The Philadelphia gender identity discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates are experienced in defending those individuals who have faced gender identity discrimination in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and recognize the importance that the recent EEOC decision will have on deciding future cases in all U.S. Courts. Until now, although many states and municipalities across the nation have clearly defined statutes protecting individuals from gender identity discrimination in the workplace, complaints filed with the EEOC claiming gender identity discrimination were often rejected because of uncertainty in interpreting the language of the existing law.  The EEOC’s decision recognizes and protects the rights of transgender people to declare their gender identity without fear of discrimination in the workplace. 

Transgender individuals include those who are transsexual, transvestites, and androgynes.  Though they may have been born with male or female characteristics, they perceive themselves as the opposite sex and have the right to choose to their gender identity based on this self concept.  Many transgender individuals decide to surgically transition to the opposite sex, while some choose to live as male or female, despite their anatomy.  An employer who refuses to hire, who terminates, or who treats an  individual unfairly because they transition to male or female gender is in violation of the law. 

Gender Identity Discrimination Clearly Defined by EEOC Decision

The EEOC decision makes it clear that sex is no longer defined solely on biological characteristics.  An individual’s gender identity is defined by physical and genetic characteristics as well as self-perceived gender, encompassing not just a person’s biological sex, but also the cultural and social aspects associated with masculinity and femininity. Therefore, a refusal to hire or promote, or otherwise discriminate on the basis of gender identity is by definition sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Contact the employment discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates to learn more about this landmark decision.

Philadelphia Employment Discrimination Lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates Advocate for Victims of Gender Identity Discrimination  

The Philadelphia gender identity discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates are strong advocates for all those who face sex discrimination based on gender identity.  If you believe that you have been denied employment, terminated, demoted, or unfairly compensated or treated based on your gender identity, we can help you seek justice.  Our experienced, knowledgeable team of employment discrimination lawyers will assess the details of your claim, advise you of your options, and represent you in any and all proceedings. Call us today at 215-569-1999 for a free consultation or contact us online. 

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of sex, race, religion, or national origin.  The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 mandates that an employer with 15 or more employees must treat a pregnant worker like any other employee that becomes temporarily disabled due to illness or injury.  All policies regarding health insurance, paid family or disability leave, and continuation of employment offered in their benefits package must include pregnant employees as well.   Even with this law in effect, the Washington Post recently reported that job discrimination complaints filed by pregnant women rose 23% in the last six years.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received almost 6,000 pregnancy discrimination complaints last year alone.

Pregnancy Discrimination and Sexual Discrimination in Pennsylvania

The Philadelphia pregnancy discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates understand the problems that can occur in the workplace when a woman confirms her pregnancy.  Employers may begin to question the pregnant woman’s ability to perform her job-related duties, or fear that she will become a liability to the company.  In some cases, women that suffer pregnancy related health conditions are forced to take unpaid leave, and then find that their position had been filled when they are able to return to their job. 

This type of treatment is unfair and unlawful.  Statistics show that women are working to full capacity throughout their pregnancy, and often return to work within weeks of giving birth.  Under the law, these women are entitled to the same treatment and benefits that any other employee is granted when they are temporarily disabled.  To do otherwise is in direct violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.  Moreover, pregnancy discrimination is a form of sexual discrimination, and as such, employers cannot withhold employment, or terminate employment based on a woman’s pregnancy any more than they can terminate someone based on their sex, race, religion, or national origin.

Pregnancy Discrimination Can Cost You More than Your Job

Victims of pregnancy discrimination face the loss of wages, health insurance, and in some cases, their job.  When this happens, the employee faces a financial crisis that could put them in a desperate situation.  Medical expenses related to pregnancy can quickly overwhelm a family if health insurance benefits are terminated.  Mortgages, car payments, and living expenses continue when a pregnant woman loses her job or is forced to take an unpaid leave.  Although pregnancy discrimination affects women of all professional backgrounds, it is most common among low wage earners and many find themselves relying on public assistance programs until they can find new jobs.

The Philadelphia pregnancy discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates recognize these hardships and are dedicated to helping you recover lost wages, potential earnings pursuant to your employment contract, and punitive and other compensatory damages, as well as legal fees.   The process can be overwhelming, but our experienced team of employment law attorneys will work with you to ensure that your rights are protected as outlined in the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.

Sidney L. Gold & Associates are Philadelphia’s Premier Pregnancy Discrimination Firm  

If you have faced discrimination based on pregnancy or a pregnancy-related condition, call us today for a free consultation.  We will review the evidence in your case, advise you on how to proceed, and work to get you the compensation you deserve. The pregnancy discrimination lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates have offices in Philadelphia and serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.  Let our knowledgeable, experienced employment law attorneys help you claim what you are entitled by law to receive.   Call us today at 215-569-1999 for a free consultation or contact us online.

Supreme Court Decision Shifts Burden of Proof in Age Discrimination Lawsuits

In 2009, the Supreme Court set a new legal precedent for those facing age discrimination in the work place.  Prior to 2009, when an employee or job applicant charged an employer with age discrimination, the plaintiff only had to provide proof that age was a factor in their being demoted, laid off, or denied a promotion or employment.  The employer was then charged with proving that age was not a factor in their decision.  Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in 2009, the burden of proof has now shifted to the plaintiff, which is not an easy task when you consider that the employee now has to provide hard evidence of what went into the employer’s decision-making process.  For the over two million unemployed workers aged 55 and older finding a job or maintaining your position is even more challenging.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 Protections Affected by New Legal Precedent

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 protects Americans from discrimination in the workplace based on age.  When the Civil Rights Act was redefined in 1994, new standards for the ADEA were not included.  The Supreme Court ruled that without this, the new precedent could be set.  Now, courtrooms across the nation are adopting the standard, making it harder to prove age discrimination than it is to prove discrimination based on sex, natural origin, race, or religion.

Proposed Legislation Will Restore Original Standard of Proof in Age Discrimination Claims

Iowa Senators Tom Harkin and Charles Grassley agree that the current precedent limits the rights of older Americans in the workforce, and have proposed legislation to restore the original ADEA standard.  They recently introduced a bill that would put the burden of proof back on the employer.  The Protecting Older Workers against Age Discrimination Act seeks to restate the ambiguous language in the ADEA, and clearly define where the burden of proof lies.   If this legislation passes, older Americans will be evaluated under the same criteria as their younger colleagues, making job performance, not age, the focus in the employer’s decision making process. 

Call the Philadelphia Age Discrimination Attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates

If you suspect you have experienced the loss of a job, been denied a promotion, or have not been offered employment based on your age, call the Philadelphia age discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold and Associates.  Representing clients in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, our employment lawyers will examine the details of your case and advise you on the best way to proceed.    With the burden of proof resting on you, our skilled litigators will gather vital evidence for your defense to prove that the employer based their negative decision on your age.  The process can be cumbersome, but our knowledgeable employment law attorneys have the experience necessary to succeed in your case.  Call our office today at 215-569-1999 to schedule an appointment to meet with an experienced Philadelphia age discrimination attorney or contact us online.

Discrimination against people who are out of work is a phenomenon that’s been in the news for a while, but New Jersey stands alone as the only state to prohibit advertising a job that “knowingly or purposely” requires an applicant to be employed. As our country continues to struggle with a high unemployment rate, consider the irony in this: people who are unemployed and looking for jobs, need to be employed, to find employment. Many qualified people are unemployed, yet many companies find a way to screen out the jobless workers during the application process. This type of discrimination is just one of many types of employment practices that result in disparate treatment of individuals in the workplace. The Philadelphia Employment Discrimination Attorneys of Sidney L. Gold & Associates has built a reputation of being one of Pennsylvania’s premier employment law firms fighting against workplace discrimination in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

While unemployment rates appear to be on the decline, 8.3 percent of the population remains unemployed. When unemployment rates are high, employers become inundated with candidates for the limited openings. Employers seek to limit the amount of applicants by disqualifying potential applicants by advertising that “the unemployed” need not apply. In response to this recent development in job advertisements, members of Congress and several state lawmakers are taking action to amend anti-discrimination laws to add “unemployed status” as a protected class.

Although several states are considering legislation making it illegal to practice unemployment discrimination, discriminatory hiring practices targeting the unemployed are currently legal in every state except New Jersey where employees face stiff penalties for unemployment discrimination. California lawmakers recently introduced proposed legislation that would mandate fines for employers or employment agencies that refuse to consider out-of-work applicants for openings.  Connecticut lawmakers are considering a similar bill. In addition, Democrats in both chambers of Congress now want to make unemployment discrimination a federal crime.

Fair Employment Act of 2011 Seek to Protect Unemployed from Discrimination

In an effort to protect the rights of the jobless from unemployment discrimination, Georgia’s Democratic Representative Hank Johnson has introduced a Federal bill to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  If passed, the Fair Employment Act of 2011 would make the unemployed a protected class, thereby making it illegal for employers to limit available jobs to those already employed.  Employers are discriminating against the most powerless candidates when they post job openings and advertisements stating that: “Only currently employed need apply.”  Representative Johnson is working to afford the same protection to the unemployed that already exists for discrimination based on race, sex, religion, or national origin.

New Jersey Leads States in Passing Unemployment Discrimination Law

While the Federal bill waits to be made law, individual states are starting to think about taking the law into their own hands.   On March 29, 2011, New Jersey lawmakers took the lead in passing a law that prohibits employment discrimination based on an applicant’s employment status.  According to the New Jersey law, employers cannot post job openings or advertise open positions in print or on the Internet that exclude the unemployed from applying or being considered for a job.  Employers who violate this law face stiff penalties.  While some argue that this law infringes on the employer’s free speech rights, others contend that to allow otherwise would be to legalize discrimination against qualified candidates who have a right to be considered for available positions, regardless of their employment status.

Call the Philadelphia Employment Discrimination Attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates

Located in Philadelphia, the employment law attorneys of Sidney L. Gold & Associates practice in New Jersey and are available to assist unemployed workers to enforce their rights under the New Jersey laws against unemployment discrimination.  Anyone who has been refused an application, or has been deterred from applying based on job advertisement or job posting excluding the unemployed for a job opening, may have a case against that employer.  Our Philadelphia employment attorneys have years of experience dealing with discrimination in the workplace and have been particularly successful in complex cases and legal issues of “first impression” before the Courts. If you feel that you have been a victim of unemployment discrimination, give us a call at 215-569-1999 or contact us online.

March 1, 2012 – Mothers or expectant mothers are often victims of gender discrimination. Male managers feel personally betrayed by a pregnancy, especially when they have invested in the woman’s career, and often employers assume that mothers will not be able to handle their work responsibilities. As a result, employers discriminate against mothers and pregnant women with regard to hiring, promotions and terminations. 

Since the economy has declined, the discrimination against mothers and pregnant women has become even more obvious.  As companies are reorganized and downsized, the women seem to be the first to go. For example, employers make excuses that terminating a woman who is expecting her first or successive child has nothing to do with her pregnancy or performance, but that her job was eliminated. Yet, when these terminations are investigated, quite often, the expectant mother has been the one who trained the man who replaces her.

Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978

Employment laws under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 require employers to treat pregnancy the same as any other temporary medical disability. For instance, if a man returns to his job after having a heart attack, accommodations to his job description can be made. By law, a pregnant woman with complications is entitled to the same treatment. If an employee misses time at work due to a temporary medical disability, the employer is required by law to hold open their position. Employers must do the same for women who return from maternity leave. Women cannot be fired or passed over for a promotion after they announce their pregnancy. Any employer-provider health insurance plan must treat pregnancy-related conditions the same as any other medical conditions.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Philadelphia pregnancy discrimination lawyers of Sidney L. Gold & Associates have many years experience holding employers to these standards.

Contact the Philadelphia Pregnancy Discrimination Lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates

If you’ve been treated unfairly at work or demoted or terminated from yournposition because you became pregnant, contact the Philadelphia pregnancy discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates to speak with an experienced, knowledgeable Pennsylvania employment law attorney.  Our skilled litigators will fight for your rights under the law and will seek recovery of the full compensation due to you as a result of the pregnancy discrimination you’ve suffered.  Call us today at 215-569-1999 or contact us online.

Well-respected Philadelphia Employment Discrimination attorney, Sidney L. Gold, of the Employment Law Firm of Sidney L. Gold & Associates, recently won an important battle in the fight against discrimination in the workplace against individuals with speech impairments, namely stuttering.  Although ultimately the Judge in the case, the Honorable John M. Younge, found that the actions of the plaintiff’s employer did not amount to discrimination, he did opine that the plaintiff’s stuttering was in fact a disability under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA). This case is very important in that it is the first time a Pennsylvania state court addressed the issue of stuttering as a disability under the PHRA.

The Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, was signed into law on July 26, 1990, expanding the rights of disabled individuals on the federal level. The PHRA was amended the following year, adopting ADA standards for defining and prohibiting discrimination based on a disability.  Under the PHRA, it is illegal to discriminate in employment against an individual with a “disability” defines as:

(1) a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities;

(2) a record of having such an impairment; or

(3) being regarded as having such an impairment by your employer.

Claims under the PHRA are analyzed in the same way as claims arising under the ADA. In ADA cases, the federal courts have held that the issue of whether a stuttering condition constitutes a disability is determined by a review of the specific facts to the case. The court must examine the facts and circumstances presented by the plaintiff and determine if a plaintiff’s condition meets one of the outlined definitions of “disability”. For that reason, not all stuttering impediments are ruled as “disabilities” for the purpose of an ADA or PHRA claim.

In Mr. Gold’s case of first impression in Pennsylvania, he successfully presented evidence to show that the plaintiff’s stuttering disorder was an actual disability as defined by the PHRA. He provided lay and expert witness testimony and reports that outlined how the stuttering had substantially affected the plaintiff’s life experiences. Relying on the evidence presented by Mr. Gold, Judge Younge found that the plaintiff’s speech impediment was “a permanent medical condition that substantially impairs Plaintiff’s major life activities of speaking, breathing, and communicating with others.”

Call  our Pennsylvania Disability Discrimination Lawyers Today

When you are subjected to discrimination in the workplace, it is important to consult with a Pennsylvania employment attorney who understands the applicable laws.  Before the court will make a determination as to whether your employer’s actions amount to discrimination or a hostile workplace, your attorney must effectively present evidence that the discrimination laws are in fact applicable in your case.  While in some cases, the basis of discrimination may be quite obvious, such as race or gender, other claims may require a more in depth review of the facts, such as in this particular case addressing stuttering.  If you feel that you’ve been a victim of discrimination in your Pennsylvania workplace, contact the Philadelphia employment discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates to discuss the merits of your case.

January 21, 2011 – Millions of people around the globe face workplace discrimination because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  If your sexual orientation or gender identity does not conform to the majority, you may be seen as a convenient target for workplace discrimination or abuse. The Philadelphia employment law firm of Sidney L. Gold & Associates understands the impact sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination can have your mental, emotional and physical well-being. Our discrimination attorneys have handled numerous cases in the Philadelphia-area, as well as state-wide across Pennsylvania, dealing with workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in violation of federal, state or local discrimination laws.

Human rights abuses based on sexual orientation or gender identity include violations which have for decades formed the core agenda of the international human rights law and the United Nations’ human rights machinery. Sexual orientation includes sexual desires, practices and identification. It can be directed toward people of the same or different sexes (same-sex, heterosexual or bisexual orientation). Gender identity refers to the complex relationship between sex and gender referring to a person’s experience of self expression in relation to social categories of masculinity or femininity (gender). Don’t be a victim of sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination. Lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgender individuals can benefit from the expertise of Sidney L. Gold, a nationally-renowned Philadelphia employment attorney, who specializes in all areas of workplace discrimination.

Contact Our Philadelphia Employment Discrimination Attorneys For Help

Contact the Philadelphia employment discrimination lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates to discuss the legal grounds for your potential discrimination claim against your employer for unlawful treatment. Employers who violate human rights based on sexual orientation and gender identity should be held accountable and brought to justice for workplace discrimination against employees solely for their sexual orientation or gender identity. Call us today at 215-569-1999 to speak with an experienced, knowledgeable Philadelphia sexual orientation discrimination attorney.

The Americans with Disabilities Act protects employees with disabilities from being harassed or fired. Targeting a person with an ADA-covered disability, such as AIDS, is a violation of federal law.  The ADA states that employees have the right to work in an environment that is free from harassment and prohibits both harassment and firing of an employee because of a disability. Philadelphia employment discrimination lawyer Sidney L. Gold has extensive experience handling disability discrimination lawsuits.  He and his team of Philadelphia disability discrimination lawyers help victims of employment discrimination, holding employers accountable for their discriminatory practices.

The issue of HIV/AIDS is a sensitive one and there is no excuse for a supervisor to permit brutal workplace harassment of an HIV-positive employee. A National HIV/AIDS Strategy has been implemented by federal agencies which will address and prevent employment-related discrimination against people with HIV. The unlawful termination of this Butterball employee is an example of the type of employment discrimination that the Strategy was created to prevent. Call today to speak with Philadelphia employment discrimination attorney Sidney L. Gold, Esquire to discuss your rights under federal, state and local anti-discrimination laws.

Disability discrimination can take many different forms. In some cases, it consists of negative comments about the disability made by managers or executives accompanied by some type of adverse employment action or decision. When an employee with a disability takes medical leave, the American Disability Act (ADA) requires that the employee be allowed to return to his or her job or an equivalent position, unless the employer can show that it would create an undue hardship to do so. While employers can always fire a disabled employee for a legitimate job-related reason, employers cannot fire them because of their disability or as a means to circumvent their legal obligations under the ADA, including the duty to provide reasonable accommodations.

Despite increased sensitivity to physical and mental disabilities, many of America’s workers find themselves to be victims of employment discrimination due to their disability. The Philadelphia employment discrimination attorneys at Sidney L. Gold & Associates, P.C., have decades of experience dealing with all types of discrimination in the workplace, including disability discrimination. If you believe that you may have been the victim of disability discrimination at work, you need an experienced Philadelphia disability discrimination lawyer who can answer all of your questions.  Call Sidney L. Gold & Associates, P.C. today to discuss your disability discrimination matter.