Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Title VII
Title VII, the federal law that prohibits most workplace harassment and discrimination, covers all private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions with 15 or more employees. In addition to prohibiting discrimination against workers because of race, color, national origin, religion, and sex, those protections have been extended to include barring against discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, sex stereotyping, and sexual harassment of employees.
Audit your policies and practices with the Employment Practices Self-Audit Workbook
What's your HR IQ on
Religious Discrimination?
Family Responsibility Discrimination?
National Origin Discrimination?
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?
Workplace Harassment?
Currently, Title VII doesn't include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.However federal legislation adding sexual orientation as a protected class against discrimination, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), has been proposed in recent years and has been supported by many Democrats in Congress and President Barack Obama. Many states have employment discrimination and harassment laws as well and may include even more protected classes – such as marital status and sexual orientation – than Title VII covers.
State-by-state comparison of 50 employment laws in all 50 states
Related articles on Title VII
Title VII tools for Employment Law Letter subscribers
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was signed into law on Jan. 29, 2009, changes when the statute of limitations begins for workers’pay discrimination claims under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). It declares that an unlawful employment practice occurs not only when a discriminatory pay decision or practice is adopted but also when the employee becomes subject to the decision or practice, as well as each additional application of that decision or practice. In other words, each time compensation is paid.
HR Guide to Employment Law: A practical compliance reference manual covering 14 topics, including discrimination
Harassment
The legal theory of harassment evolved out of legal interpretations of the discrimination prohibitions in Title VII. The law itself doesn't mention the term harassment at all. Rather, the law says:
. . . It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer . . . to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Using the words “otherwise to discriminate against . . . with respect to . . . terms and conditions of employment” as a jumping off place, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted that a hostile work environment will violate the prohibitions of Title VII. When harassment is so pervasive and severe that it actually alters an employee’s terms or conditions of employment and creates an abusive working environment, a violation of the law has occurred.
Title VII and the EEOC
Before an employee can file a complaint against an employer under Title VII, he first must file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). If the EEOC finds that the employee's claim has merit, it may sue on his behalf. Otherwise, it will issue him a "right-to-sue" letter, and he then can file a complaint and begin the litigation process.
Employees and the EEOC can sue for lost wages, benefits, reinstatement, and attorneys' fees. Compensatory damages (damages for wages and emotional distress) are "capped" by Title VII and the amount allowed per employee will vary depending on the size of the employer.
View all HR topics
Related articles on Title VII featured in HR Hero Line and the Employment Law Post
- 11 Ways to for Supervisors to Avoid Workplace Lawsuits
(South Carolina Employment Law Letter, January 2010)
- EEOC Discrimination Charges Set Records in 2009
(Human Resources News, January 2010)
- Fair Pay Act Revives Police Employee's Discrimination Claims
(Delaware Employment Law Letter, December 2009)
- Supreme Court to Decide Key Employment Issues in 2010
(Federal Employment Law Insider, December 2009)
- Hostile Work Environment: Employee Warned to 'Find God' or 'Go to Hell'
(North Dakota Employment Law, November 2009)
- Addressing Employees' Religious Beliefs and Practices in the Workplace
(Indiana Employment Law Letter, October 2009)
- More on Supreme Court’s Ruling in Key Reverse Discrimination Case
(Human Resources News, July 2009)
- Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Firefighters in Reverse Discrimination Case
(Human Resources News, July 2009)
- Sotomayor’s District Court Decisions on Sex Discrimination Under Title VII
(The Word on Employment Law, June 2009)
- Will Gender and National Origin Make a Difference in the Next Supreme Court Justice’s Jurisprudence? - Part 2
(Connecticut Employment Law Letter, June 2009)
- EEOC Settles Race Bias Case Against Construction Company for $325,000
(Arizona Employment Law Letter , June 2009)
- U.S. Supreme Court Issues Major Decision in Title VII Retaliation Case
(Human Resources News, January 2009)
- Important Labor and Employment Decisions Pending Before the Supreme Court
(Federal Employment Law Insider, January 2009)
- Sour Economy, Political Changes Could Create Perfect Storm for Employment-Related Lawsuits
(Kansas Employment Law Letter, January 2009)
- Is Breaking the Law Protected Activity by Employees When Filing an EEOC Charge?
(Colorado Employment Law Letter, November 2008)
- EEOC Offers Employers Guidance on Avoiding Religious Discrimination
(Oklahoma Employment Law Letter, October 2008)
- Three Questions Employers Should Ask in Discrimination Cases
(South Carolina Employment Law Letter, February 2008)
- Pregnancy Complications: Disability, No; Sex Discrimination, Maybe
(Connecticut Employment Law Letter, April 2008)
- Can Employers Discriminate Against Younger Workers?
(Virginia Employment Law Letter, April 2008)
- 3 Questions Employers Should Ask in Discrimination Cases
(South Carolina Employment Law Letter, February 2008)
- Handling Holiday Religious Expression in the Workplace
(Georgia Employment Law Letter, November 2007)
- Race Claims Tossed Despite Offensive Conduct
(Iowa Employment Law Letter, August 2007)
- EEOC Guidance, Best Practices for Working Caregivers
(Oklahoma Employment Law Letter, August 2007)
- Supreme Court Adopts Broad Retaliation Test in Burlington Northern Case: What Should Employers Do?
(Alabama Employment Law Letter, August 2006)
HR Tools for Title VII
|
