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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeaP

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRANDYJ

... 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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRANDYJ

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.

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRANDYJ

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...

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

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


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

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

:love:

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.

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.

.

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.