Connect with us

National

EEOC settlement triggers call for ENDA executive order

Straight worker allegedly subjected to anti-gay epithets

Published

on

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission secured a $155,000 settlement against a federal contractor in a workplace discrimination case last week, triggering a call from one LGBT advocacy group for action from the Obama administration to address the issue further.

On Jan. 6, EEOC announced that DynCorp International LLC, a military contractor and aircraft maintenance company in Fairfax, Va., agreed to pay $155,000 in relief in a sex-based discrimination case.

The case involves James Friso, a straight aircraft sheet metal/structural mechanic working in Taji, Iraq, who was allegedly subjected to gender-based harassment — including anti-gay epithets — by a male co-worker.

According to the EEOC complaint, one of Friso’s male co-workers began making derogatory sex-based comments to Friso on a daily basis around November 2006. The co-worker allegedly called Friso “faggot,” “dick-sucker,” and “queer” on a daily basis.

Other comments allegedly referenced Friso’s stature, who’s five-feet, four inches tall, including “whiney little bitch,” “short little mother fucker” and “short little bitch.”

Additionally, the co-worker accused Friso of engaging in homosexual acts, even though the co-workers knew Friso was married to a woman. The co-worker allegedly made this comment in front of management, but no action was taken.

The complaint states Friso regularly complained to DynCorp management, but no action was taken. After continued complaints, managers allegedly told Friso they “would get rid of him.”

That eventually came to pass. Friso was transferred to Mannheim, Germany to a post with lower pay. The co-worker who allegedly subjected to Friso to sex-based discrimination continued to work at Taji.

EEOC filed a complaint in August 2011 in federal district court in Virginia on the basis that the sex-based discrimination violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. The announcement on Friday was the result of that complaint.

In addition to agreeing to pay $155,000 in relief to Friso, DynCorp must provide anti-harassment and anti-retaliation training to managers and human resource personnel. DynCorp is also enjoined from engaging in further sex-based harassment or retaliation and has agreed to allow EEOC to monitor it for the decree’s term.

Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for EEOC’s Charlotte District, whose jurisdiction includes Virginia, said in a statement the result of the case is a reminder that sex-based discrimination shouldn’t be tolerated.

“This lawsuit should remind employers that employees have a legal right to a workplace free of harassment, including harassment based on sex-based stereotypes,” Barnes said. “Employers must be careful about allowing comments concerning sexual orientation to be made in the workplace because if those comments are based on sexual stereotyping, they might violate the law.”

But Ashley Burke, a spokesperson for DynCorp, denied the company engaged in any wrongdoing even though it accepted the terms of the settlement.

“The Company was not involved in any wrongdoing and wholly denies all of the allegations contained in the Complaint,” Burke said. “This case involves a personal dispute that occurred five years ago, and the alleged harasser is no longer with the Company. We are pleased to put the matter behind us.”

One LGBT workplace rights advocate said the incident calls for additional administrative action from the Obama administration.

Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, took issue with the consent decree in the case for not mentioning sexual orientation.

“The company will not have to add sexual orientation or gender identity to its non-discrimination policy,” Almeida said. “Even after this case, DynCorp can discriminate against LGBT employees while getting fat on billions of dollars in taxpayer money.”

Almeida said the action against DynCorp demonstrates the need for an executive order prohibiting federal dollars from going to companies that do not have non-discrimination protections for employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

“The members of the civil rights enforcement team at the Department of Labor currently have their hands tied and are not allowed to investigate federal contractors like DynCorp for discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation because President Obama has not yet signed the ENDA executive order,” Almeida said.

DynCorp receives more than 96 percent of its revenue from federal contracts that amount to $2 billion each year, making it the 32nd largest federal contractor, according to Freedom to Work. However, protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity aren’t included in the company’s non-discrimination policy.

The “ENDA” executive order is so named because it would be similar to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, legislation that would prohibit workplace discrimination against LGBT people.

The order would enable LGBT Americans who face workplace discrimination to file complaints with the Labor Department. Possible remedies include payment of back wages or reinstatement for LGBT employees who faced discrimination.

Almeida has called on Obama to issue the executive order before, and now says he’s “optimistic” that Obama will sign the order in early 2012.

“During just the past few months alone, the president has taken more than 20 strong executive actions under the slogan ‘We Can’t Wait’ for the current dysfunctional Congress to act,” Almeida said. “It’s a logical next step to sign an executive order granting LGBT Americans the freedom to work for federal contractors without fear of discrimination or harassment on the job.”

The White House hasn’t said whether it would be open to issuing such an executive order despite the president’s support for ENDA.

DynCorp’s Burke insisted the company already has protections in place for its workers, saying the company “encourages a positive, supportive work environment where harassment or retaliation of any kind is simply not tolerated.”

“In addition to anti-harassment training provided to all new hires, personnel receive refresher training, anti-harassment policies are posted throughout worksites, and our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct clearly states the Company’s zero tolerance of harassment and retaliation,” Burke said.

In the early 2000s, a DynCorp employee who alleged that company workers in Bosnia had purchased young women from brothels and kept them as sex slaves was terminated from her job and later won a $173,000 judgment from an employment tribunal in Britain.

In May 2008, a federal jury ordered DynCorp to pay $15 million to a minority-owned telecommunications contractor that charged DynCorp with terminating a contract on the basis of racial discrimination, according to the Washington Post.

Asked whether the settlement has prompted DynCorp to reconsider its non-discrimination policy, Burke replied, “Although there was no wrongdoing on the part of the Company identified in this case, we are always looking for ways to further strengthen our policies and procedures and this is one area that we are currently examining.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia murder suspect remains at large

Two killed, one injured in attacks motivated by victims’ sexual orientation

Published

on

Jahylin Melchur, 21, is wanted in connection with three Philadelphia shootings, including two murders, who may have targeted his victims because they were gay. (Photos courtesy Philadelphia Police Department)

Police seek the public’s support in finding a suspect wanted in connection with three Philadelphia shootings, including two murders, who may have targeted his victims because they were gay. All three shootings took place near Hunting Park Recreation Center between May 29 and June 26.

The suspect is 21-year-old Jahylin Melchur, who has not been located by police and is not in police custody as of July 7. Police seek the public’s support in tracking down the suspect, whose image was captured on surveillance cameras. Previous reporting underlined that Melchur should be considered armed and dangerous.

Each of the victims was found partially clothed between 10 and 11 p.m.

On May 29, a 55-year-old in Juniata Park was found two miles from the rec center. The victim, who survived the encounter with critical injuries, said a man approached him and announced his intention to rob him, before shooting him in the elbow and torso.

Martin Higgins, 45, was pronounced dead on the bleachers of the rec center’s baseball field on June 20, suffering from a gunshot wound to the abdomen. Sharef Holman, 29, was found near the basketball courts on June 26, suffering from multiple gunshot wounds. He was transported to Temple University Hospital but died shortly thereafter.

Deputy Police Commissioner Frank Vanore declined to answer the Philadelphia Inquirer’s question regarding whether the victims may have met Melchur on a dating app, citing the ongoing investigation. Sources told the Philadelphia Inquirer that investigators are exploring this possibility

Although robbery may be at least part of the motive in the first shooting, other movies are unclear.

NBC10 reported that law enforcement sources told the station all three victims were targeted because they were gay, but the Philadelphia Police Department did not confirm this.

The Philadelphia Police Department replied to PGN’s questions with an email stating, “This remains a very active investigation, and investigators are looking at all aspects of the case, including underlying motivations for committing these crimes.

“At this point, we can confirm that Melchur is wanted for two homicides by shooting and one non-fatal shooting, all of which occurred in the Hunting Park area. 

“The investigation has not established that the victims were specifically targeted because of their sexual orientation.”

The Philadelphia Police Department is urging anyone with information to contact the Homicide Unit at 215-686-3334 or submit an anonymous tip by calling the PPD Tip Line at 215-686-TIPS (8477).

(This story is republished with permission of the Philadelphia Gay News.)

Continue Reading

National

Madonna roundup: Reviews, sales, and love for ‘Danceteria’

Pop legend’s new album ‘Confessions II’ earning raves

Published

on

Madonna isn’t just back, she’s ubiquitous. 

From a Times Square takeover to Graham Norton’s couch, the pop legend is busy promoting her new album, “Confessions II,” a sequel to 2005’s “Confessions on a Dance Floor,” that is earning rave reviews.

“Madonna’s back in peak form with a fresh and honest dance record that’s not only her best in 20 years, but a genuinely vital addition to her canon,” says Pitchfork.

“Facing grief and loss has made Madonna’s music deeper than it’s been in 20 years, but also more alive,” the Guardian proclaims.

“If everyone in the club is a work of art, as ‘Danceteria’ says, then to live loudly is to make an indelible mark,” according to Vulture.

The album features upbeat dance productions along with some melancholic views on death and loss. On the song “Betrayal,” she reflects on the recent death of her stepmother Joan, singing, “You’ll never take my mother’s place … you betrayed me, you enslaved me.”

On “L.E.S. Girl,” she revisits her early days living on the Lower East Side and struggling to pay the rent. “Bizarre” seems to reference her failed 1980s marriage to actor Sean Penn. “Test” is a duet with daughter Lola Leon, in which she sings, “I wish I knew / The pain I’ve caused / My butterfly / Was always being watched.”

But the emotional high point of the album comes on “Fragile,” which she wrote about the death of her brother Christopher. The two were close early in Madonna’s career and he designed sets for early tours, including “Blonde Ambition.” But they had a falling out after her marriage to Guy Ritchie and he wrote a scathing tell-all book about his sister that led to years of estrangement. The two reconciled after Christopher’s cancer diagnosis and shortly before he died in 2024 at age 63. She sings, “Late last night I was fast asleep/You came to me in a dream/You said, ‘Don’t forget about me/Don’t forget to be happy.’”

Death emerges again but in a much more upbeat context in “Danceteria,” an ode to the iconic New York nightclub that has emerged as a gay favorite single and seems destined to be the song of the summer in queer nightlife. She recounts her pre-fame days trying to convince a DJ to play her first single “Everybody” at the club and name checks Jean-Michel Basquiat, Keith Haring, best friend Debi Mazar, and DJ Mark Kamins on the track. 

Streaming numbers and sales are strong for the new album with projected first week sales of 100,000 ensuring a No.1 debut in the U.S. 

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Three overlooked court rulings limited White House anti-trans policies

Supreme Court narrowed trans rights, advocates saw victories in other decisions

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. B.P.J. continues to dominate headlines about transgender rights, three recent federal court cases produced significant rulings that limited or temporarily blocked Trump-Vance administration policies attacking trans Americans.

Talbott v. USA

Trump issued Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” on Jan. 27, 2025, banning trans people from serving in the military. The following day, GLAD Law and the National Center for LGBTQ Rights filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the ban on behalf of six active-duty service members and two individuals seeking to enlist. The organizations argue the policy violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

The plaintiffs sought a nationwide preliminary injunction — a temporary block on enforcement of the executive order while the litigation continued. The district court granted that injunction and later rejected the Trump-Vance administration’s request to dissolve it, temporarily protecting trans service members from being discharged solely because of their gender identity.

That protection, however, was short-lived. In Shilling v. Trump, the Supreme Court stayed the lower court’s injunction, allowing the military to begin enforcing the trans service ban while litigation continued. The U.S. Air Force subsequently required trans service members facing involuntary separation proceedings to appear in uniforms and grooming standards corresponding to their sex assigned at birth and, in some cases, used their deadnames during those proceedings.

Despite that setback, the plaintiffs secured two significant legal victories during Pride month.

On June 1, a federal appeals court blocked the discharge of the trans service members involved in Talbott. Then, on June 30, a federal district court certified the case as a class action on behalf of all currently serving trans service members. That means future rulings in the case will apply not only to the original six plaintiffs but to all active-duty trans military personnel covered by the class.

The case remains ongoing, but class certification significantly strengthens the ability to protect trans service members as the litigation continues. Currently, there are 28 plaintiffs in total, including the two still attempting to enlist.

Z.A. v. Blanche

In Z.A. v. Blanche (formerly Z.A. v. Lucile Salter Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an emergency order one day before a federal grand jury subpoena was set to be enforced on July 2. The order blocked the Department of Justice from obtaining confidential medical records belonging to California families whose children receive gender-affirming care.

The ruling relied in part on protections established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), the 1996 federal law governing the privacy and security of medical records.

The decision represented a significant check on the administration’s efforts to obtain sensitive patient information, protecting the privacy of trans patients and their families while the legal challenge proceeds.

Doe v. Blanche

Doe v. Blanche, which remains ongoing, challenges Trump’s executive order, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. Under policies implementing that order, many trans women in federal custody would be housed in men’s prisons.

A federal district court in D.C. granted a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of a Bureau of Prisons policy that would require incarcerated trans women to be housed in men’s facilities regardless of individualized safety assessments or the risk of sexual assault.

The Bureau of Prisons policy also conflicts with the goals of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), enacted by Congress in 2003 to address sexual abuse in correctional facilities through standards, research, funding, and prevention measures. Federal data has consistently shown that trans people in custody experience sexual assault at dramatically higher rates than the general prison population.

Continue Reading

Popular