Posted on 04/09/2015 12:30:18 PM PDT by jazusamo
The Obama administration has ordered the U.S. Army to pay damages for discriminating against a transgender worker by denying the one-time man access to the women’s bathroom after he “transitioned” to female, thus changing his “gender identity.”
Additionally, the administration has determined that the Army also discriminated against the employee by failing to use his new female name (Tamara Lusardi) and instead continuing to use the name the man was originally hired under. The case involves a military veteran who worked as a civilian software specialist at the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) in Redstone, Alabama. Lusardi served in the Army from 1986 to 1993 and claims he suffered in a hostile workplace when management and co-workers kept calling him “sir” after becoming a woman and legally changing his name.
This month the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the bloated federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, ordered the Army to pay up for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by committing sex discrimination against Lusardi. The EEOC tweaked the 1960s federal law to include transgender to the mix, asserting that it constitutes “gender identity discrimination” and therefore falls under Title VII of the Civil Rights Law. The agency defines transgender as persons whose gender identity, gender expression or behavior does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.
In the order issued this month the EEOC writes that Lusardi was harassed because superiors used “male pronouns” after he identified as a woman and “referred to her using these male signifiers on at least seven occasions.” The Army also violated Lusardi’s rights by refusing to let him use the women’s bathroom, the EEOC asserts. The document includes testimony from an Army official explaining that Lusardi was assigned a single-user executive restroom because other female employees would feel “extremely uncomfortable having an individual, despite the fact that she is conducting herself as a female, is still basically a male, physically.”
Allowing a man to use the women’s bathroom would cause more problems than having the individual use a private restroom, the official, identified as the Deputy Program Manager of the Program Executive Office, goes on to explain. “I also thought that under the circumstances, the male restroom would be inappropriate. So, that was left to use the single use bathrooms.” Lusardi used the women’s bathroom anyways and management repeatedly asked him to use the gender-neutral executive restroom until he underwent the final surgery for the sex change because it was making other employees uncomfortable.
There is no cause to question that complainant—who was assigned the sex of male at birth but identifies as female—is female, the EEOC writes in its order. “And certainly where, as here, a transgender female has notified her employer that she has begun living and working full-time as a woman, the agency must allow her access to the women’s bathroom,” the EEOC says. “This ‘real-life experience’ often is crucial to a transgender employee’s transition.” The agency found that the Army’s actions were sufficiently severe or pervasive to subject Lusardi to a hostile work environment based on sex and ordered compensatory damages and attorney’s fees.
Under Obama the EEOC has spiraled out of control to meet the administration’s mission of operating a politically correct government. In fact, nearly half of federal agency rulings dismissing employee discrimination claims have been overturned under Obama, costing American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars in settlements. In one year alone this translated into an astounding $51.4 billion that federal agencies paid to settle discrimination claims that often had no merit, according to the government’s figures. In nearly 45% of discrimination claims thrown out by agencies across the U.S. government the EEOC stepped in and revived the cases. The number has increased steadily since Obama became president, according to the EEOC’s figures.
The agency has also taken legal action against private businesses across the nation accusing them of everything from discriminating against minorities for running criminal background and credit checks to discriminating against Muslims for not allowing hijabs on the job. Last year the EEOC even went after a Green Bay Wisconsin metal and plastic manufacturer for requiring employees to speak English at work. In that case the EEOC asserted that the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on national origin, which includes the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. Therefore, according to this absurd reasoning, foreigners have the right to speak their native language even during work hours at an American company that requires English.
Social re-engineering 101 Alinsky style.
Or worse, at all your encounters with governmental officials.
Certainly not the Obama Justice Dept. Is there any other conceivable motivation for gender benders?
Can we just give it all away?
Problem is us women haven’t changed ours and we shouldn’t have to fear for our safety.
“Assigned the sex”???? No you were knitted together in the womb and emerged the sex you were meant to be whether not you think it fits your personality.
AMEN...Couldn’t agree more.
As the headline writer seems to want to use the Newspeak “trans”, rather than describing the aggrieved employee with the appropriate English description, “delusional man who claims to be a woman”, the headline writer should get the Newspeak usage correct: a “trans man” is Newspeak for a delusional woman who insists she is a man. The deluded individual is what is called in Newspeak a “trans woman”
The whole thing creeps me out. I’m not convinced there’s another reason.
A man so overwhelmed with desire for female relationship that he takes on the attributes of a woman is deeply disturbed and overtly perverted. What possible other reason can he have for him to insist on disrobing and performing toilet functions with women?
Seems to me they could be so screwed up in the head that they actually thought they were born with the mentality of the opposite sex. I’m not sure how much of that I buy into though.
I’ll have to say that it seems to me this type of person would be more a candidate for counseling rather than the rest of society having to stand on it’s head to accommodate him.
I’m only going with my gut here. I have no knowledge other than common sense here.
All of this is just going BEYOND ridiculous!!!! Pushing the gay/transgender agenda in the Military is going to reduce the quality and readiness and weaken it!!!
Active Duty ping.
It is testosterone driven perversion, nothing more.
I don’t think these guys are all secretly hitting on women.
I do think there is that risk when a bathroom is shared with women. Pretenders can join in, and that’s a problem. How do you stop that if guys are allowed to go into the female bathroom on a whim? That’s my issue.
There are districts where these guys like to hang out. It’s my take that some are hitting on men, and some are not homosexuals. They just like to dress up weird.
I think some of them want to get out of the men’s bathroom because men don’t take kindly to strange characters hanging out in their restroom. So we should push them off on women and girls? No.
I appreciate the comments. Testosterone may play in, but which direction is that driving all these men? I don’t think it’s just to men or just to women.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.