What are the LEGAL ramifications of being "caught" or outed"?

[Wildaboutheels]

Any Legal Eagles wandering about here? I am asking in reference to the rights of emloyers. THEIR right to terminate an employee for how they dress or where they go on their OWN time.

Quite understandable that a Doctor, Lawyer or Indian chief might be terminated, local News/sports anchor, University president etc. Someone that is constantly under public scrutiny or is paid to interact with the public. But what about the averge Joe or Jane? Would it be LEGAL to terminate someone merely for being a CD? Or would they have to trump up something such "poor job performance", "constantly late to work", "poor attitude" etc.?

Anyone ever heard of someone being fired for it or "coerced" to quit?

[SheriM]

I've not had experience with being let go for feminine dressing, however, in most of the cases we read about, I would side with the employer. The employer hires people to do work for him/her and to enhance the business. If appearance detracts from that goal or even has a negative impact on business, it is certainly understandable why he/she would not want to have that person in their employ.

[I Am Paula]

Here in Canada, the only three legal reasons someone can be fired are :
Alcohol or drug use.
Theft
Willfully disrupting business or productivity. This ones the big, no, huge grey area. In my opinion you could interpret that just about any way you see fit.

I'm no lawyer, and I'm not sure about The United States, but I'll bet that they can fire you for most anything if they put thier mind to it.

[BRANDYJ]

It depends on where you live in America. In any place where there are non-discrimination laws with gender identity/expression, the answer is no, at least in theory.

Unfournately, crossdressers can and do get fired from their jobs for being a crossdresser, even though most don't crossdress on the job. This can even happen in a locality where non-discrimination laws are on the books. All an employer has to do for a worker they have found out to be a crossdresser is to look for anything else they can fire them on.
I would not risk my job. So many ways around any discrimination laws. You could be transferred, reassigned out of public site, given a different position at lower pay. Or other ways to make you just want to quit so they don't have to worry about firing you.

[DonnaT]

It's been done, firing someone for CDing off the job, but there are new ramifications for employers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/24/transgender-employees-anti-discrimination-law-eeoc-_n_1449282.html

So, yes, they would likely need to invent some other reason to fire you. At least under the current administration.

[Carroll]

It all depends on the state or the company. A lot of states are "Right to hire/fire", meaning you can be legally be terminated for no reason. Some companies follow this, or will come up with little things. NY is a right to fire, but the company I used to work for had to have a really good reason to fire you. Though I never did it, I had every right to show up dressed for work if I wanted to. They (Sears) takes it's anti-discrimination policy seriously.

[Julie Gaum]

In most states and I worked/lived in 14 the state laws back up the employer who usually states on the application you sign that "An employee may be terminated for any cause.......". In practice the easiest reason is "cutting work forces" or "employee not up to our standards (Something vague). In this manner age, race, sexual persuasion, and so on can be avoided by stete laws that mouth the basic no-nos. Off the subject but just as silly is that applications in every state do not ask one's age and yet down below they ask year graduated high school, college and military. Don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out one's age from that. Yet this subtefuge has been going on for at least 60 years!
Julie

[Lorileah]

The U S Government now cannot fire you for dressing or transitioning as it falls under the sexual part of discrimination (even though you are not a female a TG is protected under the same rules) Caveat though is the military has different rules and even with DADT gone, being TG is till a reason to discharge you. So if you are a civilian employee on a military base they can't fire you for gender reasons, but if you are military they can. Otherwise as stated it is by state or community. Most places the employer can let you go for any reason.

[Wildaboutheels]

It sounds thus far that any company with deep enough pockets or a "good enough" attorney can find a way to fire someone law or no law? Easy to imagine that very few people would be willing to fight it.

[Anne2345]

Employment in the private sector in many states is "at will." This means that an employer can terminate an employee for a good reason, a bad reason, or for no reason at all. An employer, however, cannot terminate an employee for reasons specifically prohibited by law. Employment discrimination cases, though, can be very difficult to prove.

[Badtranny]

Is Lori the only respondent who is actually out?

One of the problems with discourse on this site is the huge quantity of speculation. Closeted people speculating on the danger of being outed.

I'm 100% out and there has been zero legal or professional ramifications. Much of it is related to your comfort level. Dirty little secrets are generally disagreeable in any context, but if you can be self assured and confident about who you are then being "caught" would be no big deal.

"Hey Bob, I saw you and your wife at the mall and I was a little shocked to see how you were dressed" Yeah, me and the wife like to mix it up sometimes. You should have seen me last Halloween.

There is nothing wrong with cross dressing. Stop acting like it's shameful and eventually people will see that it's just another fun thing to do. Like Cos play, or a Trekkie convention, or Renaissance fairs, or Civil War re-en actors. If you get "outed" just own it. You weren't doing anything wrong.

[BRANDYJ]

You live in Florida as I do. Florida is a At Will Employment state. As copied from Wikapedia.....

At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship and that the employer does not belong to a collective bargaining group (i.e., has not recognized a union). Under this legal doctrine:

“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.


The doctrine of at-will employment has been criticized as predicated upon flawed assumptions about the inherent distribution of power and information in the employee-employer relationship and for its brutal harshness upon employees.[3][4] However, scholars in the field of law and economics such as Professors Richard A. Epstein[5] and Richard Posner[6] credit employment at will as a major factor underlying the strength of the U.S. economy. At-will employment has also been stressed as a significant reason for the success of Silicon Valley as an entrepreneur-friendly environment.[7]

At-will employment disclaimers are a staple of employee handbooks in the United States. It is common for employers to define what at-will employment means, explain that an employee’s at-will status cannot be changed except in a writing signed by the company president (or chief executive), and require that an employee sign an acknowledgment of his or her at-will status. [8]

[StarrOfDelite]

It's been done, firing someone for CDing off the job, but there are new ramifications for employers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/24/transgender-employees-anti-discrimination-law-eeoc-_n_1449282.html

So, yes, they would likely need to invent some other reason to fire you. At least under the current administration.

I am a lawyer, and have some limited familiarity with discrimination law. It's damnably complicated when you get down to specific cases, but, generally speaking, in most American jurisdictions the doctrine of "employment at will" prevails, which means that an employer can fire any employee with the appropriate period of notice for any reason. The only limits on this law are the anti-discrimination statutes of the type which were first promulgated in 1964 under LBJ. I never handled a case involving transgender discrimination, but it has been my impression that it is spelled out as being a prohibited discriminatory reason for discharge in some state statutes, and not protected by anti-discriminatory language in others. I have no idea what the Florida statute says.

Donna, thanks for the article from Huffington Post about the Macy case. Since this decision relates to discrimination by the U.S. Government, there may be some questions if it applies to private employers. Note, however, that even if it is incorporated into the general employment discrimination law, some very small companies may not be bound to follow it under federal law.

Most state anti-discrimination statutes cover smaller employers, and some are more strict than federal law. The only way to get an idea about your rights is to consult with a lawyer. A practitioner in the area could give you an overview of your rights inside an hour, and how much it would cost would depend on where you live. I have no idea what the going hourly rate is in Tampa, but would estimate something between $250-400. The best time to consult a lawyer is BEFORE anything happens. The old adage about an ounce of prevention, et cetera, is applicable in almost every legal situation.

Generally, if you have a state anti-discrimination statute you will get at least an interview with an investigator if you are fired and file a complaint. The EEOC process is fairly complicated, and trying to summarize it here would only confuse the issue more.

If you are under the income level you are entitled to at least a free consultation with a lawyer at your local legal aid society.

As you implied with your comment about "under this administration," the EEOC can be politicized, and might reverse itself if a more conservative administration is in power.
If the decision of the EEOC in the Macy case holds up through the appeals process, which will include hearings before the appropriate circuit court of appeals and possibly the Supreme Court, then it would put crossdressing on the same level as being gay or lesbian. The Obama administration may choose not to appeal the case, as it might not wish to appear anti-GLBT in an election year.

[NathalieX66]

"Outed"?....don't know, sorry. :idontknow:

We have some pretty progressive laws regarding gender expression regarding employment, and restrooms here in New Jersey. It's legal for TG people to use the bathroom of their choice........ BY LAW! Eat that!

[Eryn]

The US is a patchwork of regulations and one's rights vary depending upon where you work.

Regardless of one's actual transgender protections, an employer can find other ways to be rid of someone that they dislike.

[Anne2345]

It's damnably complicated when you get down to specific cases, but, generally speaking, in most American jurisdictions the doctrine of "employment at will" prevails, which means that an employer can fire any employee with the appropriate period of notice for any reason.

Employment law, in and of itself, is not complicated at all. The law is what it is, the application is relatively simple, and there is a mountain of previously established case law in any given jurisdiction. Employment law complaints involving issues of first impression are very far and few in between, so there is very little need to reinvent the wheel.

Obviously, the terminated employee has the burden of proof. The difficulty in prevailing in an employment discrimination complaint is proving that discrimination occured. A sophisticated employer will not give a reason for termination in an at-will jurisdiction, because no reason is necessary. In so doing, it makes it that much more difficult to prove.

If, however, an employer is stupid enough to fire an employee for being green, for example, and puts the reason in writing, that's an easy case. But in today's legal climate, employers have become much slicker than that.

In the end, the employer is going to do what the employer is going to do, whether it is for one reason or another. Or for no reason at all . . . .

[Debglam]

Yes & yes!


Is Lori the only respondent who is actually out?

One of the problems with discourse on this site is the huge quantity of speculation. Closeted people speculating on the danger of being outed.

I'm 100% out and there has been zero legal or professional ramifications. Much of it is related to your comfort level. Dirty little secrets are generally disagreeable in any context, but if you can be self assured and confident about who you are then being "caught" would be no big deal.

"Hey Bob, I saw you and your wife at the mall and I was a little shocked to see how you were dressed" Yeah, me and the wife like to mix it up sometimes. You should have seen me last Halloween.

There is nothing wrong with cross dressing. Stop acting like it's shameful and eventually people will see that it's just another fun thing to do. Like Cos play, or a Trekkie convention, or Renaissance fairs, or Civil War re-en actors. If you get "outed" just own it. You weren't doing anything wrong.

Yes from a philosophical perspective. Your employer calls you in and shows you a photo or says someone saw you out dressed. IMHO, your initial response is going to have a lot to do with where things go.


Employment in the private sector in many states is "at will." This means that an employer can terminate an employee for a good reason, a bad reason, or for no reason at all. An employer, however, cannot terminate an employee for reasons specifically prohibited by law. Employment discrimination cases, though, can be very difficult to prove.

Yes from a legal perspective. It really all depends upon the terms of your employment. At will means at will.

[Stephanie47]

In Washington State it is illegal to fire someone for any gender issues; gay, lesbian or cross dresser. Of course, you would have to be able to prove your case.

[STACY B]

Yep ,,, I got the ol boot for dressing in the other genders garmets ,,, An its no fun at all ,,I was out of a job an didn't know what the hell to do,, Only thing I did was made a few mistakes by wearing some different clothes an shoes at work an had long hair that was blowing in the wind an always painted my nails an sometimes even wore some MAKEUP ,,, Bad idea ,,, So told my self ,,I said self no more of that sneaking around an doing all the crazy stuff behind my bosses back . So I just came clean an bit the Bullet ,, From now on its strait an narrow for me an I will dress the way I am supposed to at work ,,No more dressing like a Hochie ,, Just simple capris an sandals an T shirts an no more crazy makeup ..Just real light an hair put up kept nice an neat ,, So I got a second chance now my wife hired me back only was unemployed for about 30 seconds till the phone rang an had to Roll ,, She aint got no CDL anyway ....LOL

[Helen Grandeis]

As long as I don't lie, cheat or steal or deliberately disregard either procedures or industrial safety protocols, I can work here forever as long as my employment provides shareholder value. Because we sell electricity to the US government, we are bound by US anti-discrimination laws. In 1992, we had a presentation by the attorney of a transsexual. I encountered "Laura" in the elevator at HQ. Apparently, her arrangement was to use the facilities in the lobby. She was immaculately dressed. When I looked at her, I felt a connection. She made the move to the site in 1992 and then quietly disappeared into obscurity perhaps after establishing a female work history. There was never any negative discussion about her. She was respected as an engineer.

[Veronica27]

This is one of those issues where the differences between crossdressing and transgendered come into play. Most laws that have been passed on the issue refer to "T". I don't think that many employers are averse to having transgendered individuals dress in the manner in which they are most comfortable. However, constantly switching back and forth to suit the mood of a crossdresser, can be disruptive. The employer should have some rights in this situation, including the right to establish rules as to when and where and if, or to negotiate an agreement with the employee and other staff. What a person does in their own time should be up to them, unless they are somehow representing the employer while on their own time.




There is nothing wrong with cross dressing. Stop acting like it's shameful and eventually people will see that it's just another fun thing to do. Like Cos play, or a Trekkie convention, or Renaissance fairs, or Civil War re-en actors. If you get "outed" just own it. You weren't doing anything wrong.

I've been scooped. Or maybe someone has hacked into my computer. I was thinking about writing a thread about the similarities between crossdressing, cosplay, historical re-enactment and all the various types of fan conventions, and to that end have been doing some research about these activities. Crossdressing can be a part of some of these things, depending upon the aims of the group and the degree of authenticity they want. Oh well, I guess the element of originality of thought is gone, so I will put it on the back burner for awhile. That's the problem with lethargy and procrastination. I'm just happy that I'm not the only one with similar thoughts.

Veronica

[STACY B]

Is Lori the only respondent who is actually out?

One of the problems with discourse on this site is the huge quantity of speculation. Closeted people speculating on the danger of being outed.

I'm 100% out and there has been zero legal or professional ramifications. Much of it is related to your comfort level. Dirty little secrets are generally disagreeable in any context, but if you can be self assured and confident about who you are then being "caught" would be no big deal.

"Hey Bob, I saw you and your wife at the mall and I was a little shocked to see how you were dressed" Yeah, me and the wife like to mix it up sometimes. You should have seen me last Halloween.

There is nothing wrong with cross dressing. Stop acting like it's shameful and eventually people will see that it's just another fun thing to do. Like Cos play, or a Trekkie convention, or Renaissance fairs, or Civil War re-en actors. If you get "outed" just own it. You weren't doing anything wrong.



Nothing Wrong ,,, Waittttttt a Min ? What if ya crossdressing in someone elses clothes not your own ? Huh ,,, What about that ? Maybe a clothes line theaf ,, Or panty robber than ya mite get it ? Never mind ,,, Some one just brought all my stuff back .. Just checking /

[sometimes_miss]

<snip> Or would they have to trump up something such "poor job performance", "constantly late to work", "poor attitude" etc.? Anyone ever heard of someone being fired for it or "coerced" to quit?
That happens more often than you think. I've seen it several times, but if I came forward, then I'd become a target next time they needed to downsize and decided to come up with a reason to get rid of someone (seen that happen too!). It's easy to stand up and support what's right; but sadly, whistleblowers in this country are considered traitors by the people who run the country. Everyone's supposed to be a 'company man', or they'll find a way to get rid of you. Shouldn't be that way, but I don't have the energy anymore to keep losing jobs. I got screwed out of one job about 20 years ago, my boss was very careful to make it look like my work was sub standard, while all the time assigning me more and more work 'because it's just part of the job'.

[Beverley Sims]

Is Lori the only respondent who is actually out?

One of the problems with discourse on this site is the huge quantity of speculation. Closeted people speculating on the danger of being outed.

I'm 100% out and there has been zero legal or professional ramifications. Much of it is related to your comfort level. Dirty little secrets are generally disagreeable in any context, but if you can be self assured and confident about who you are then being "caught" would be no big deal.

"Hey Bob, I saw you and your wife at the mall and I was a little shocked to see how you were dressed" Yeah, me and the wife like to mix it up sometimes. You should have seen me last Halloween.

There is nothing wrong with cross dressing. Stop acting like it's shameful and eventually people will see that it's just another fun thing to do. Like Cos play, or a Trekkie convention, or Renaissance fairs, or Civil War re-en actors. If you get "outed" just own it. You weren't doing anything wrong.

Melissa, I think that's a great attitude, maybe I am not as outgoing yet but one day.......
A nice alternative to all the replies here.

[Badtranny]

Melissa, I think that's a great attitude, maybe I am not as outgoing yet but one day.......
A nice alternative to all the replies here.

Thanks Beverley, I think so many CD's get so caught up in the secrecy that they forget that nobody really cares about their private life. I'm not saying that you should show up to work and explain how you feel inside, I'm just saying that if somebody sees you, just wink and say something like "gotta keep it fresh baby". Keep your privacy but drop the secrecy. I've said it a hundred times, deep dark secrets will eventually start absorbing light from the rest of your life until there is no more happiness left. Only frustration and fear. Secrets beget secrets until you completely lose who you really are. If you're a big tough guy then why would you be afraid to own your playtime?

I think CD's need to cut themselves a break. You like what you like, and life is way too short to pretend otherwise.

[Marleena]

The US is a patchwork of regulations and one's rights vary depending upon where you work.

Regardless of one's actual transgender protections, an employer can find other ways to be rid of someone that they dislike.

This is true. An employer can find other ways of letting an employee go.

Now we have had a few threads lately where CDers don't want to be labelled transgender or be in any way associated with the LGBT. I have tried to point out to you without shoving your faces in it that you may need them some day and their representation is actually a good thing.

What happens if you are outed at work and it causes a disruption? You could lose your job. What happens if your landlord gets complaints from other tenants they have a guy in the building that likes to wear dresses. He could kick your rear out.

The LGBT are helping you in those important areas. Just something to think about.

[TxKimberly]

You have to love this forum! No matter what topic you ask about, you KNOW that there is at least one expert out there!

As I understand it, Texas is one of those "At will" states - they don't need a reason or an excuse. If they dont want you, they get rid of you, and good luck trying to fight it.

Like others have said, Cross dressing is NOT illegal, but that's entirely beside the point. If your employer is sufficiently irritated by something about you, they will no doubt find a way to get rid of you if they want to.

[Colleen1989]

I like your enthusiasm, but not everyone has that level of confidence or is viewed with such tolerance. Most people have too much to lose in their non-crossdressing life to fully expose their deeper desires. I wish the world were more in line with your way of thinking.

[SherriePall]

Has everyone forgotten the WinnDixie incident? A truckdriver got fired for crossdressing on his own time. He kept it a secret, but somehow spilled the beans when he made a complaint about fellow workers who were giving him the business for being gay which he wasn't (but some of his CDingisms must have shown through).
Help me out somebody. It was only a couple, two, three years ago.

[BRANDYJ]

I have to tell ya, as a Cd myself, I feel I am very accepting and tolerant of other CD's, TS's, gays and other alternate lifestyle choices. With that said, as an ex business owner of a small company in the retail business, If an employee of mine came to work crossdressed, he would not be working for me any longer. Reality is that most of society is not ready to deal with crossdressing. To some it would make them very uncomfortable being waited on by a CD. No doubt it would cause a disruption and loss of business if I would allow it. I would not crossdress and operate my own business for the very same reasons, therefore an employee would not work for me crossdressed. What he did on his own time is none of by business.
With that said, I am also a strong advocate for "at will" work states. I am very anti union for some personal reasons that go back to when my dad was alive, and what a union did to his non-union shop. I am so glad that here in Florida, a company does not have to let unions partition it's employees. And you do not have to join a union to work for any company even if they have a union. Point is, when you work for someone, you have a responsibility to conform to the dress code and other conditions your employer sets forth. Don't like it, quit and find some place else to work. No one owes you a job.

[Barbara Jo]

Fact is, if an employer wants to fire you for any reason, they wiil .

All they have to do is make up a reason why they fired you like saying you threatened the boss, etc.
It wiil be your word against his/hers and you can not do a thing about it particulaly in a "riight to work state which is more accuratly called "right to fire state".

Any employer can fire you for any legally proteted reason as long as they do not say that is why they fired you . Bottom line, if your boss likes you, they wiil make alowances and be tollerant of you. If they do niot like you, you wiil be history sonner or later .

[StarrOfDelite]

Employment law, in and of itself, is not complicated at all. The law is what it is, the application is relatively simple, and there is a mountain of previously established case law in any given jurisdiction. Employment law complaints involving issues of first impression are very far and few in between, so there is very little need to reinvent the wheel.

Obviously, the terminated employee has the burden of proof. The difficulty in prevailing in an employment discrimination complaint is proving that discrimination occured. A sophisticated employer will not give a reason for termination in an at-will jurisdiction, because no reason is necessary. In so doing, it makes it that much more difficult to prove.

If, however, an employer is stupid enough to fire an employee for being green, for example, and puts the reason in writing, that's an easy case. But in today's legal climate, employers have become much slicker than that.

In the end, the employer is going to do what the employer is going to do, whether it is for one reason or another. Or for no reason at all . . . .

Beg to differ. As I tried to explain, the statutes themselves are relatively straightforward, although there is enough legal language in them to confuse most college graduates who don't own a legal dictionary. However, the law is what judges say it is in each individual case, and since each individual case depends on relatively complex facts involving performance evaluations, testimony about incidents evincing discriminatory intent from the complainant, the supervisor, fellow employees, and other documentary and testimonial evidence such as complaints from customers or suppliers, it can get very, very complicated in individual cases. Also, as noted, transgenderism is not specifically statutorily protected in many states, including some large industrial employment states like Ohio, where so far as I know, the question of whether the state law covers transgenderism has not been decided one way or the other. I am unaware whether Oiler v. Winn Dixie has ever been overruled, for example, do you have any input on that?

[erickka]

Nowadays there are so many tiny little loopholes employers can use against you, I would err on the side of caution, especially if you work for some of the big corporations. They may have anti discrimination rules on their books, but the also have powerful attorneys that can use those loopholes against you. On the other hand, what you do when not on their clock is none of their business if it is not illegal. The last time I checked a fella wearing a dress and high heels was perfectly legal in the U.S.

[Sherry Lynn]

In these days since 9/11 the authorities have passed or started enforcing laws banning the wearing of a disguise. I personally know of a cd that was arrested for this. I have also heard of Moslem women being hassled for wearing a veil. It may be legal to cd, but if a cop wants to hassle you, he will find a legal reason.

[VeronicaMoonlit]

Has everyone forgotten the WinnDixie incident?

Of course I do, Peter Oiler incident, 10 years ago....who is a member here (openly admitted it) IIRC. The incident took place in Louisiana...and as we all know, The south tends to be more "right to fire" and have fewer protections for GLBT folk than say states like Illinois are.

Veronica

[JenniferR771]

A friend, ebuddy, wanted to dress at work every day. Personnel said it was OK, but they day before she started her new look, she was fired. Poor customer relations, reason. Stay tuned.

[Jason+]

Peter Oiler decided to end his fight. Initially he won his case but Winn Dixie appealed and it was overturned. According the the article below he decided it wasn't worth the fight he would likely lose. As a final thank you from WD they sued him to recover their legal costs.

The second article is worth reading as well. Peter did find new employment with a company that obviously knows he is a cross dresser.

http://www.genderadvocates.org/News/Oiler%20ends%20fight.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/transgendernews/message/1965

[DeeInGeorgia]

To ShariM, you seem to forget that the excuse you suggest fir the employer was used as a justification to not employ people of color, people with disabilities, gays, women in the recent past or even now. That customers are offended is because of their own bigotry.

[Rogina B]

My only thought is "IF you are really good at what you do"....then any employer will most likely grant you the freedom of expression.You have to dress appropriately for the job under any circumstances..Although I work for myself,I am interested in knowing[or imagining]if a qualified technical person could do technical work in some of the companies I buy from. If you have a thick skin,and are sharper than your average customer,I think you will survive the cut. Just my opinion.

[PretzelGirl]

Is Lori the only respondent who is actually out?

Sorry, not keeping up real well lately. First I will say everyone's situation is different and geographical areas are different. Since I live in a liberal state <cough>, I don't worry about it. My company at both the division and company level have gender identity statements in their EO policy, for what it is worth. We have at least two TS ladies that I know of and one transitioned on the job (not sure about the other as it would have been before my time).

So I am not sweating it. I am not openly outing myself at work, that doesn't accomplish anything. But I have run into coworkers when out. Did they pay attention enough to know it was me? Who knows? Two appear to give me the look at work but no one is saying. So we shall see. It hasn't affected our ability to be pleasant to each other and get work done. But I am friendly with everyone, have a great reputation, and work hard. That is what counts in the end to me.


If an employee of mine came to work crossdressed, he would not be working for me any longer.

Clarification Brandy. I understand your need to run your business your way, but would you at least extend a warning that said "I can't allow that here"?

[Veronica27]

To ShariM, you seem to forget that the excuse you suggest fir the employer was used as a justification to not employ people of color, people with disabilities, gays, women in the recent past or even now. That customers are offended is because of their own bigotry.

An employer is in business to earn a living, and in so doing enables his employees to earn their living. This involves putting the customer first, regardless of their personal opinions and beliefs. Before a customer's desires can be ignored, the impact on the business has to be weighed carefully. The examples you list are not out of the ordinary, and I cannot think of any employer losing business in this day and age because he hired any of them. Crossdressing on the job is not yet anywhere near being a normal situation.

Secondly, a customer does not necessarily have to be offended in order to feel uncomfortable in a given situation. Having a crossdresser unexpectedly handle his or her transaction could be a bit unnerving because it is anything but a normal everyday experience for most people. Bigotry is a pretty strong word to apply to ordinary people who suddenly have something completely out of the ordinary thrust at them. We want people to be sensitive to our needs, but I don't think we can expect that unless we are willing to be sensitive to their feelings as well.

Veronica

[carrkool]

Well let me add my two cents from a person stand point. I was working for decker truck lines who is out of fort dodge iw. My terminal was the new one in missoula mn. I had a perfect work history with them never late nothing wrong. I found in their own handbook they cover gender id. so i contacted HR and spoke with them. I was told i could dress in femine any time any place.IE shipper, yard consignee. Than 2 weeks later i get a load heading to Oh coming out of wa. I load and start running. I get a message to swap loads at the yard that another driver is out of hours. Now this is nothing new with decker swapping out loads. so i get to the yard i was in mens attire that day as i needed to wash clothes. while waiting for the other "driver" they say they have a work order needs done on my truck to pull in the shop while i am there. Now i had asked to have my cat looked at because of a problem i had been having. So i pull in. wait. than a guy comes to the truck and ask me to come in to look at my logs. i walk in and we go into the mechaincs office where he says ok we are all here. The fire me. claiming i lied on my app. they claimed i had a criminal record i did not list. Now to start i do not have a record. I did get a fine for DC in pa in jan. but it is not on my record. so they throw me out of my truck with my wife and tell me they will contact me when i can get my belongings back. I get home and request my dac and my background record. turns out nothing on either about this charge that has been handled. clean background clean dac till than.

Bottom line is a right to work state or not, a protected right or not. if a company wants you gone your gone. i had also seen them fire a driver they did not like for putting the wrong start date for a former employer and this was 3 months after he started and by worng date i mean. example he put 8-9-10 and it was 8-10-10.said he lied on his app. so be carefull dot your I's and cross your T's before moving on. I got another job not planning on telling them but i still dress everyday. with the weather getting cold it will be easier because i will wear womens jeans top make up and nails done up with a coat to cover some and if asked about the make up my wife was bored inless i feel its safe. Now on a good note i went in a truck stop a while back fully dressed minus my wig and the girl working loved my look and told me about her guy friend. she called him up and he came out after she got of work and we all sat outside the J and bs and gave tips to each other.

[carrkool]

on another note there was another case where a lady who was in trans applied for a job i think it was atf. she explained everything and applied as her new self. than out of the blue she was told do to cuts the possiontion was no longer open to anyone. she got to looking alittle later and found another person less qualified had been hired instead. she filled an eeoe complaint and won. the courts ruled that not hiring her due to her trans was a form of sex discrimination. i want to say this was in a high court and never appealed.

[Amanda_P]

On a differant note.


Quite understandable that a Doctor, Lawyer or Indian chief might be terminated, local News/sports anchor, University president etc. Someone that is constantly under public scrutiny or is paid to interact with the public

There is a town in Oregan that elected a crossdressing mayor. He was quite open about it and walked the streets wearing a dress.

[catriona36]

against the law here to fire anyone for being cd. out of the work place. the only thing that could get you fired outside of work is facebook. there is a company that scans fb and reports back to clients about what the employees say on fb. then they fire them. there was a case here in the army where the army paid for the surgery of a mtf tg person. a friend of mine had his own company, he couldnt sak the guy working for him. he was all ways stuffing up, late , rude etc. was allways something different. its so hard to sack someone here even if they are uselessssssss.

[linda allen]

I'm glad this has been straightened out.

According to the posts here, you can be fired for crossdressing or you cannot be fired for crossdressing. I don't think anybody changed anybody else's mind.

My opinion - it depends on the job. There's no hard and fast rule. In most cases, if your behavior (and that includes how you dress) is causing a disruption or loss of business, and you don't correct that behavior, you can be terminated.

When thinking about this issue, it helps to think of how you would act if you were the boss or business owner. You hire people to do a job and make a profit for your company. If this isn't happpening, you need to let them go. You shouldn't be forced to hire or retain someone who is scaring customers away.

[BRANDYJ]

in answer ti Sue's question:

Clarification Brandy. I understand your need to run your business your way, but would you at least extend a warning that said "I can't allow that here"?

Yes, I would extend a warning and then maybe ask them to come over and dress at my house, just never in my place of business.


An employer is in business to earn a living, and in so doing enables his employees to earn their living. This involves putting the customer first, regardless of their personal opinions and beliefs. Before a customer's desires can be ignored, the impact on the business has to be weighed carefully. The examples you list are not out of the ordinary, and I cannot think of any employer losing business in this day and age because he hired any of them. Crossdressing on the job is not yet anywhere near being a normal situation.

Secondly, a customer does not necessarily have to be offended in order to feel uncomfortable in a given situation. Having a crossdresser unexpectedly handle his or her transaction could be a bit unnerving because it is anything but a normal everyday experience for most people. Bigotry is a pretty strong word to apply to ordinary people who suddenly have something completely out of the ordinary thrust at them. We want people to be sensitive to our needs, but I don't think we can expect that unless we are willing to be sensitive to their feelings as well.

Veronica

Veronica, very well said. That is exactly how I feel. To many CD's are selfish and think that if anyone does not like them being dressed around them is their problem and not theirs. To me that is very insensitive. I care about other's feelings and comfort level around me.

[PetiteDuality]

in answer ti Sue's question:

Yes, I would extend a warning and then maybe ask them to come over and dress at my house, just never in my place of business.



Then you could be sued for sexual harassment :-)

Litigation in US has gotten too far...

[LeaP]

... Bigotry is a pretty strong word to apply to ordinary people who suddenly have something completely out of the ordinary thrust at them. We want people to be sensitive to our needs, but I don't think we can expect that unless we are willing to be sensitive to their feelings as well.

I think bigotry is exactly the right word. You can toss in ignorance and a few other choice terms, too.

People who are merely being themselves aren't "thrusting" themselves on people any more than gay people are "forcing their lifestyle" on people. Having rights also requires no sensitivity on the part of others, else rights never have teeth.

I'm dual-minded on the employer question. I think true family businesses (meaning small businesses who employ ONLY immediate family members) should fall into the arena of personal association rights. Businesses who employ members of the public should not be permitted to discriminate - period. I regard business owners who discriminate as personally and primarily responsible for perpetuating the culture of discrimination in business. Passing this off on customers is cowardly, even if the concern sometimes has some basis in reality. After all, one (hopefully) doesn't START discriminating if a customer objects to, say, the race of an employee.

[BRANDYJ]

Then you could be sued for sexual harassment :-)

Litigation in US has gotten too far...

I think you are wrong. A business owner has the right to set a dress code for it's employees. A crossdresser does not have the right tocome to work dressed fem. There is nothing in the way of sexual harrassment for an employee to demand propper attire for work. to say it's sexual harrassment is a huge stretch.
So if you are correct, I guess the Hooter's waitresses can wear blue jeans and a sweat shirt to work and cut their hair as short as a butch cut ( pun intended)

[BRANDYJ]

I think bigotry is exactly the right word. You can toss in ignorance and a few other choice terms, too.

People who are merely being themselves aren't "thrusting" themselves on people any more than gay people are "forcing their lifestyle" on people. Having rights also requires no sensitivity on the part of others, else rights never have teeth.

I'm dual-minded on the employer question. I think true family businesses (meaning small businesses who employ ONLY immediate family members) should fall into the arena of personal association rights. Businesses who employ members of the public should not be permitted to discriminate - period. I regard business owners who discriminate as personally and primarily responsible for perpetuating the culture of discrimination in business. Passing this off on customers is cowardly, even if the concern sometimes has some basis in reality. After all, one (hopefully) doesn't START discriminating if a customer objects to, say, the race of an employee.

I have to disagree with you Lea. By definition: A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion. I am not a bigot by that definition simply because I don't believe a crossdresser or anyone has the right to dress the way they want to dress in the work place. I am not intolerant of crossdresser, gays or transexuals in any way. But if I was a business owner I have the right and responsibility to make a profit in order to survive. I strongly feel a crossdresser would make my customers uneasy, uncomfortable, embarrassed orotherwise cause them to do business elsewhere. I am a crossdresser, so how can you say I am bigoted just because I feel there is a time and place for everything. The work place is not one of them. What someone does on their own time, including me, is no one's business.
In a retail store where there are sales people waiting on the customer, the manner of dress and looks is very important to the success of that business. If I was selling high end clothes, furniture, or anything where the public has to deal with a sales person, I would not hire someone with tattoos all over their body, piercings in their nose, brows, lips and tongues. It would ruin the professional image of the store. now if I was selling things that attract those with the tats and piercings, I then would hire them to wait on like minded people.

This is not being a bigot, it's being a smart businessman.

[LeaP]

... I feel there is a time and place for everything. The work place is not one of them. ...

This is not being a bigot, it's being a smart businessman.

In this case, I'd say they coincide.

Trivializing this ("dress the way they want to dress in the workplace") may be appropriate to the most casual CDers, it is not for many others such as transsexuals and the gender variant, whose identity is at issue. I'm unwilling to compromise on a basic human rights issue for money.

We'll agree to disagree, I suspect.

[StarrOfDelite]

I think you are wrong. A business owner has the right to set a dress code for it's employees. A crossdresser does not have the right tocome to work dressed fem. There is nothing in the way of sexual harrassment for an employee to demand propper attire for work. to say it's sexual harrassment is a huge stretch.
So if you are correct, I guess the Hooter's waitresses can wear blue jeans and a sweat shirt to work and cut their hair as short as a butch cut ( pun intended)

You are correct in stating that an employer has a right to set a dress code. However, assuming that there is an anti-discrimination law in place, that dress code has to be equally applied to all employees. Thus, a work place rule against skirts and high heels would have to include female employees as well as male. Same thing for long hair, liptick, earrings, et cetera. Regarding Hooters, if a man is willing to wear hot pants/short shorts, and take table orders on roller skates then under Federal law he cannot be refused a job if qualified by training and experience. There is, in fact, a famous lawsuit in which Hooters paid the EEOC a $3.75 million dollar settlement and agreed to create gender neutral positions.

[Donna June]

A few years ago a truck driver who drove for a supermarket chain got fired when it was found out he was a crossdresser. I believe it was in Texas. He didn't dress while working and from the story I read, was an excellent reliable employee, but his record didn't matter to his empolyers

[carrkool]

Ok Let me clarify this some hopefull for good, not to end this thread but to help people. As of this year you CAN NOT be fire for crossdressing as the EEOE rule and add that firing someone for this would be a violtion of the protected right of Sex. They also clarified the EEOE police and added Gender Identity to the list of protected work class. HOWEVER........HOWEVER>>>>>>HOWEVER....watch closely here. If you dress out side of work or at work and they do not like it they can and will find a reason to let you go. It does not matter how long you have been there. We all make mistakes at work at some points. Be it we are sick and have to take off a week or you get back from break a few mintes late there is always a way to fire someone. at which point it is on you to file a complaint and wait for the EEOE board to review it and up to you to insure it is proven that you are let go because you crossdress. Intill the day comes where we are out in numbers dressed at work we will have to have the fear of losing our jobs. This applies to US persons. I do not know about other countries. I have done so much legal research on this I have my worn my laptop and my cell phone.lol But the facts remain. LEGALLY you can NOT be fire for crossdressing BUT they can and will should they choice, fire you for some other BS reason

[StarrOfDelite]

A few years ago a truck driver who drove for a supermarket chain got fired when it was found out he was a crossdresser. I believe it was in Texas. He didn't dress while working and from the story I read, was an excellent reliable employee, but his record didn't matter to his empolyers

That is the Oiler vs Winn-Dixie case I mentioned in an earlier post. There is also a case called Waddams v. Initech, which was dismissed by the trial court, and reinstated by the appeals court. As has been pointed out, the EEOC has mad gender identity a protected class within the past year. In Waddams, the process was complicated because Waddams was fired for not showing up at work on a Saturday when he chose to attend a transgender support group instead.

[meganmartin]

I am going to weight in on this although seen the topic has many opinions.
Although many states have a right to work law and within that many employers have the right to terminate employement for any reason or for no reason is the better term. However if they can not show just cause there are terms of that termination such as un-employment etc.
From being in management for many years in charge of hiring and firing of employees it is very simple if you read the chart or the website the law it clearly tilted on the employers behalf unless you can prove discrimination ( which is hard to do ) you will just have to find another job.

[PetiteDuality]

I think you are wrong. A business owner has the right to set a dress code for it's employees. A crossdresser does not have the right tocome to work dressed fem. There is nothing in the way of sexual harrassment for an employee to demand propper attire for work. to say it's sexual harrassment is a huge stretch.
So if you are correct, I guess the Hooter's waitresses can wear blue jeans and a sweat shirt to work and cut their hair as short as a butch cut ( pun intended)


I was focusing more on what you said about

"Yes, I would extend a warning and then maybe ask them to come over and dress at my house"

If you are the boss and make such invitation, that could be considered sexual harassment...

[MsJanessa]

Depends on what state you live in---In Maine, where I used to live and practice law, an anti discrimination statute was passed in 2006 (I think that was the year) which protects GBLT--and specifically makes it illegal to discriminate in employment based on a person's sexual or gender identification. Other places aren't so libral when it comes to protecting our rights

[eluuzion]

I realize that this is an "old" thread...But, for what it is worth, I decided to toss this out for anyone interested...

I am not a licensed attorney, so I will not profess to know the “answers” you are looking for.

What I can do is tell you where you can find the answers you are looking for. I will let you do your own research and “homework”, :heehee:

Transgender Laws and Legislation indexed by State. (use the state search engine provided on the page).
www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/state

Specific to workplace issues…
www.hrc.org/resources/category/workplace
(http://www.hrc.org/resources/category/workplace)

more workplace related issues/resources here…
www.hrc.org/resources/category/transgender

Non-discrimination Laws (including gender laws)
www.transgenderlaw.org/ndlaws/ (http://www.transgenderlaw.org/ndlaws/)

:love:

[LadyPilot]

It is sad that we have to worry about being fired because of the clothes we wear. Big companies such as Boeing has CD and LGBT groups so you are less likely to get fired, apparently, there is safety in numbers. I (like many) are in a job the may not be "dressed" appropriate and I accept that, but, after work I want to do whatever I want without the fear of getting in trouble; this is not a way to live.

[Loni]

for me getting fired just cause i dress is nothing to worry about. state laws, and union rules as well as company edicts.

even if the union did back me and the company said ok no problems.
my fellow workers would do things to make my like a living hell so i would have to move on.

some jobs and people are good to go or just ok with it. some are very anti. even with the first statement above.

no law or requirement will change how people think or act.

so for me it is not done..much at work.
required pants and top. so that is a set deal. but the top iterates my skin so i have something on under it. (not frilly).
last time i bought some work shoes i stepped up unknowing (really) to the women's wall of shoes, the sa said over here are the men's shoes.
steel toed work boots all look about the same no true gender lines. hard leather crappy looking, no style.

.

[Stephanie47]

Loni, if there are federal, state and local laws in place concerning gender discrimination, then what the other employees may do has a bearing. It's called a hostile work environment. An employer cannot just turn a blind eye or deaf ear to what goes on. If all the guys hit on the delicious looking well stack long legged blond in the office, that, is no different than employees casting dispersions upon a gay, lesbian or transgendered individual. It seems human resources becomes very sensitive to gender discrimination when it comes with dollar signs attached to it.