Comments (102) | Add a comment
Assembly passes transgender discrimination bill
-
Cathleen Allison/Associated Press
Assemblyman Paul Aizley, D-Las Vegas, speaks in favor of his bill to outlaw job discrimination against transgender people. The Assembly passed his measure, although Assemblyman Cresent Hardy, R-Mesquite, left, voted against the bill.
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU
Updated: Apr. 19, 2011 | 3:56 p.m.
CARSON CITY -- In a monumental vote for one of the state's least-known minorities, the state Assembly Monday backed a bill that would outlaw job discrimination against transgender people.
Members voted 29-13 for Assembly Bill 211, which would prevent discriminating against people based on their gender identity or expression.
All 26 Democrats backed the bill, with three of the 16 Republicans: John Hambrick of Las Vegas, Ed Goedhart of Amargosa Valley and Kelly Kite of Minden.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where supporters think they have the votes to pass the bill. Gov. Brian Sandoval hasn't given an indication whether he will sign it.
The bill's sponsor, Assemblyman Paul Aizley, D-Las Vegas, said transgender people testified they often are denied jobs because of how they look. There are 25,000 transgender people in Nevada.
There are three other bills on transgender rights coming up for votes in the Senate. One would abolish discrimination in public accommodations, and another would abolish discrimination in housing. The last would make crimes against transgender people hate crimes subject to longer prison sentences.
Activists were pleased with the passage.
"This is the most important of all the bills among the transgender community," said Lauren Scott, a former Air Force member who is a leader in the transgender community in Reno. Scott attributed the passage of the bill to the fact transgender people showed up at hearings and spoke with legislators, who got to see them as people, "not freaks."
"It's easier to discriminate against people when you don't know them," she said.
Fears of employers about hiring transgender people should be lessened because the bill still allows employers to order all workers to wear appropriate dress for the workplace, Scott added.
Gender identity or expression is defined in the bill as a "gender-related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the person's assigned sex at birth."
Employers still may require transgender workers to "adhere to reasonable workplace appearance, grooming and dress standards" that are consistent with his or her gender identity and expression.
Two conservative Republicans spoke out for the bill.
"I was a co-sponsor of the bill," Hambrick said. "Very simply, it is the fair thing to do."
Kite said, "I just feel it is wrong to discriminate for any particular reason."
Assembly Minority Leader Pete Goicoechea, R-Eureka, said his caucus took no position on the transgender bill. Transgender people are "different," he said, supporting employers' right not to hire them.
Aizley said transgender people have been waiting for a law to outlaw job discrimination against them since 1999, when lawmakers banned discrimination against gays.
"There is no reason they should be discriminated against," he said.
Assemblyman Pat Hickey, R-Reno, said he wasn't convinced there are legal barriers preventing transgender people from being hired.
But Aizley said there have been no court cases filed by transgender people because they lack the legal standing to bring them. The Nevada Equal Rights Commission will investigate job discrimination complaints filed by transgender people if the bill becomes law.
In other action Monday, the Assembly did the following:
■ Voted 38-4 for Assembly Joint Resolution 7, which would create a court of appeals in Nevada. Voters defeated a similar plan in November.
■ Voted 42-0 for Assembly Joint Resolution 6, which calls on the U.S. transportation secretary to create an interstate highway out of U.S Highway 93.
■ Voted 32-10 for Assembly Bill 170, which requires stores that sell cigarettes to put up warning signs telling pregnant women that smoking can be hazardous for their unborn children.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Raoul. laughing now. the science i refer to is as current as you new equipment.
Pete Goicoechea sleeps through half the proceedings and plays Soduko through the other half. Transgender people are "different". Way to go, sleepy head. I wish he would spend more time listening to we the people instead of sleeping. If the folks in Elko knew what a slacker he has become they would never elect him again.
gbigs, your "science" is about 80 years out of date. In the 1930's gender was defined by genitalia. Now, scientists understand gender as being composed of many elements, specifically including physical structure of the brain and the central nervous system. And that is NOT a matter of choice, that's a physical condition present at birth and continuing throughout life. What scientists have also learned is that there is a physical area of the brain which is connected to gender identity. (The Central Subdivision of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalus, or BSTc, within the hypothalamus). Those who have a female brain have a BSTc structure which gives them a female gender self-identity.
Based on the quality of comments below, it's easy to see why such a law was needed in Nevada. Those commenting without detailed knowledge of who is transgender should think about reading up on the subject before confirming their ignorance and stupidity in print. As for the stupid remarks about restroom use, that's covered by a specific letter from a specialist psychiatrist that the transgender carries with them to prevent harassment by law officials. Until the letter is issued, the person must use the restroom of the physical gender they present. Ignorance is curable, stupdiity is not. On this subject, please be merely ignorant and not deliberately stupid.
Raoul. there is no science at all that says a person has a distinct biology, other than hormones and genitalia that they are 'born' a gender other than what they come out as. these people are CHOOSING to do this to their bodies. odd. when it comes to homosexual subjects, note that suddenly you are a genetic homosexual, this is necessary isnt it? you cant help it...
The beauty oif this is gender "identity". So I am a guy but I don't have to even get male to female surgery to be considered a female. I "identify" as a female trapped in a males' body. So when I go to Las Vegas Athletic Club I am going to go into the females bathroom and shower. And I'll just tell the hot naked women I am a female. Becaue according to this bill I am. And I won't be discriminated against! :)
Raoul.N.Stone wrote: there already has been a federal ruling that employers cannot require women to wear skirts or dresses. The case was brought by a woman who worked for one of the major auditing firms. She was ordered to wear skirt suits instead of pant suits. The US District Court found that her employer could not order mode of dress on gender-based reasons.
. . .
You make a good counterpoint here. My post was to point out the double standard: If employers cannot require women to wear skirts or dresses on the grounds that they are ordering mode of dress on gender based reasons, it logically follows that they cannot prohibit men from wearing blouses, skirts and pantyhose or full length dresses on the grounds that they are ordering mode of dress on gender based reasons. Lawsuits are almost certain to follow passage of this bill for exactly that reason. Again, well written post and good counterpoint.
JPH
So, you know, if someone has had this "gender confirming" thing, and has had that adam's apple procedure and is committed to their chosen gender 100% then how would any employer know that they were in fact a transgender?
It is so comforting to know our Nevada Assembly has their priorities straight (please forgive the word "straight). How long has Paul Aizley been a transgendered man anyway? This is so much more important than Jobs, the economy, the budget, veterans affairs etc! Way to go Cartoon City! You go girl! Er, I meant Dude?
yes, gbigs, gender confirming. Given that these individuals were born with the physical brain and central nervous system of a specific gender, and that the surgery confirms that gender, it is logically called "gender confirming"