Virginia's new state employment nondiscrimination bill is trans-inclusive

by: Hypatia

Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 23:29:28 PM EST

On January 18, the last day for filing, Del. Adam Ebbin introduced HR 1493 in the Virginia House of Delegates:

Nondiscrimination in state public employment. Prohibits discrimination in state government employment based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, or status as a special disabled veteran or other veteran covered by the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Act of 1974.

The first thing I noticed was the conspicuous absence of gender identity protection. But looking at the language of the bill, gender identity is specifically included under the definition of "sexual orientation."

The relevant part of the bill:

no state agency, institution, board, bureau, commission, council, or instrumentality of the Commonwealth shall discriminate in employment based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, or status as a special disabled veteran or other veteran covered by the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Act of 1974, as amended.
"Sexual orientation" means a person's actual or perceived heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, or gender identity or expression. This definition does not protect any person whose attraction is towards persons with whom sexual conduct would be illegal due to the age of the parties.

It would be very good news for LGBT rights in Virginia if this bill passed, so please support Equality Virginia as we go to Richmond this week to lobby for HR 1493.

Seth Croft, a field organizer for Equality Virginia, told me:

We worked with the Task Force's Transgender Policy Researcher to develop the strategy to subdefine sexual orientation to include gender identity. We're hoping that this strategy will also prevent any of the problems that ENDA faced at a national level.

It caught me by surprise, as I'd never seen the legal definition of "sexual orientation" used this way before. A new twist in transgender rights strategy? Seth also wrote to me, "...we've gotten a lot of questions about this."

I just wish it covered all workers, why does it have to only cover state employees?

Close Window