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/2012/0...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/2012/0...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.

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.