“Because of Sex”: Bostock, Federal Sex Discrimination Law, and Best Practices for Protecting LGBTQ Workers 2024

  • 9:00 AM - 10:15 AM
  • Pacific Time (US & Canada)
  • By: Practising Law Institute
Topics:
  • LGBT
  • Ethics

Why You Should Attend

In 2020, the Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that discrimination because a person is LGBTQ is discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII, the federal law prohibiting employment discrimination. In this session, you will learn about the impact of the Bostock decision on employment law and other areas of federal sex discrimination law, including recent developments and emerging issues. The session will also provide an overview of best practices for employers for protecting the rights of LGBTQ employees.

 

What You Will Learn

After completing this program, participants will be able to:

Understand and analyze the background to and key takeaways from the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock
Recognize and evaluate the impact of Bostock on employment law and other areas of federal sex discrimination law, including recent developments and emerging issues
Apply best practices for protecting the rights of LGBTQ employees


Who Should Attend

Attorneys, employers, and other professionals looking to expand their knowledge of federal sex discrimination law and who want to implement best practices for protecting LGBTQ employees.

Special Feature(s): Scholarships are available to attend this program.

Program Level: All Levels

Prerequisites: An interest in staying up to date on federal sex discrimination case law and practice.

Advanced Preparation: None

PLI offers full scholarships, registration fee waivers, and discounts to attend PLI programs for attorneys, paralegals, law librarians, and staff working for nonprofit/legal services organizations; pro bono attorneys/volunteers (providing no-fee legal assistance to clients individually or through a nonprofit organization); government attorneys; judges and judicial law clerks; law professors and law students; retired attorneys; independent/freelance paralegals; unemployed attorneys; and others with financial hardships

 

  • CLE Credit Comments: 1 Total 1 Professional Practice