Subscribe for free: compensation & pay equity law review
You'll receive a weekly newsletter email with the most important legal news on compensation and pay equity. We handle your contact details in line with our Privacy Policy
Editor's Note
Who Decides What Gender Is?
Gender is not just biology; it's also legal and political. Science says there are many genders and they sometimes change. Some animals are designed to change gender—fish, birds, snakes, insects, even turtles change their gender. It's a completely normal part of nature.
For legal purposes gender is a protected factor and humans cannot be discriminated against because of their gender. This is a fundamental civil and human right. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights begins with these paragraphs in the preamble:
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Human rights include:
The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution has similar language:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Gender is also about privacy. Why are people so obsessed about what's in someone's pants? And when does it make sense for the government to get involved in designating gender for someone?
It doesn't make sense. Governments generally are not empowered to decide a person's gender one way or the other. In fact, the government's job is to treat all people equally and to apply laws in ways that do not discriminate regardless of gender.
I expect to see litigation making these and other arguments soon.
In the meantime, all federal and state anti-discrimination laws are still in effect, which include protections for people with genders besides male and female. And state law will continue to be in effect no matter what the Executive or Congress plan to do. Employers are still obligated to respect people's human rights and dignity and to not discriminate.
- Heather Bussing
by Sheila Abron, Leanne Lane Coyle, and Emily Town
A pair of back-to-back moves from the new Trump administration demonstrates a clear shift in the way the federal government will approach EEO and anti-bias laws over the course of the next several years. On his first day in office, President Trump issued an executive order announcing that the federal government will recognize only two sexes while rolling back Biden-era EEO workplace guidance on LGBTQ+ harassment. And the next day, Trump appointed EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas – a vocal critic of DEI programs and other Biden administration policies – as Acting Chair of the Commission. What do you need to know about these actions, and what are the five key takeaways for your workplace?
Signed within hours after Trump took office, the executive order is officially titled, "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” It mandates that the federal government recognize only two biological sexes, male and female, as determined at conception. Among other things, the order:
Having served on the Commission since 2020, Andrea Lucas now occupies the role of Acting Chair according to Trump’s January 21 announcement. She made clear her position right off the bat: “In recent years, this agency has remained silent in the face of multiple forms of widespread, overt discrimination. Consistent with the President’s Executive Orders and priorities, my priorities will include:
Lucas has twice been a dissenting voice against EEOC actions that helped shape the last several years of workplace law:
The move installing Lucas into power doesn’t change the fact that she will be outnumbered on the EEOC by Democratic appointees for the next two years. Commissioners serve five-year staggered terms, and the opportunity for Trump to completely shift the five-member leadership team to a Republican majority will not arrive until 2026. Until then, Democrats will retain majority voting power.
But that’s not to say that Lucas will be without power. In conjunction with the Commission’s General Counsel – a role that is expected to be filled by a Trump appointee in the near future – Lucas can help guide the EEOC on which kinds of lawsuits the agency will file and other procedural steps it will take.
Under 2023 filing instructions, the EEO-1 form only provided binary options for reporting the sex of your employees – but allowed employers to voluntarily report non-binary employee demographic data in the comments section of the report. You should assume that will change for the next reporting year.
Trump’s executive order proclaims that “‘sex’ is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity’.” However, this stance runs counter to the Supreme Court’s Bostock ruling, which explicitly determined that “sex” as defined by Title VII includes “gender identity.” The Court has tilted right since that 6-3 decision, however, so it’s possible that the interpretation could change if the issue were teed up before SCOTUS in the future – which appears to be a distinct possibility. No doubt this issue will be the subject of frequent litigation in the coming months and years, but you should recognize that discrimination against transgender and non-binary/gender non-conforming people remains illegal under federal law.
Andrea Lucas has made clear her stance on gender-affirming bathroom access: “Every female worker has privacy and safety rights that necessitate access to single-sex workplace bathrooms limited to biological women,” she said while voting against the EEOC’s most recent workplace harassment guidance. And we know where the President stands given his executive order.
Practically speaking, employers could be between a rock and a hard place on this issue: do you permit transgender and non-binary/gender nonconforming employees to use the bathroom that aligns with gender identity and risk EEOC enforcement action, or prohibit such conduct in alignment with the executive order and risk gender discrimination claims in court?
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court decision discussed above specifically avoided the bathroom issue, saying it did “not purport to address bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind.” And Trump’s executive order requires the Department of Justice to “correct” misapplications of that SCOTUS decision. Which means we’ll be seeing lots of litigation over this issue – and perhaps a return trip to the Supreme Court.
The EEOC’s most recent workplace harassment guidance said that employers did not need to grant religious accommodations to employees if the accommodations would create a hostile environment. For example, employers did not have to permit employees to deliberately misgender people because their religious beliefs ran counter to certain gender identity issues, or permit hostility towards LGBTQ+ workers because of an employee’s religiously held belief. But with the guidance now rescinded, the matter is sure to be tested out in litigation, as some employees may now claim their religious beliefs do not permit them to follow gender-identity or sexual orientation-related policies or practices.
The most controversial aspect of the April 2024 PWFA rules is the requirement that employers accommodate applicants and workers who need time off or other workplace modifications for an abortion procedure. Given that Lucas voted against the rules at the time because they would “broaden the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,” we expect the Commission to rescind the PWFA rules shortly after Republicans assume control in 2026.
Both the Trump executive order and Andrea Lucas’s nomination statement take an aggressive stance against corporate DEI programs. To understand how to respond to this development, read our recent Insight: Trump Orders Feds to Combat “Illegal” Corporate DEI Programs: 5 Takeaways for Private-Sector Employers + What You Should Do Now.
You'll receive a weekly newsletter email with the most important legal news on compensation and pay equity. We handle your contact details in line with our Privacy Policy
CompAnalyst® Pay Equity Suite can help you achieve and sustain pay equity