EEOC overturns guidance on workplace harassment based on gender identity

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Update: On January 22, 2026, the EEOC voted to rescind this harassment guidance. The Commission voted along party lines, and did not give members of the public notice or the opportunity to comment on overturning the guidance. Overturning the harassment guidance is yet another sign of the EEOC’s turn away from attempting to protect workers from gender-identity based harassment on the job, and, in the bigger picture, any attempt to enforce basic civil rights for transgender workers.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2020 (in Bostock v. Clayton County) that firing an employee based on their sexual orientation or gender identity would violate their right to protection from sex-based discrimination.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued new guidance, entitled “Enforcement Guidance on Workplace Harassment,” and approved it by a 3-2 vote in April 2024. EEOC guidance provides more detail on agency policy and provides examples of how the policy would pertain to specific workplace situations. It is intended to provide clarity and guidance to employers about their legal responsibilities to provide discrimination-free workplaces, and to inform workers about their rights under the law. The guidance issued in 2024 included updates on how harassment of an employee based on their gender identity could constitute illegal, sex-based harassment, including repeated or intentional refusal to respect a transgender or nonbinary employee’s preferred name and pronouns.

The state of Texas sued the EEOC, seeking to block this guidance. On May 15, a federal judge partially overturned guidance from the EEOC that explained how certain behavior toward employes based on their preferred gender identity can constitute illegal workplace harassment. Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that the EEOC’s guidance went beyond the authority of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court precedent.

https://www.epi.org/policywatch/federal-judge-partially-strikes-down-protections-from-workplace-harassment-based-on-gender-identity/ 280810-59078569&mc_cid=ef643053cc&mc_eid=56485f06ea

[TommyT139]

1. Use the wrong name or pronoun, and why...

...should the employee think you are talking to them?

Also, fuck Republicans.

[leftstreet]

2. This is bullshit

Do they actually think millions of Americans are just chomping at the bit to disrespect or hurt others?

Thin end of the wedge stuff here. Eroding our civil rights, starting wherever they spot some low hanging fruit.