Posted on 02/02/2016 2:13:26 PM PST by wagglebee
ST. PAUL, Minnesota, February 2, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – A judge has awarded $115,000 to a man whose employer did not let him use the women's bathroom.
Minnesota-based Deluxe Financial Services, the largest check printing company in the U.S., is paying the settlement and apologizing to a Mr. Austin, who now goes by the female name "Britney."
Mr. Austin was hired and employed as a man in the Phoenix offices of Deluxe, but in 2011, he announced to his supervisor that he considered himself a woman and began dressing as a female at work. His supervisor would not let him use the women's community bathroom, and, according to the lawsuit, co-workers "intentionally us[ed] the wrong gender pronouns to refer to" him. Deluxe also refused to change his name to "Britney" on company records, because he had not undergone cosmetic surgery to make himself appear female.
Austin also complained that Deluxe's health insurance for employees did not cover such surgery.
Terms of the settlement included Deluxe writing Mr. Austin a reference letter, paying for transgender care in its health insurance for employees, creating a written policy against transgender "discrimination," conducting training sessions every year for all employees against transgender "discrimination," and annual accountability reports to the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) showing compliance with settlement terms.
The Obama EEOC brought the lawsuit. EEOC attorney David Lopez explained that the Obama administration is committed to "securing the rights of transgender individuals," and "[w]e hope that employers will take notice and begin to take proactive steps to prevent and eliminate discrimination against their transgender workers."
"This is an example of Obama bullying companies into embracing the trans agenda," Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth told LifeSiteNews. "Obama has stacked the EEOC."
This is the third lawsuit filed by the Obama EEOC supporting the delusions of gender-confused individuals. Most have been cases where the employer concedes and settles out of court. A Florida eye clinic was forced to pay $150,000 in April 2015 to a man who wants to be called a woman, and another similar Obama EEOC lawsuit is pending against a Detroit funeral home.
"Our concern is that these social issues are not even being discussed in this election cycle," LaBarbera added. "Perhaps these transgender rulings can be reversed when we have an administration with some sanity to it, but we have to talk about these things. Where is the debate on this in the public square?"
"I think they overwhelmed us," LaBarbera said, "and they are trying to do all they can before Obama's term is over."
The words the Obama EEOC uses to describe both the lawsuits and the transgender plaintiffs are significant. The district EEOC director in Phoenix, Rayford O. Irvin, described employers' refusal to allow men in women's community bathrooms as "being forced to face the indignity and danger of using a restroom inconsistent with [Mr. Austin's] gender identity."
Irvin describes natural gender as "subscrib[ing] to sex stereotypes" and states that the concerns of all non-transgender employees are irrelevant. "Employee and customer preferences based on stereotypes [sic] are not a legitimate reason to discriminate."
So, not only is the employer being punished for RESPECTING WOMEN'S PRIVACY, the taxpayers are paying to go to court over this depravity.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
the judge has outlived his term
Disgusting. Drag queens have more rights than anyone now. They don’t even need to work, just sue people for a living.
if I was working for that employer I would sue that male for demanding he use the women’s bathroom...
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
It’s getting to the point where folks like Mr. Austin need a visit from Guido and Vinny.
Didn’t we all suspect that this is what would happen?
If he still has man parts, he needs to be the bathroom that is designed to accommodates man parts.
Exactly. Always loved Daffy. :)
Deluxe also refused to change his name to “Britney” on company records, because he had not undergone cosmetic surgery to make himself appear female.
_______________________________________________
No because he had not changed it legally...
the employer does not have to doctor records just on the employees say so...
If the guy had gone to court and changed it legally to Iamaqueer Mann or Ima Mann then the employer would have to change the records and give the employee new ID name tags etc...
The women at that company ought to walk out. The recidivism rate for “transgender” people is surprisingly high. This guy might very well “change back”, and then all those women will have to live with a heterosexual man they aren’t married to knowing intimate information about them.
Yes, it puts the company owner between a rock and a hard place, but the company will likely end up having to shut down anyway after the judgement and bad publicity; they might as well be able to blame the guy directly rather than some impersonal court decision.
Companies that settle these suits are contributing to the problem and it will only increase the number of law suits.
I understand very well that in many cases it comes down to the simple math that drives these settlements.
It is becoming extortion.
He WILL age like a man, receding hairline or friar tuck bald top, lots of hair will grow in his nose and eyebrows. He'll get the MALE pot belly.
Taking his genetalia away isn't going to grow him a uterus.
HE will ever be SHE. HE will also have to face his Maker someday and explain why he listened to Satan about his gender.
YES.
So if a worker comes in one day, says he’s now to be called Fido, and sets up a fire hydrant, the EEOC will be there to sue anyone who says no?
I realize that these settlements are all about cost rationalizations - it would cost hundreds of thousands more to defend against the lawsuit, and already cost tens of thousands to get to this point.
But catering to someone’s psychotic fantasy isn’t a long term solution.
He probable knows the best bathroom in every part of the city and would not be denied.
This so-called judge is sicker than Austin.
The judge deserves the rope more than the mental case.
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.