I was fired.I know Louisiana is an at will state but I thought enda was suposed to protect the disabled in the work force.I told my vocational rehab counselor but he just blew it off like it was nothing.Note that this company made no adjustments to comply with anything to work around my disablities,wich wouldnt have taken much to do or time out of the work day.All this was done in front of the whole staff as well as about 50 ppl dureing orentation..I was isused uniforms and filled out papaer work then they droped the bomb on me in a very public way.I know there isnt any good way to fire someone but dreaging me threw the mill the way they did wasnt at all a good thing to go threw.

Federal laws prohibit workplace discrimination with regard some very specific things. Age discrimination is one of them. Contact a lawyer right away. Don't let the statute run and lose your rights!

[TheresaD]

Originally Posted by Rockinonahigh

Excuse me for rainng on the enda act,but I have my doubts about its ablaity to do a thing in real life for ppl with disablities or anything else cause last year I was hired by a local company and they knew about my disablity as well as my sexuality wich wasnt the issue beleave it or not.They hired me full knowing about my disablity and even voiced that I may not be able to handle the job,then hired me anyway..a week later I was fired.I know Louisiana is an at will state but I thought enda was suposed to protect the disabled in the work force.I told my vocational rehab counselor but he just blew it off like it was nothing.Note that this company made no adjustments to comply with anything to work around my disablities,wich wouldnt have taken much to do or time out of the work day.All this was done in front of the whole staff as well as about 50 ppl dureing orentation..I was isused uniforms and filled out papaer work then they droped the bomb on me in a very public way.I know there isnt any good way to fire someone but dreaging me threw the mill the way they did wasnt at all a good thing to go threw.

Federal laws prohibit workplace discrimination with regard some very specific things. Disability discrimination is one of them. Contact a lawyer right away. Don't let the statute run and lose your rights!

[Rockinonahigh]

Originally Posted by TheresaD

Federal laws prohibit workplace discrimination with regard some very specific things. Disability discrimination is one of them. Contact a lawyer right away. Don't let the statute run and lose your rights!

It has been over a year so I doubt a lawyer will help,I can prove it cause an ex friend of mine was working there at the time.I reported a sexual harrasment issue with a local casino same deal...gotta prove it.

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by Rockinonahigh

It has been over a year so I doubt a lawyer will help,I can prove it cause an ex friend of mine was working there at the time.I reported a sexual harrasment issue with a local casino same deal...gotta prove it.

talk to an employment lawyer...........a year is well within the time frame for a claim...............

employers hope you think a year (or more) is too long..............it's not.

your claim may not be about ENDA....it could be ADA

[Rockinonahigh]

[QUOTE=Toughy;567664]talk to an employment lawyer...........a year is well within the time frame for a claim...............

employers hope you think a year (or more) is too long..............it's not.

your claim may not be about ENDA....it could be ADA[/QUOTE



Where can I find an employment lawer,its the first time I ever herd of one.

[Toughy]

I would call the local lgbt center and ask for a referral....I think every state has at least one lgbt center. There is also lamda legal defense and NCLR (national center for lesbian rights) for legal referrals.

I would also talk to the state employment division....most states have a labor rights divisions that might be able to help.

You could also check with friends and see if they know anyone. I needed a lawyer once and sure enough there was one in my greater circle of friends.

[Corkey]

Don't forget the ACLU, sometimes they are pro-bono.