Royal

EEOC Files Lawsuits for Sex Discrimination Related to Transgender Employees

Oct 07, 2024

On October 1, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed two lawsuits for sex discrimination. The EEOC is suing for enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Both employers were accused of preventing transgender employees from using restrooms consistent with their gender identity, accused of harassment on the basis of gender identity and retaliation against said employees.


Key Takeaways:

-         It is a violation of the Civil Rights act to treat transgender employees differently than cis-gender employees

-         Transgender employees are guaranteed by law, the right to access restrooms in correlation with their gender identity.

-         The EEOC has received more than 3000 charges of alleged discrimination since 2013 and has received another 81,000 charges of retaliation.


Next Steps for Employers:

It is extremely important for employers to remain up to date on legislation to ensure compliance and to update existing policies as needed.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

14 Oct, 2024
Attorneys Amy Royal and Trevor Brice represent two Defendants, Prosegur Security USA (“Prosegur”) and its senior vice president Fernando A. Arango (“Arango”) in a lawsuit accusing Arango and Prosegur of violations of the Connecticut Uniform Trade Secrets Act, the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. The lawsuit further accuses Arango of breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and violations of trade secrets and unfair practices laws.  A Connecticut federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Prosegur and Arango. The order mandates that Prosegur and Arango refrain from disclosing any confidential information obtained from Arango’s former employer, United Security Inc. (USI). The injunction requires Prosegur to certify that no USI trade secrets are stored on its systems and to preserve evidence related to the alleged misappropriation. USI alleges that Arango downloaded numerous confidential files, including sensitive business information valued at $85 million, before joining Prosegur. Prosegur and Arango deny any wrongdoing, asserting that competitive pricing, not misappropriated information, led to the acquisition of a key USI client. “Defendants were able to offer plaintiff’s client a better price, without the use of knowledge and/or alleged trade secrets, and subsequently garnered their business,” stated Prosegur. Trevor Brice of The Royal Law Firm LLP further added that, “Defendants deny liability as to the claims brought by plaintiff.” An article detailing this court decision was published in Law360, please click this link to read more.
Share by: