Remarks from EEOC Commissioner Constance S. Barker at ACI Conference in NYC

I have just listened to a keynote address from Commissioner Constance Barker of the EEOC.  Here are a few takeaways from Ms. Barker's remarks:

• The EEOC will issue final rules "very soon" on the ADA and wellness plans as well as GINA.

• While the EEOC takes the position that its criminal background checks apply to employers irrespective of state law (even those requiring background checks for certain industries), as a practical matter the EEOC will not file suits against companies following background check laws such as nursing homes or day care centers.  The thought process behind the EEOC position regarding state law is a fear that some industries would lobby state legislatures for carve outs to end-run the background check requirement.

• The EEOC continues to crack down on severance and release agreements that it considers overly broad.  Title VII waivers should now be clearly set out and possibly put in bold print.

• The EEOC has not taken a formal position on releases that allow an employee or former employee to file administrative charges but require the employee to not obtain any monetary recovery as a result.

• The EEOC hiring freeze has been lifted and the EEOC recently hired 350 new employees--mostly intake and investigators to tackle the 75,000 agency's charge backlog.

• 27 percent of the EEOC's current litigation docket relates to "systemic" claims; i.e. cases where companies are accused of widespread practices that are discriminatory.

• The EEOC now utilizes 18 "lead systemic investigators" at its regional locations to oversee systemic investigations and will seek to aggressively pursue systemic cases.

• The bill currently pending before the Senate to fund the EEOC would require the EEOC to follow regulatory notice and comment rules where two commissioners request it.  This would mean that the EEOC would effectively be unable to simply issue "guidance" as it has done recently since the two Republican Commissioners could request a comment period just as when the EEOC issues regulations.  

EEOC Formally Includes Sexual-Orientation Discrimination as Part of “Sex Discrimination” Under Title VII; Michigan Treasury Issues Guidance on Same-Sex Spousal Benefits

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued a formal decision in a federal sector case finding that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a form of illegal “sex discrimination” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The case, Complainant v. Foxx, E.E.O.C., No. 0120133080, issued July 16, 2015, found that “[s]exual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination because it necessarily entails treating an employee less favorably because of the employee's sex.”  Title VII applies to employers with 15 or more employees. 

While the EEOC decision does not carry the force of law, it indicates how the agency will address claims of sexual orientation discrimination, and it can have persuasive effect when courts consider private sector lawsuits involving alleged sexual orientation discrimination.  So far, however, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal court of appeals that hears cases from Michigan federal courts, has consistently ruled that “sexual orientation is not a prohibited basis for discriminatory acts under Title VII.”  It remains an open question as to whether the Sixth Circuit, or any other court, will reverse itself based on the EEOC position.

The Sixth Circuit has held that Title VII does protect transsexual persons from discrimination for failing to act in accordance and/or identify with their perceived sex or gender.  The new EEOC ruling, however, goes a step beyond acting in accordance with a gender stereotype and expressly finds that sexual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination under Title VII. 

It is also important to recognize that based on the new EEOC ruling and in the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage, this area of the law is in flux.  Courts and administrative agencies are quickly adopting new rules that will force new compliance mandates on employers.  For instance, on July 16, 2015, the Michigan Treasury issued guidance clarifying taxation of benefits for same-sex spouses.  Employers in Michigan should stop applying state income tax withholding to the portion of employee wages that is used to pay premiums for a same-sex spouse.  Further, an employee with a same-sex spouse may wish to file a new W-4 changing the number of deductions, marital status, and possibly adding a spouse’s dependents.  Employers are encouraged to contact counsel with any questions in this quickly-changing area of law.

Lynn McGuire contributed to this post.

Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Decision and DOL Overtime Expansion -– What Employers Need to Know Today