Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump Rolls Back Protections for LGBTQ Workers, Despite Recent Promises
vogue ^

Posted on 03/29/2017 1:32:00 PM PDT by ChicagoConservative27

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: ChicagoConservative27
Whoa - this one's spinning so hard you get dizzy trying to read it. Let's break it down a bit. First, the authors admit that Trump didn't actually remove any discrimination protection per se:

Executive Order 13672...explicitly prohibited federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of gender identity or sexuality. Although Trump did not erase that order...

No, he didn't. So what did he rescind?

Under Executive Order 13673, which Obama issued in 2014, companies receiving federal contracts in excess of half a million dollars were required to demonstrate they had complied with a set of 15 federal or state labor laws over the previous three years

Now, $500K isn't a very big contract as federal contracts go, and the administrative overhead in demonstrating compliance tends to force those contracts to companies large enough to have internal staffs who can do the compliance proof paperwork, or force smaller companies to hire such people themselves. This is job protection for bureaucrats, nothing more.

...several of those laws offered critical protections for LGBTQ workers.

Really? What protection was provided over and above the simple prohibition of discrimination in hiring which has not been rescinded? The authors do not say, and it isn't a surprise.

By removing the requirement that companies prove their compliance with federal law, the government has no way to ensure they’re also following the nondiscrimination requirements Obama explicitly laid out.

This is a lie. The courts are a part of the government, and they're still very much in play.

In other words, the president has created a major loophole that could allow companies to deny LGBTQ people opportunities or otherwise treat them unequally—and those organizations can still receive massive federal contracts.

The President has created nothing of the sort. Discrimination is still illegal and companies may be sued if it happens. This "loophole" simply means that the companies are not presumed guilty until given a pass through a blizzard of forms, inspections, and federal and state oversight. Nobody's rights have been taken away, and it is a lie to pretend or imply that they have. Trump has removed an onerous bit of government ring-kissing from private industry, nothing more.

41 posted on 03/29/2017 2:05:55 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gspurlock
The simple fact is that companies look for the people who can do the best job at the best price.

Only if they enjoy having the EEOC up their ass all the time ...

If they want to keep the Diversity Nazis off their backs, they make sure they have diversity ... thus they prefer hiring black lesbians.

42 posted on 03/29/2017 2:07:30 PM PDT by NorthMountain (The Democrats ... have lost their grip on reality -DJT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

It sort of sounds like it was a deal 0bama put in, to require a bunch of regulatory crap that would make it so hard for employers, that they would just give up and hire the LGBTQs to avoid the burden of compliance.


43 posted on 03/29/2017 2:07:49 PM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kaehurowing

The regulation required documenting antidiscrimination practices as a function of the bidding process. Any bidder failing to provide documentation of such practices was automatically rejected.
In effect the rule denied fair process to any bidder who had never intentionally hired a member of a designated classes.
Laws against antidiscrimination remain in place. Prejudging does not.


44 posted on 03/29/2017 2:13:58 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell (The Left has the temperament of a squealing pig.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Is Congress included in this ,LOL


45 posted on 03/29/2017 2:16:12 PM PDT by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

This article is make believe. The author states he didn’t revoke the Gay order. But, that reducing paperwork requirements in general somehow impacts the Gaystapo. Pretending.


46 posted on 03/29/2017 2:20:07 PM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

If it were “all my girl friends” then it would be a good idea :)

Chocolate can be used in many ways :)

I respect everyone’s choice of friends. It ain’t my business.

I just didn’t ever expect on FR to see “all of my gay friends” :)

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. - Seinfeld reference :)


47 posted on 03/29/2017 2:27:11 PM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust cIonservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

I would imagine he is doing away with all the expensive and time-consuming paperwork involved in all these regulations. That doesn’t do away with discrimination laws.


48 posted on 03/29/2017 2:28:33 PM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HarleyLady27

>God also said “Thou shalt not kill”

Yes, but God didn’t say anything about short Helicopter rides for Communists. Until he does I’ll continue in my ways :)


49 posted on 03/29/2017 2:32:08 PM PDT by RedWulf (#purge the nevertrumpers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Companies that I’ve worked for and still work for, have antidiscrimination clauses in their bylaws..be it gender, religion, orientation, etc. Those won’t be rolled back. But the requirements to go back 3 years and prove it sounds more like a quota argument than anything else. I see this as a hand wringing exercise..and worrying (senselessly,imo) about what * might* happen.


50 posted on 03/29/2017 2:32:32 PM PDT by SueRae (An administration like no other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: major-pelham
This article is make believe. The author states he didn’t revoke the Gay order. But, that reducing paperwork requirements in general somehow impacts the Gaystapo. Pretending.

How dare you impugn the hard-hitting journalistic reputation of Vogue!

And your shoes are hideous!

51 posted on 03/29/2017 2:33:10 PM PDT by papertyger (The semantics define how we think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mass55th; ChicagoConservative27

This is just for federal contractors, causing taxpayers more money for paperwork. As you say, all employers are still under anti discrimination laws.


52 posted on 03/29/2017 2:33:14 PM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Do gays have any idea of the cost of compliance? It’s an impediment to any business. Their sexual orientation or identification should not be an employer’s concern, one way or the other.


53 posted on 03/29/2017 2:34:46 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NEMDF

it was Obama’s attempt to bestow strict scrutiny on homos by executive order. Strict Strutiny being the form of substantive due process which requires the government to prove why a law is not unconstitutional as it applies to a minority group. Thus bestowing de facto minority status on the homos as if they were born that way. This is why they want to claim they were born that way.


54 posted on 03/29/2017 2:54:12 PM PDT by HARRY TUTTLE (Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less. R. E. Lee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: NEMDF

it was Obama’s attempt to bestow strict scrutiny on homos by executive order. Strict Strutiny being the form of substantive due process which requires the government to prove why a law is not unconstitutional as it applies to a minority group. Thus bestowing de facto minority status on the homos as if they were born that way. This is why they want to claim they were born that way.


55 posted on 03/29/2017 2:54:59 PM PDT by HARRY TUTTLE (Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less. R. E. Lee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: chris37

“I don’t have any gay friends.”

I used to have several. Each and every one of them died from their deathstyle lifestyle.


56 posted on 03/29/2017 2:55:26 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Deplorable and loving it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Lied!? No. Simply a terminological ambiguity.


57 posted on 03/29/2017 2:56:07 PM PDT by SgtHooper (If you remember the 60's, YOU WEREN'T THERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

Many years ago I had a gay acquaintance in New Orleans.

He worked at Audubon Zoo with my roommate at the time.

He was a pretty nice guy, uber flamer though.

One morning he woke up with Bell’s Palsy. Whole side of his face just hanging there.

First time I ever heard of that.

I’ve no idea how long it lasted, or if it ever went away, but I remember wondering if that was an effect of his lifestyle.


58 posted on 03/29/2017 2:59:46 PM PDT by chris37 (Donald J. Trump, Tom Brady, The Patriots... American Destiny!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

But Trump isn’t conservative enough!!!!


59 posted on 03/29/2017 3:02:02 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

A very simple way for gays to AVOID this completely... is to STOP being GAY. /s


60 posted on 03/29/2017 3:07:35 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson