Connecticut Know Your Rights - Page 5 of 12 - GLAD Law
Skip Header to Content
GLAD Logo Skip Primary Navigation to Content

Search

Discrimination | Employment | Connecticut

Does Connecticut have an anti-discrimination law protecting LGBT individuals from discrimination in employment?

Yes. Since 1991, Connecticut has prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation in public and private employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c to 46a-81q). In July 2011, these laws were extended to protect transgender people when Governor Malloy signed Public Act 11-55, An Act Concerning Discrimination, into law. The act, which went into effect on October 1, 2011, added “gender identity or expression” to Connecticut’s list of protected classes. For more detailed information see GLAD’s and the Connecticut Women’s Education and Legal Fund’s (CWEALF) publication, Connecticut:  Legal Protections for Transgender People, at: Connecticut: Legal Protections for Transgender People

Do the laws also protect people perceived to be LGBT in employment?

Yes. Connecticut non-discrimination law defines “sexual orientation” as either “having a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality, having a history of such preference or being identified with such preference…” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81a (emphasis added)). This language includes discrimination based on perception. For example, if a person is fired because they are perceived to be gay, they may invoke the protection of the anti-discrimination law regardless of their actual orientation.

Similarly, the law defines “gender identity or expression” as:

[A] person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth… (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-51(21) (emphasis added)).

What do the employment provisions say? Who do they apply to?

The non-discrimination law applies to public and private employees. It forbids employers from refusing to hire a person, discharging them, or discriminating against them “in compensation, or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment” because of sexual orientation (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c(1)) or gender identity or expression (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60(a)(1)). This covers most significant job actions, such as hiring, firing, failure to promote, demotion, excessive discipline, harassment, and different treatment of the employee and similarly situated co-workers.

In addition, employment agencies may not discriminate based on sexual orientation (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c(2)), gender identity, or gender expression (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec.c. 46a-60(a)(2)), either by refusing to properly classify or refer their customers for employment or in general. Labor organizations (e.g. unions) similarly may not discriminate (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c(3); Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60(a)(3)). The law also forbids all of these entities from advertising in such a way as to restrict employment because of sexual orientation (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c(4)), gender identity, or gender expression (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60(a)(6)).

Finally, the State of Connecticut and its agencies are forbidden from discriminating based on sexual orientation (see generally Conn. Gen. Stat. secs. 46a-81g to 46a-81o) and gender identity or expression (see generally Conn. Gen. Stat. secs 46a-70 & 46a-71), both in their own employment practices as well as in their provision of services. The law also imposes an affirmative obligation on state agencies to adopt rules to enforce the non-discrimination provisions and to establish training programs. Contractors and subcontractors who provide services to the state must certify in writing that they will not discriminate when fulfilling the contract terms.

Effective June 7, 2016, Connecticut added sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, as well as religion, sex and national origin, as protected categories under its law banning discrimination in membership, unit formation, promotion or accommodations in “the armed forces of the state” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 27-59).

Does the law apply to every employer in Connecticut?

No. As broad as the law is, there are several exemptions to its application.

  • Employers with fewer than 3 employees are not subject to the law (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-51(10)).
  • Certain religious employers are also exempt. See below on Religious Exemption to the Prohibitions on Sexual Orientation And Gender Identity Discrimination.
  • Any employer, agency, or labor organization may defend against a discrimination claim by arguing that it is a “bona fide occupational qualification” of the particular job to have a non-LGBT employee fill it (Conn. Gen. Stat. secs. 46a-81c; 46a-60 generally). Luckily, although this defense is technically allowed by law, it is strictly applied and rarely successful (see, e.g. The Evening Sentinel et al. v. National Organization for Women, 168 Conn. 26, 36 (1975) (“A BFOQ exists only if no member of the class excluded is physically capable of performing the tasks required by the job”); Conn. Institute for the Blind v. CHRO, 176 Conn. 88 (1978) (“The standard for a BFOQ purposely imposes a heavy burden on an employer whose refusal to hire is prima facie discriminatory”)).
  • The ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) program, which is established under federal law to provide officers to the U.S. military, may continue to discriminate in its “conduct and administration” at colleges and universities (Conn. Gen. Stat.  sec. 46a-81q.  It is worth noting that LGB individuals are no longer excluded from the military and ROTC programs; and transgender individuals can now serve in the military and will be allowed participation in ROTC no later than July 1, 2017).

Can religious employers discriminate against LGBTQ+ people?

On July 8, 2020, in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed its stance on the application of ministerial exception to employment discrimination cases as established in earlier rulings. In doing so, the Court simultaneously raised an unanswered issue under Title VII: does the ministerial exception for religious employers allow those organizations to discriminate against employees or candidates based on their LGBTQ+ status?

It’s unclear at this point how the Court’s ruling in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru may impact the LGBTQ+ employees of religious employers, but religious organizations and employers should recognize that the ministerial exception does not apply to every position within their organizations. Rather, it is limited to those employees who truly perform religious duties. For example, the position of a school janitor who is only present in the building outside of school hours and is not responsible for transmitting the faith would likely not be considered ministerial in nature.

Does Connecticut law forbid sexual harassment on the job?

Yes.  Connecticut law defines sexual harassment as:

Unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or any conduct of a sexual nature when (a) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment, (b) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or (c) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60(a)(8))

Can I file a complaint of sexual harassment if I’m LGBT?

Yes. It is just as unlawful to sexually harass an LGBT individual as it is to harass anyone else. Some harassment is specifically anti-LGBT, and may be more fairly characterized as harassment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Other harassment is sexual in nature and more appropriately categorized as “sexual harassment.” Both types of harassment can happen to the same person, and both are forbidden.

Both the United States Supreme Court and several state courts have found same-sex sexual harassment to violate sexual harassment laws (Compare Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, 523 U.S. 75, 118 S.Ct. 998 (1998) (man can sue for sexual harassment by other men under federal sexual harassment laws); Melnychenko v. 84 Lumber Co., 424 Mass. 285, 676 N.E.2d 45 (1997) (same-sex sexual harassment forbidden under state law)).

How do I file a complaint of discrimination?

If you wish to file a complaint, you should contact an intake officer at one of the regional offices of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). The intake officer will discuss your concerns, explain the complaint process, and advise you about what help CHRO may be able to provide to you. If CHRO has jurisdiction, you will be given an appointment to come to a regional office to file a complaint. The contact information for CHRO’s administrative headquarters and four regional offices is below:

  • ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS 25 Sigourney Street Hartford, CT 06106 PHONE: (860) 541-3400 OR (800) 477-5737 FAX: (860) 246-5068

• CAPITOL REGION OFFICE 450 Columbus Boulevard Hartford, CT 06103-1835 PHONE: (860) 566-7710 FAX: (860) 566-1997

• EASTERN REGION OFFICE 100 Broadway Norwich, CT 06360 PHONE: (860) 886-5703 FAX: (860) 886-2550

• WEST CENTRAL REGION OFFICE Rowland State Government Center 55 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waterbury, CT 06702-2004 PHONE: (203) 805-6530 FAX: (203) 805-6559

• SOUTHWEST REGION OFFICE 350 Fairfield Avenue, 6th Floor Bridgeport, CT 06604 PHONE: (203) 579-6246 FAX: (203) 579-6950

The complaint must be in writing and under oath, and it must state the name and address of the individual making the complaint (“the complainant”) as well as the entity he or she is complaining against (“the respondent”). The complaint must set out the particulars of the alleged unlawful acts and (preferably) the times they occurred (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82). There is no charge to file a complaint.

If you are a state employee, you may file your case directly in court. State employees can skip over the CHRO process entirely.

Do I need a lawyer?

No. The process is designed to allow people to represent themselves. However, GLAD strongly encourages people to find lawyers to represent them throughout the process. Not only are there many legal rules governing the CHRO process, but employers and other defendants are likely to have legal representation.

What are the deadlines for filing a complaint of discrimination?

A complaint must generally be filed with the CHRO within 180 days of the last discriminatory act or acts (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82(e)). There are very few exceptions for lateness, and GLAD encourages people to move promptly in filing claims.

Can I file more than one type of discrimination complaint at once, for example, if I believe I was fired both because I am a lesbian and Latina?

Yes. Connecticut’s employment non-discrimination laws forbid discriminating against someone because of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression as well as race, color, religious creed, age, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, and present or past history of mental, intellectual, learning, or physical disability (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60).

What happens after a complaint is filed with the CHRO?

When you file a complaint with the CHRO, you will be given a packet of information explaining the CHRO procedures and deadlines. Please review these and follow the deadlines.
The complaint will be served on your respondent, who must answer the complaint under oath within 30 days. If you wish to respond or comment on your respondent’s answer, you have 15 days to do so.

Within 60 days of receiving the respondent’s answer, the CHRO will review the complaint and determine if any further investigation is necessary. This is called a merit assessment review (MAR). It is based solely on your original complaint, the answer, and any additional comments you make regarding the answer. Since many cases are dismissed at this stage of the proceedings, GLAD recommends that you reply to the respondent’s answer.

If the case is dismissed, you will be given 15 days to request the right to move your complaint from CHRO into the courts. If you do not request to remove your complaint, the CHRO will review your case and decide whether to uphold the dismissal or reinstate your complaint.

If the case is not dismissed, an investigator will be assigned and a mandatory mediation conference will be held within 60 days. If negotiations fail to produce a settlement agreeable to all parties, either party or the CHRO can request early legal intervention. The CHRO has 90 days to decide whether to grant this request. If granted, a Hearing Officer will be appointed to decide the merits of the case in a trial-type hearing.

If there is no request for early legal intervention, then the investigator will continue to collect evidence and will make a determination of “reasonable cause” or “no reasonable cause.” If a finding of “reasonable cause” is made, you can request either to have the case heard at the CHRO or to move it to Superior Court. If a finding of “no reasonable cause” is made, you have 15 days to request reconsideration.

What are the legal remedies the CHRO may award for discrimination if an individual wins their case there?

Hiring, reinstatement, or upgrading; back pay; restoration in a labor organization; cease and desist orders; and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the antidiscrimination laws (e.g. training programs, posting of notices, etc.) (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a – c)).

Should I take my case away from the CHRO and file in court? How do I do so?

This is a decision you should make with your lawyer. Greater damages are available to you in state court than at the CHRO, including emotional distress damages and attorney’s fees.
To sue an entity in state court as opposed to the CHRO, you must follow several steps and meet various deadlines (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-101 to 46a-102).

• Your complaint must have been filed on time at the CHRO (i.e., within 180 days of the last act of discrimination);

• Your complaint must have been pending with the CHRO more than 180 days (although if you and your employer agree to request the case’s removal to court, you may do so before the 180 days elapse) or the merit assessment review must have been completed;

• You must request a release of your complaint from the CHRO for the purpose of filing a court action, which the CHRO must grant except when the case is scheduled for public hearing, or they believe the complaint can be resolved within 30 days;

• You must file your court action within 2 years of the date of filing your complaint with the CHRO; and

• You must file your court action within 90 days after you receive a release from the CHRO to file your case in court.

Can I also file a discrimination complaint with a federal agency?

Yes, in many cases. Since federal law and state law contain overlapping provisions, someone bringing a discrimination claim may sometimes pursue protections under both. For example, the federal employment non-discrimination law, called Title VII, applies to employers with at least 15 employees and forbids employment discrimination based on race, sex, age, religion, and disability (which includes HIV status).

While Title VII does not expressly forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, a growing number of courts and government agencies have taken the position that its proscription against sex discrimination encompasses both (See, e.g., United States & Dr. Rachel Tudor v. Southeastern Oklahoma State University, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89547 (2015) (denying motion to dismiss professor’s Title VII complaint that school had subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her gender identity)). In two separate decisions in 2012 and 2016, the EEOC itself concluded that sexual orientation discrimination, gender identity discrimination, and sex discrimination are one and the same, since the latter two are based on preferences, assumptions, expectations, stereotypes, and norms associated with masculinity and femininity (See Macy v. Holder, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120821 (Apr. 20, 2012); Baldwin v. Foxx, EEOC Appeal No. 0120133080 (July 15, 2015)). Although the EEOC’s decisions are not binding on the courts, many have used similar reasoning in affirming Title VII’s applicability to discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation (See, e.g., Smith v. City of Salem, 378 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding that Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on gender stereotyping); Videckis v. Pepperdine Univ., 150 F. Supp. 3d 1151, 1160 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (holding “sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex or gender discrimination”)).

Should I file a complaint with a federal agency?

GLAD recommends that, where there may be overlapping state and federal jurisdiction, you explore filing with CHRO first but keep in mind the possibility of pursuing a federal claim as well. Federal complaints must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). However, if you initially institute your complaint with CHRO and indicate that you wish to have the complaint cross-filed with the EEOC, then the time limit is extended to the earlier of 300 days or 30 days after CHRO has terminated the case (United States Code 42 sec. 2000e-5(e)(1)). (People who work for federal agencies are beyond the scope of this publication.)

If you have a sexual orientation or gender identity complaint, you should check off “sex” as well as “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” as the bases for your claim and request that CHRO cross-file your complaint with the EEOC.

Are there other options for filing a complaint for discrimination?

Possibly yes, depending on the facts of your particular situation.

  1. Union: If you are a member of a union, your contract (collective bargaining agreement) may provide additional rights to you in the event of discipline, discharge, or other job-related actions. If you obtain relief under your contract, you may even decide not to pursue other remedies. Get and read a copy of your contract and contact a union steward about filing a complaint. Deadlines in contracts are strict. Bear in mind that if your union refuses to assist you with a complaint, you may have a discrimination action against them for their failure to work with you, or for failure of duty of fair representation.
  2. State or Federal Court: After filing with the CHRO, EEOC, or both, you may decide to remove your discrimination case from those agencies and file in court. There are rules about when and how this must be done as discussed above.

In addition, you may wish to bring a court case to address other claims which are not appropriately handled by discrimination agencies. For example, if you are fired in violation of a contract, fired without the progressive discipline promised in a handbook, or fired for doing something your employer doesn’t like but which the law requires, these matters are beyond the scope of what the agencies can investigate and the matter should be pursued in court. Similarly, if your claim involves a violation of constitutional rights—for instance, if you are a teacher or governmental employee who believes his or her free speech or equal protection rights were violated—then those matters must also be heard in court.

What can I do if my employer fires me for filing a complaint of discrimination?

It is illegal for your employer or landlord to retaliate or punish you because you filed a complaint. If they do so, you can file an additional complaint against them for retaliation. “Retaliation” protections cover those who have filed complaints, testified or assisted in the complaint process, or opposed any discriminatory employment practice (Conn. Gen. Stat. secs. 46a-60 (4); 46a-64c(a)(9)).

What can I do to prepare myself before filing a complaint of discrimination?

Contact GLAD Answers at www.GLADAnswers.org or by phone at 800-455-4523 (GLAD) any weekday to discuss options.

As a general matter, people who are still working with or residing under discriminatory conditions have to evaluate how filing a case will affect their job or housing, and if they are willing to assume those possible consequences. Even if you have been fired or evicted, you may decide it is not worth it to pursue a discrimination claim. This is an individual choice which should be made after gathering enough information to make an informed decision. Some people prefer to meet with an attorney to evaluate the strength of their claims. It is always helpful to bring the attorney an outline of what happened on the job that you are complaining about, organized by date and with an explanation of who the various players are (and how to get in touch with them). Try to have on hand copies of your employee handbooks or personnel manuals, as well as any contracts, job evaluations, memos, discharge letters and the like.

Discrimination | HIV/AIDS | Connecticut

Questions and answers on HIV/AIDS Discrimination. Also see our pages on Testing and Privacy and Other HIV-Related Laws.

Does Connecticut have laws protecting people with HIV from discrimination?

Yes, Connecticut has enacted anti-discrimination laws protecting people with HIV from discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations and credit. In addition, there are a number of federal laws that protect people from discrimination based on their HIV status.

Who is protected under these anti-discrimination laws?

  • People with AIDS or who are HIV-positive, even if they are asymptomatic and have no outward or manifest signs of illness.
  • Under the ADA, but not Connecticut law, persons who are regarded or perceived as having HIV.
  • Under the ADA, but not Connecticut law, a person who does not have HIV, but who “associates” with a person with HIV — such as friends, lovers, spouses, roommates, business associates, advocates, and caregivers of a person or persons with HIV.

What laws protect people with HIV from discrimination in employment?

People who are HIV-positive or who have AIDS are protected from employment discrimination under both Connecticut Human Rights Law (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60) and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  Both of these statutes prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of a person’s disability.  The Connecticut law covers employers with 3 or more employees in the United States; the ADA covers employers with fifteen or more employees.

What do these anti-discrimination laws prohibit?

An employer may not take adverse action against an applicant or employee simply on the basis that the person has a disability such as HIV or AIDS.  This means that an employer may not terminate, refuse to hire, rehire, or promote, or otherwise discriminate in the terms or conditions of employment, based on the fact that a person is HIV-positive or has AIDS.

The focus here is whether a person with AIDS or HIV was treated differently than other applicants or employees in similar situations.

The following are examples of unlawful discrimination:

  • An employer may not refuse to hire a person with HIV based on fear that HIV will be transmitted to other employees or to customers.
  • An employer may not refuse to hire or make an employment decision based on the possibility, or even probability, that a person will become sick and will not be able to do the job in the future.
  • An employer cannot refuse to hire a person because it will increase health or workers’ compensation insurance premiums.

What may an employer ask about an employee’s health during the application and interview process?

Under the ADA, prior to employment, an employer cannot ask questions that are aimed at determining whether an employee has a disability.  Examples of prohibited pre-employment questions are:

  • Have you ever been hospitalized or under the care of a physician?
  • Have you ever been on workers’ compensation or received disability benefits?
  • What medications do you take?

After an offer of employment, can an employer require a medical exam? What guidelines apply?

If an employer has 15 or more employees, they must comply with the ADA.  After a conditional offer of employment, an employer may require a physical examination or medical history.  The job offer, however, may not be withdrawn unless the results demonstrate that the person cannot perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation.  The same medical inquiries must be made of each person in the same job category.  In addition, the physical examination and medical history records must be segregated from personnel records, and there are strict confidentiality protections.

After employment has begun, the ADA permits an employer to only require a physical examination if it is job-related and consistent with business necessity.

How have the courts addressed fears that health care employees who perform invasive procedures, such as surgeons, will transmit HIV to patients?

The risk of HIV transmission from a health care worker to a patient is considered so small that it approaches zero.  Nevertheless, in cases where hospitals have sought to restrict or terminate the privileges of HIV-positive health care workers who perform invasive procedures, courts have reacted with tremendous fear and have insisted on an impossible “zero risk” standard. As a result, the small number of courts that have addressed this issue under the ADA have upheld such terminations.

The employment provisions in the ADA provide that an employee is not qualified to perform the job if he or she poses a “direct threat to the health or safety of others.” To determine whether an employee poses a “direct threat,” a court analyzes:

  • The nature, duration and severity of the risk;
  • The probability of the risk; and
  • Whether the risk can be eliminated by reasonable accommodation.

However, in the case of HIV-positive health care workers, courts have ignored the extremely remote probability of the risk and focused on the nature, duration and severity of the risk. The following excerpt from a recent case is typical of courts’ approach:

“We hold that Dr. Doe does pose a significant risk to the health and safety of his patients that cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation. Although there may presently be no documented case of surgeon-to-patient transmission, such transmission clearly is possible. And, the risk of percutaneous injury can never be eliminated through reasonable accommodation.  Thus, even if Dr. Doe takes extra precautions … some measure of risk will always exist …” (Doe v. University of Maryland Medical System Corporation, 50 F.3d 1261 (4th Cir. 1995)).

It is important to note that only a small number of courts have addressed the rights of HIV-­positive health care workers.  The AIDS Law Project believes that these cases have been incorrectly decided and are inconsistent with the intent of Congress in passing the ADA.   Because of the unsettled nature of the law in this area, a health care worker who is confronted with potential employment discrimination should consult a lawyer or public health advocate.

Assessing Discrimination by an Employer

While it may be useful to consult with a lawyer, the following steps can be helpful in beginning to consider and assess a potential employment discrimination problem.

1. Consider the difference between unfairness and illegal discrimination. The bottom line of employment law is that an employee can be fired for a good reason, bad reason, or no reason at all. A person can be legally fired for a lot of reasons, including a bad “personality match.” What they cannot be fired for is a discriminatory reason specifically outlawed by a statute.

2. In order to prove a discrimination claim (i.e., that you were fired, demoted, etc. because of discrimination and not because of some legitimate reason), you must be able to show the following:

  • The employer knew or figured out that you are HIV-positive or have AIDS;
  • You were qualified to perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation; and
  • Adverse action was taken against you because of your HIV or AIDS status and the pre-textual reason given by the employer for the adverse action is false.

3. If your employer knows that you have HIV or AIDS, identify exactly who knows, how they know, and when they found out. If you have not told your employer, is there any other way the employer would know or suspect your HIV status?

4. Consider the reasons why you believe that you are being treated differently because of HIV status, including the following areas:

  • Have other employees in similar situations been treated differently or the same?
  • Has your employer followed its personnel policies?
  • Did the adverse treatment begin shortly after the employer learned of your HIV status?
  • Have you been out of work due to illness for any period of time and did the adverse treatment begin upon your return to work?
  • What will your employer’s version of events be? How will you prove that the employer’s version is false?

5. Do you have any difficulty fulfilling the duties of your job because of any HIV-related health or medical issue? Does your condition prevent full-time work, or require time off for medical appointments, lighter duties or a less stressful position? You might want to try brainstorming to create a reasonable accommodation that you can propose to your employer. Here are some points to consider:

  • How does the company operate and how would the accommodation work in practice?
  • Put yourself in your supervisor’s shoes. What objections might be raised to the requested reasonable accommodation? For example, if you need to leave at a certain time for medical appointments, who would cover your duties?

What laws prohibit discrimination in housing?

It is illegal under both Connecticut law (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-64c) and the National Fair Housing Amendments of 1989, to discriminate in the sale or rental of housing on the basis of HIV status.  A person cannot be evicted from an apartment because of his or her HIV or AIDS status, or because he or she is regarded as having HIV or AIDS.

Are there exceptions to the housing anti-discrimination laws?

Yes, Connecticut law exempts a rental portion of a single-family dwelling if the owner maintains and occupies part of the living quarters as his or her residence, or for the rental of a unit in a residence that has four or fewer apartments when the owner occupies one apartment.  In addition, the Fair Housing act exempts, in some circumstances, ownership-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit the occupancy to members.

Do Connecticut laws protect against discrimination by health care providers, businesses, and other public places?

Yes, under Connecticut law (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-64), and the ADA, it is unlawful to exclude a person with HIV from a public place (what the law refers to as a “public accommodation”) or to provide unequal or restricted services to a person with HIV in a public place.  Under both statutes, the term “public accommodation” includes any establishment or business that offers services to the public.

Therefore, people with HIV are protected from discrimination in virtually every public place or business, including bars, restaurants, hotels, stores, schools, vocational or other educational programs, taxi cabs, buses, airplanes, and other modes of transportation, health clubs, hospitals, and medical and dental offices, as long as these facilities are generally open to the public.

Is discrimination by health care professionals against people with HIV still a problem?

Believe it or not, yes, people with HIV still face discrimination by hospitals, doctors, dentists, and other health care providers. This discrimination can take the form of an outright refusal to provide medical services or an illegal referral because of a patient’s HIV status.

What types of arguments do doctors who discriminate against people with HIV make, and are they legitimate?

Doctors typically try to justify discrimination against people with HIV with one of two arguments:

  • “Treating People with HIV is Dangerous” (Some doctors refuse to treat people with HIV based on an irrational fear of HIV transmission); and
  • “Treating People with HIV Requires Special Expertise” (Some doctors refer patients to other medical providers based on an inaccurate belief that general practitioners are not qualified to provide care to patients with HIV).

Both an outright refusal to provide medical treatment and unnecessary referrals on the basis of a person’s disability are unlawful under the ADA and Connecticut law.

How have courts and medical experts responded to these arguments?

Courts and medical experts have responded to these arguments in the following ways:

  1. “Treating People with HIV is Dangerous”

Doctors and dentists may claim that a refusal to treat a patient with HIV is legitimate because they fear they might contract HIV themselves through needle sticks or other exposures to blood.  However, studies of health care workers have concluded that risk of contracting HIV from occupational exposure is minuscule, especially with the use of universal precautions.

For this reason, in 1998, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case Bragdon v. Abbott that health care providers cannot refuse to treat people with HIV based on concerns or fears about HIV transmission (524 U.S. 624 (1998)).

In addition to the legal perspective, both the American Medical Association and the American Dental Association, and many other professional health care organizations, have issued policies that it is unethical to refuse treatment to a person with HIV.

  1. “Treating People with HIV Requires Special Expertise”

In these cases, the merits of a discrimination claim depend upon whether, based on objective medical evidence, the services or treatment needed by the patient require a referral to a specialist or are within the scope of services and competence of the provider.

In United States v. Morvant, a federal trial court rejected a dentist’s claim that patients with HIV require a specialist for routine dental care (898 F. Supp. 1157 (E.D. La 1995)). The court agreed with the testimony of experts who said that no special training or expertise, other than that possessed by a general dentist, is required to provide dental treatment to people with HIV. The court specifically rejected the dentist’s arguments that he was unqualified because he had not kept up with the literature and training necessary to treat patients with HIV. While this case arose in the context of dental care, it is applicable to other medical settings as well.

What are the specific provisions of the ADA that prohibit discrimination by health care providers?

Under Title III of the ADA (42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12188), it is illegal for a health care provider to:

  1. Deny an HIV-positive patient the “full and equal enjoyment” of medical services or to deny an HIV-positive patient the “opportunity to benefit” from medical services in the same manner as other patients.
  2. Establish “eligibility criteria” for the privilege of receiving medical services, which tend to screen out patients who have tested positive for HIV.
  3. Provide “different or separate” services to patients who are HIV-positive or fail to provide services to patients in the “most integrated setting.”
  4. Deny equal medical services to a person who is known to have a “relationship” or “association” to a person with HIV, such as a spouse, partner, child, or friend.

What specific health care practices constitute illegal discrimination against people with HIV?

Applying the specific provisions of the ADA above to the practice of health care, the following practices are illegal:

  • A health care provider cannot decline to treat a person with HIV based on a perceived risk of HIV transmission or because the physician simply does not feel comfortable treating a person with HIV.
  • A health care provider cannot agree to treat a patient only in a treatment setting outside the physician’s regular office, such as a special hospital clinic, simply because the person is HIV-positive.
  • A health care provider cannot refer an HIV-positive patient to another clinic or specialist, unless the required treatment is outside the scope of the physician’s usual practice or specialty. The ADA requires that referrals of HIV-positive patients be made on the same basis as referrals of other patients. It is, however, permissible to refer a patient to specialized care if the patient has HIV-related medical conditions which are outside the realm of competence or scope of services of the provider.
  • A health care provider cannot increase the cost of services to an HIV-positive patient in order to use additional precautions beyond the mandated OSHA and CDC infection control procedures. Under certain circumstances, it may even be an ADA violation to use unnecessary additional precautions which tend to stigmatize a patient simply on the basis of HIV status.
  • A health care provider cannot limit the scheduled times for treating HIV-positive patients, such as insisting that an HIV-positive patient come in at the end of the day.

What protections exist under Connecticut anti-discrimination law with regard to credit?

Any person who “regularly extends or arranges for the extension of credit” for which interest or finance charges are imposed (e.g. a bank, credit union, or other financial institution), may not discriminate because of HIV status in any credit transaction (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-66).

What are some potential remedies for discrimination under federal law?

To pursue a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act for employment discrimination, the employer must have at least 15 employees. A person must file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the date of the discriminatory act. A person may remove an ADA claim from the EEOC and file a lawsuit in state or federal court.

To pursue a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act for discrimination in a place of public accommodation, a person may, without first going to an administrative agency, file a claim in state or federal court for injunctive relief only (i.e., seeking a court order that the discriminatory conduct cease). Money damages are not available for violation of Title III of the ADA unless they are sought by the United States Department of Justice. However, a person may recover money damages under the Federal Rehabilitation Act in cases against entities that receive federal funding.

To pursue a claim under the Rehabilitation Act, a person may file an administrative complaint with the regional office of the federal Department of Health and Human Services and/or file a lawsuit directly in court.

To pursue a claim under the National Fair Housing Act for discrimination in housing, a person may file a complaint with the United States Office of Housing and Urban Development within one year of the violation. A person may also bring a lawsuit within two years of the violation. A lawsuit may be filed whether or not a person has filed a complaint with HUD.

Discrimination | Transgender Rights | Connecticut

Does Connecticut have an anti-discrimination law protecting transgender individuals from discrimination?

Yes. Since 1991, Connecticut has prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation in public and private employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c to 46a-81q). In July 2011, these laws were extended to protect transgender people when Governor Malloy signed Public Act 11-55, An Act Concerning Discrimination, into law. The act, which went into effect on October 1, 2011, added “gender identity or expression” to Connecticut’s list of protected classes. For more detailed information see GLAD’s and the Connecticut Women’s Education and Legal Fund’s (CWEALF) publication, Connecticut:  Legal Protections for Transgender People, at: Connecticut: Legal Protections for Transgender People

Do the laws also protect people perceived to be transgender?

Yes. Connecticut non-discrimination law defines “sexual orientation” as either “having a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality, having a history of such preference or being identified with such preference…” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81a (emphasis added)). This language includes discrimination based on perception. For example, if a person is fired because they are perceived to be gay, they may invoke the protection of the anti-discrimination law regardless of their actual orientation.

Similarly, the law defines “gender identity or expression” as:

[A] person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth… (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-51(21) (emphasis added)).

How do I file a complaint of discrimination?

If you wish to file a complaint, you should contact an intake officer at one of the regional offices of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). The intake officer will discuss your concerns, explain the complaint process, and advise you about what help CHRO may be able to provide to you. If CHRO has jurisdiction, you will be given an appointment to come to a regional office to file a complaint. The contact information for CHRO’s administrative headquarters and four regional offices is below:

ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS 25 Sigourney Street Hartford, CT 06106 PHONE: (860) 541-3400 OR (800) 477-5737 FAX: (860) 246-5068

CAPITOL REGION OFFICE 450 Columbus Boulevard Hartford, CT 06103-1835 PHONE: (860) 566-7710 FAX: (860) 566-1997

EASTERN REGION OFFICE 100 Broadway Norwich, CT 06360 PHONE: (860) 886-5703 FAX: (860) 886-2550

WEST CENTRAL REGION OFFICE Rowland State Government Center 55 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waterbury, CT 06702-2004 PHONE: (203) 805-6530 FAX: (203) 805-6559

SOUTHWEST REGION OFFICE 350 Fairfield Avenue, 6th Floor Bridgeport, CT 06604 PHONE: (203) 579-6246 FAX: (203) 579-6950

For housing complaints, contact the Housing Discrimination Unit at (800) 477-5737 ext. 3403 or (860) 541- 3403.

The complaint must be in writing and under oath, and it must state the name and address of the individual making the complaint (“the complainant”) as well as the entity he or she is complaining against (“the respondent”). The complaint must set out the particulars of the alleged unlawful acts and (preferably) the times they occurred (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82). There is no charge to file a complaint.

If you are a state employee, you may file your case directly in court. State employees can skip over the CHRO process entirely.

Do I need a lawyer?

No. The process is designed to allow people to represent themselves. However, GLAD strongly encourages people to find lawyers to represent them throughout the process. Not only are there many legal rules governing the CHRO process, but employers and other defendants are likely to have legal representation.

What are the deadlines for filing a complaint of discrimination?

A complaint must generally be filed with the CHRO within 180 days of the last discriminatory act or acts (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82(e)). There are very few exceptions for lateness, and GLAD encourages people to move promptly in filing claims.

Can I file more than one type of discrimination complaint at once, for example, if I believe I was fired both because I am transgender and Latina?

Yes. Connecticut’s employment non-discrimination laws forbid discriminating against someone because of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression as well as race, color, religious creed, age, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, and present or past history of mental, intellectual, learning, or physical disability (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-60). In housing and public accommodations, the criteria are expanded to include “lawful source of income” (Conn. Gen. Stat. secs. 46a-64c; 46a-64). Housing also adds “familial status” to the list (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-64c).

What happens after a complaint is filed with the CHRO?

When you file a complaint with the CHRO, you will be given a packet of information explaining the CHRO procedures and deadlines. Please review these and follow the deadlines.

The complaint will be served on your respondent, who must answer the complaint under oath within 30 days (10 days for a housing case). If you wish to respond or comment on your respondent’s answer, you have 15 days to do so.

Within 60 days of receiving the respondent’s answer, the CHRO will review the complaint and determine if any further investigation is necessary. This is called a merit assessment review (MAR). It is based solely on your original complaint, the answer, and any additional comments you make regarding the answer. Since many cases are dismissed at this stage of the proceedings, GLAD recommends that you reply to the respondent’s answer.

If the case is dismissed, you will be given 15 days to request the right to move your complaint from CHRO into the courts. If you do not request to remove your complaint, the CHRO will review your case and decide whether to uphold the dismissal or reinstate your complaint.

If the case is not dismissed, an investigator will be assigned and a mandatory mediation conference will be held within 60 days. If negotiations fail to produce a settlement agreeable to all parties, either party or the CHRO can request early legal intervention. The CHRO has 90 days to decide whether to grant this request. If granted, a Hearing Officer will be appointed to decide the merits of the case in a trial-type hearing

If there is no request for early legal intervention, then the investigator will continue to collect evidence and will make a determination of “reasonable cause” or “no reasonable cause.” If a finding of “reasonable cause” is made, you can request either to have the case heard at the CHRO or to move it to Superior Court. If a finding of “no reasonable cause” is made, you have 15 days to request reconsideration.

Note that in housing discrimination cases, the CHRO must complete its investigation within 100 days of filing and the final disposition within one year, unless it is impracticable to do so (For sexual orientation Conn. Gen. Stat. sec 46a-81(e) and for gender identity or expression Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-64c(f)).

What are the legal remedies the CHRO may award for discrimination if an individual wins their case there?

Employment: hiring, reinstatement, or upgrading; back pay; restoration in a labor organization; cease and desist orders; and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the antidiscrimination laws (e.g. training programs, posting of notices, etc.) (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a – c)).

Housing: damages—i.e., expenses actually incurred because of unlawful action related to moving, storage, or obtaining alternate housing; cease and desist orders; reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the antidiscrimination laws (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a, c)). The CHRO may also order civil fines to be paid to the state (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81e(f)).

Public Accommodations: cease and desist orders and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the anti-discrimination laws. The CHRO may also order civil fines to be paid to the state (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a); sec. 46a-64 (c)).

Credit: cease and desist orders and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the anti-discrimination laws (e.g. allowing person to apply for credit on non-discriminatory terms) (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a); sec. 46a-98 (outlining additional damages available for cases filed in Superior Court within one year of discriminatory act)).

Note that when cases are filed in court, emotional distress damages and attorneys’ fees are also available to a successful complainant. These are not available from the CHRO (See Bridgeport Hospital v. CHRO, 232 Conn. 91 (1995); Delvecchio v. Griggs & Browne Co., Inc., 2000 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1149 (April 17, 2000)(“The CHRO is without authority to award a prevailing party attorneys’ fees, punitive or compensatory damages or damages for emotional distress.”)).

Should I take my case away from the CHRO and file in court? How do I do so?

This is a decision you should make with your lawyer. Greater damages are available to you in state court than at the CHRO, including emotional distress damages and attorney’s fees.

To sue an entity in state court as opposed to the CHRO, you must follow several steps and meet various deadlines (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-101 to 46a-102).

  • Your complaint must have been filed on time at the CHRO (i.e., within 180 days of the last act of discrimination);
  • Your complaint must have been pending with the CHRO more than 180 days (although if you and your employer agree to request the case’s removal to court, you may do so before the 180 days elapse) or the merit assessment review must have been completed;
  • You must request a release of your complaint from the CHRO for the purpose of filing a court action, which the CHRO must grant except when the case is scheduled for public hearing, or they believe the complaint can be resolved within 30 days;
  • You must file your court action within 2 years of the date of filing your complaint with the CHRO; and
  • You must file your court action within 90 days after you receive a release from the CHRO to file your case in court.

Can I also file a discrimination complaint with a federal agency?

Yes, in many cases. Since federal law and state law contain overlapping provisions, someone bringing a discrimination claim may sometimes pursue protections under both. For example, the federal employment non-discrimination law, called Title VII, applies to employers with at least 15 employees and forbids employment discrimination based on race, sex, age, religion, and disability (which includes HIV status).

While Title VII does not expressly forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, a growing number of courts and government agencies have taken the position that its proscription against sex discrimination encompasses both (See, e.g., United States & Dr. Rachel Tudor v. Southeastern Oklahoma State University, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89547 (2015) (denying motion to dismiss professor’s Title VII complaint that school had subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her gender identity)). In two separate decisions in 2012 and 2016, the EEOC itself concluded that sexual orientation discrimination, gender identity discrimination, and sex discrimination are one and the same, since the latter two are based on preferences, assumptions, expectations, stereotypes, and norms associated with masculinity and femininity (See Macy v. Holder, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120821 (Apr. 20, 2012); Baldwin v. Foxx, EEOC Appeal No. 0120133080 (July 15, 2015)). Although the EEOC’s decisions are not binding on the courts, many have used similar reasoning in affirming Title VII’s applicability to discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation (See, e.g., Smith v. City of Salem, 378 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding that Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on gender stereotyping); Videckis v. Pepperdine Univ., 150 F. Supp. 3d 1151, 1160 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (holding “sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex or gender discrimination”)).

LGBT people who are discriminated against in housing may also be able to file a complaint with the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in addition to CHRO. For more information go to: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing _equal_opp/LGBT_Housing_Discrimination.

Should I file a complaint with a federal agency?

GLAD recommends that, where there may be overlapping state and federal jurisdiction, you explore filing with CHRO first but keep in mind the possibility of pursuing a federal claim as well. Federal complaints must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). However, if you initially institute your complaint with CHRO and indicate that you wish to have the complaint cross-filed with the EEOC, then the time limit is extended to the earlier of 300 days or 30 days after CHRO has terminated the case (United States Code 42 sec. 2000e-5(e)(1)). (People who work for federal agencies are beyond the scope of this publication.)

If you have a sexual orientation or gender identity complaint, you should check off “sex” as well as “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” as the bases for your claim and request that CHRO cross-file your complaint with the EEOC.

Are there other options for filing a complaint for discrimination?

Possibly yes, depending on the facts of your particular situation.

Union: If you are a member of a union, your contract (collective bargaining agreement) may provide additional rights to you in the event of discipline, discharge, or other job-related actions. If you obtain relief under your contract, you may even decide not to pursue other remedies. Get and read a copy of your contract and contact a union steward about filing a complaint. Deadlines in contracts are strict. Bear in mind that if your union refuses to assist you with a complaint, you may have a discrimination action against them for their failure to work with you, or for failure of duty of fair representation.

State or Federal Court: After filing with the CHRO, EEOC, or both, you may decide to remove your discrimination case from those agencies and file in court. There are rules about when and how this must be done as discussed above.

In addition, you may wish to bring a court case to address other claims which are not appropriately handled by discrimination agencies. For example, if you are fired in violation of a contract, fired without the progressive discipline promised in a handbook, or fired for doing something your employer doesn’t like but which the law requires, these matters are beyond the scope of what the agencies can investigate and the matter should be pursued in court. Similarly, if your claim involves a violation of constitutional rights—for instance, if you are a teacher or governmental employee who believes his or her free speech or equal protection rights were violated—then those matters must also be heard in court.

What can I do if my employer fires me or my landlord threatens me for filing a complaint of discrimination?

It is illegal for your employer or landlord to retaliate or punish you because you filed a complaint. If they do so, you can file an additional complaint against them for retaliation. “Retaliation” protections cover those who have filed complaints, testified or assisted in the complaint process, or opposed any discriminatory employment practice (Conn. Gen. Stat. secs. 46a-60 (4); 46a-64c(a)(9)).

What can I do to prepare myself before filing a complaint of discrimination?

Contact GLAD Answers at www.GLADAnswers.org or by phone at 1-800-455-4523 (GLAD) any weekday to discuss options.

As a general matter, people who are still working with or residing under discriminatory conditions have to evaluate how filing a case will affect their job or housing, and if they are willing to assume those possible consequences. Even if you have been fired or evicted, you may decide it is not worth it to pursue a discrimination claim. This is an individual choice which should be made after gathering enough information to make an informed decision. Some people prefer to meet with an attorney to evaluate the strength of their claims. It is always helpful to bring the attorney an outline of what happened on the job that you are complaining about, organized by date and with an explanation of who the various players are (and how to get in touch with them). Try to have on hand copies of your employee handbooks or personnel manuals, as well as any contracts, job evaluations, memos, discharge letters and the like. If you are concerned about a housing matter, bring a copy of your lease, along with any notices and letters you have received from your landlord.

Discriminatory Treatment | Connecticut

Does Connecticut have an anti-discrimination law protecting LGBT individuals from discrimination?

Yes. Since 1991, Connecticut has prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation in public and private employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c to 46a-81q). In July 2011, these laws were extended to protect transgender people when Governor Malloy signed Public Act 11-55, An Act Concerning Discrimination, into law. The act, which went into effect on October 1, 2011, added “gender identity or expression” to Connecticut’s list of protected classes. For more detailed information see GLAD’s and the Connecticut Women’s Education and Legal Fund’s (CWEALF) publication, Connecticut: Legal Protections for Transgender People

Do the laws also protect people perceived to be LGBT?

Yes. Connecticut non-discrimination law defines “sexual orientation” as either “having a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality, having a history of such preference or being identified with such preference…” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81a (emphasis added)). This language includes discrimination based on perception.

Similarly, the law defines “gender identity or expression” as:

[A] person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth… (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-51(21) (emphasis added)).

I am often told by police to “move along” from public areas. Is that legal?

Not necessarily. If the area is public and not posted as having particular hours, you generally have a right to be there as long as you are not engaged in unlawful activity. Public places belong to everyone, and are often also places of public accommodation subject to Connecticut’s non-discrimination law. Even if a police officer wants to deter crime, or suspects some kind of unlawful intent, they have no general right to request people to move from one place to another unless there is unlawful conduct (Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 126 (1958)).

What are the general rules about interaction with police?

The presence of individuals who appear to be LGBT – whether because such individuals are displaying symbols such as a rainbow flag or pink triangle or for any other reason – should not trigger any special scrutiny by a police officer.

Police may of course approach a person, and make inquiries.  But the fact that a person has been convicted of a past offense, or fails to respond, or responds in a way which does not satisfy the officer, cannot, without more, justify an arrest.

If an officer has a “reasonable and articulable suspicion” that a crime has been committed or is about to be committed, they may briefly detain an individual, or stop the person for purposes of investigation (State v. Anderson, 24 Conn. App. 438, 441, 589 A.2d 372, 373 (1991); Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 16 (1968)). However, an arrest can only occur upon “probable cause” that a crime has been committed.

What can I do if I believe I have been improperly treated by the police?

Complaints may be made to any individual police department for matters concerning its officers, and complaints to the Connecticut State Police may be made to Department of Public Safety, Attn: Legal Affairs Unit, 1111 Country Club Rd., Middletown, CT  06457. Their general number is (860) 685-8000.

In some cases, you may decide to pursue a lawsuit, either because of injuries, improper detainment, or for some other reason. These matters are highly specialized, and GLAD can make attorney referrals.

Credit Lending | Discrimination | Connecticut

Does Connecticut have an anti-discrimination law protecting LGBT individuals from discrimination in credit, lending and services?

Yes. Since 1991, Connecticut has prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation in public and private employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81c to 46a-81q). In July 2011, these laws were extended to protect transgender people when Governor Malloy signed Public Act 11-55, An Act Concerning Discrimination, into law. The act, which went into effect on October 1, 2011, added “gender identity or expression” to Connecticut’s list of protected classes. For more detailed information see GLAD’s and the Connecticut Women’s Education and Legal Fund’s (CWEALF) publication, Connecticut:  Legal Protections for Transgender People, at: Connecticut: Legal Protections for Transgender People

Do the laws also protect people perceived to be LGBT in credit, lending and services?

Yes. Connecticut non-discrimination law defines “sexual orientation” as either “having a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality, having a history of such preference or being identified with such preference…” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81a (emphasis added)). This language includes discrimination based on perception. For example, if a person is fired because they are perceived to be gay, they may invoke the protection of the anti-discrimination law regardless of their actual orientation.

Similarly, the law defines “gender identity or expression” as:

[A] person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth… (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-51(21) (emphasis added)).

What protections exist under Connecticut anti-discrimination law with regard to credit?

Any person who “regularly extends or arranges for the extension of credit” for which interest or finance charges are imposed—e.g. a bank, credit union, or other financial institution—may not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-81f) or gender identity or expression (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-66(a)) in any credit transaction.

Example: GLAD brought and settled a claim against a credit union which refused to allow an effeminate looking man from applying for a loan until he came back looking more masculine. A federal court ruled that this stated a claim of sex discrimination (Rosa v. Park West Bank, 214 F.3d 213 (1st Cir. 2000)).

How do I file a complaint of discrimination?

If you wish to file a complaint, you should contact an intake officer at one of the regional offices of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). The intake officer will discuss your concerns, explain the complaint process, and advise you about what help CHRO may be able to provide to you. If CHRO has jurisdiction, you will be given an appointment to come to a regional office to file a complaint. The contact information for CHRO’s administrative headquarters and four regional offices is below:

  • ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS 25 Sigourney Street Hartford, CT 06106 PHONE: (860) 541-3400 OR (800) 477-5737 FAX: (860) 246-5068

• CAPITOL REGION OFFICE 450 Columbus Boulevard Hartford, CT 06103-1835 PHONE: (860) 566-7710 FAX: (860) 566-1997

• EASTERN REGION OFFICE 100 Broadway Norwich, CT 06360 PHONE: (860) 886-5703 FAX: (860) 886-2550

• WEST CENTRAL REGION OFFICE Rowland State Government Center 55 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waterbury, CT 06702-2004 PHONE: (203) 805-6530 FAX: (203) 805-6559

• SOUTHWEST REGION OFFICE 350 Fairfield Avenue, 6th Floor Bridgeport, CT 06604 PHONE: (203) 579-6246 FAX: (203) 579-6950

The complaint must be in writing and under oath, and it must state the name and address of the individual making the complaint (“the complainant”) as well as the entity he or she is complaining against (“the respondent”). The complaint must set out the particulars of the alleged unlawful acts and (preferably) the times they occurred (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82). There is no charge to file a complaint.

If you are a state employee, you may file your case directly in court. State employees can skip over the CHRO process entirely.

Do I need a lawyer?

No. The process is designed to allow people to represent themselves. However, GLAD strongly encourages people to find lawyers to represent them throughout the process. Not only are there many legal rules governing the CHRO process, but employers and other defendants are likely to have legal representation.

What happens after a complaint is filed with the CHRO?

When you file a complaint with the CHRO, you will be given a packet of information explaining the CHRO procedures and deadlines. Please review these and follow the deadlines.

The complaint will be served on your respondent, who must answer the complaint under oath within 30 days. If you wish to respond or comment on your respondent’s answer, you have 15 days to do so.

Within 60 days of receiving the respondent’s answer, the CHRO will review the complaint and determine if any further investigation is necessary. This is called a merit assessment review (MAR). It is based solely on your original complaint, the answer, and any additional comments you make regarding the answer. Since many cases are dismissed at this stage of the proceedings, GLAD recommends that you reply to the respondent’s answer.

If the case is dismissed, you will be given 15 days to request the right to move your complaint from CHRO into the courts. If you do not request to remove your complaint, the CHRO will review your case and decide whether to uphold the dismissal or reinstate your complaint.

If the case is not dismissed, an investigator will be assigned and a mandatory mediation conference will be held within 60 days. If negotiations fail to produce a settlement agreeable to all parties, either party or the CHRO can request early legal intervention. The CHRO has 90 days to decide whether to grant this request. If granted, a Hearing Officer will be appointed to decide the merits of the case in a trial-type hearing.

If there is no request for early legal intervention, then the investigator will continue to collect evidence and will make a determination of “reasonable cause” or “no reasonable cause.” If a finding of “reasonable cause” is made, you can request either to have the case heard at the CHRO or to move it to Superior Court. If a finding of “no reasonable cause” is made, you have 15 days to request reconsideration.

What are the deadlines for filing a complaint of discrimination?

A complaint must generally be filed with the CHRO within 180 days of the last discriminatory act or acts (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-82(e)). There are very few exceptions for lateness, and GLAD encourages people to move promptly in filing claims.

Can I file more than one type of discrimination complaint at once?

Yes. Connecticut’s credit non-discrimination laws forbid discriminating against someone because of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression as well as race, color, religious creed, age, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, and present or past history of mental, intellectual, learning, or physical disability or veteran status (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-66).

What are the legal remedies the CHRO may award for discrimination if an individual wins their case there?

Cease and desist orders and other relief that would fulfill the purposes of the anti-discrimination laws (e.g. allowing person to apply for credit on non-discriminatory terms) (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46a-86 (a); sec. 46a-98 (outlining additional damages available for cases filed in Superior Court within one year of discriminatory act)).

Note that when cases are filed in court, emotional distress damages and attorneys’ fees are also available to a successful complainant. These are not available from the CHRO (See Bridgeport Hospital v. CHRO, 232 Conn. 91 (1995); Delvecchio v. Griggs & Browne Co., Inc., 2000 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1149 (April 17, 2000)(“The CHRO is without authority to award a prevailing party attorneys’ fees, punitive or compensatory damages or damages for emotional distress.”)).

Should I take my case away from the CHRO and file in court? How do I do so?

This is a decision you should make with your lawyer. Greater damages are available to you in state court than at the CHRO, including emotional distress damages and attorney’s fees.

To sue an entity in state court as opposed to the CHRO, you must follow several steps and meet various deadlines.45

• Your complaint must have been filed on time at the CHRO (i.e., within 180 days of the last act of discrimination);

• Your complaint must have been pending with the CHRO more than 180 days (although if you and your employer agree to request the case’s removal to court, you may do so before the 180 days elapse) or the merit assessment review must have been completed;

• You must request a release of your complaint from the CHRO for the purpose of filing a court action, which the CHRO must grant except when the case is scheduled for public hearing, or they believe the complaint can be resolved within 30 days;

• You must file your court action within 2 years of the date of filing your complaint with the CHRO; and

• You must file your court action within 90 days after you receive a release from the CHRO to file your case in court.

Can I also file a discrimination complaint with a federal agency?

Yes, in many cases. Since federal law and state law contain overlapping provisions, someone bringing a discrimination claim may sometimes pursue protections under both. For example, the federal employment non-discrimination law, called Title VII, applies to employers with at least 15 employees and forbids employment discrimination based on race, sex, age, religion, and disability (which includes HIV status).

While Title VII does not expressly forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, a growing number of courts and government agencies have taken the position that its proscription against sex discrimination encompasses both (See, e.g., United States & Dr. Rachel Tudor v. Southeastern Oklahoma State University, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89547 (2015) (denying motion to dismiss professor’s Title VII complaint that school had subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her gender identity)). In two separate decisions in 2012 and 2016, the EEOC itself concluded that sexual orientation discrimination, gender identity discrimination, and sex discrimination are one and the same, since the latter two are based on preferences, assumptions, expectations, stereotypes, and norms associated with masculinity and femininity (See Macy v. Holder, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120821 (Apr. 20, 2012); Baldwin v. Foxx, EEOC Appeal No. 0120133080 (July 15, 2015)). Although the EEOC’s decisions are not binding on the courts, many have used similar reasoning in affirming Title VII’s applicability to discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation (See, e.g., Smith v. City of Salem, 378 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding that Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on gender stereotyping); Videckis v. Pepperdine Univ., 150 F. Supp. 3d 1151, 1160 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (holding “sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex or gender discrimination”)).

Should I file a complaint with a federal agency?

GLAD recommends that, where there may be overlapping state and federal jurisdiction, you explore filing with CHRO first but keep in mind the possibility of pursuing a federal claim as well. Federal complaints must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). However, if you initially institute your complaint with CHRO and indicate that you wish to have the complaint cross-filed with the EEOC, then the time limit is extended to the earlier of 300 days or 30 days after CHRO has terminated the case (United States Code 42 sec. 2000e-5(e)(1)). (People who work for federal agencies are beyond the scope of this publication.)

If you have a sexual orientation or gender identity complaint, you should check off “sex” as well as “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” as the bases for your claim and request that CHRO cross-file your complaint with the EEOC.

Are there other options for filing a complaint for discrimination?

Possibly yes, depending on the facts of your particular situation.

  • State or Federal Court: After filing with the CHRO, EEOC, or both, you may decide to remove your discrimination case from those agencies and file in court. There are rules about when and how this must be done as discussed above.

In addition, you may wish to bring a court case to address other claims which are not appropriately handled by discrimination agencies. For example, if you are fired in violation of a contract, fired without the progressive discipline promised in a handbook, or fired for doing something your employer doesn’t like but which the law requires, these matters are beyond the scope of what the agencies can investigate and the matter should be pursued in court. Similarly, if your claim involves a violation of constitutional rights—for instance, if you are a teacher or governmental employee who believes his or her free speech or equal protection rights were violated—then those matters must also be heard in court.

What can I do to prepare myself before filing a complaint of discrimination?

Contact GLAD Answers at www.GLADAnswers.org or by phone at 800-455-4523 (GLAD) any weekday to discuss options.

As a general matter, people who are still working with or residing under discriminatory conditions have to evaluate how filing a case will affect their job or housing, and if they are willing to assume those possible consequences. Even if you have been fired or evicted, you may decide it is not worth it to pursue a discrimination claim. This is an individual choice which should be made after gathering enough information to make an informed decision. Some people prefer to meet with an attorney to evaluate the strength of their claims. It is always helpful to bring the attorney an outline of what happened, organized by date and with an explanation of who the various players are (and how to get in touch with them).

Custody Parentage Laws | Connecticut

Can a single gay individual adopt a child in Connecticut?

Yes.

Can same-sex partners together adopt a child in Connecticut?

Yes. More information on adopting in CT can be found, here.

How does a court generally go about making custody determinations?

When a married couple divorces, the parties are encouraged to make their own agreement about custody and visitation. If they can’t reach an agreement, a Superior Court judge will make a custody and visitation determination based the best interests of the child (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46b-56(b). A court considers all relevant factors, keeping in mind a child’s growth, development, well-being, and the continuity and stability of their environment (Cappetta v. Cappetta, 196 Conn. 10, 16, 490 A.2d 996, 999 (1985)).

In all contested cases, the judge will appoint a family relations officer to investigate in order to help the judge arrive at a decision. The investigation can touch on matters of “parentage and surroundings of any child, [the child’s] age, habits and history, inquiry into the home conditions, habits and characters of his parents or guardians and evaluation of his mental or physical condition” (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46b-6).

Are there different kinds of custody?

Yes (Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46b-56(a)). Four kinds:

“Sole legal custody” means that only one parent has the right to make major life decisions for the child, including matters of education, medical care, and emotional, moral and religious development.

“Shared legal custody” means that both parents are involved in and make these decisions.

“Sole physical custody” means that a child lives with and is under the supervision of only one parent, subject to reasonable visitation with the other parent, unless a court finds that visitation is not in the child’s best interests.

“Shared physical custody” means that the child resides with both parents in a way which ensures frequent contact with both.

The court may also award custody to a third party if it finds it to be in the child’s best interests (Id).

If I have a child from a former straight relationship, and I am now involved with a same-sex partner, can my ex use my sexual orientation against me in custody proceedings?

As stated above, Connecticut courts base custody arrangements on the best interests of the child.  As a general rule, a parent’s sexual orientation or marital status should have no bearing on a child’s best interests.

Nevertheless, your former partner may try to argue that your sexual orientation is detrimental to your child. Any number of reasons can be cited, such as that the LGBT parent’s sexual orientation is causing other people to tease or ostracize the child, that the parent is a bad role model, or that the parent’s new partner is not good for the child. In the overwhelming majority of circumstances, these matters can be answered to the satisfaction of a judge in a way which does not penalize the gay parent or the child. Contact GLAD for further resources for dealing with such a situation.

Does it matter if my ex knew or suspected I was gay or lesbian before we separated?

It may make a difference with respect to future modification of court orders for custody. People can seek to modify court orders for custody when there has been a change in circumstances which alters the child’s best interests (see generally, Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 46b-56). If a spouse did not know of your sexual orientation at the time of the court proceedings but learns it later, they may argue that this is a change of circumstances and that the custody issues should be litigated anew.

Is it considered harm to the child if they are teased about having a gay or lesbian parent?

It shouldn’t be. One of the additional responsibilities of being a gay or lesbian parent is helping one’s children deal with this possibility or reality. Of course, children can be teased about everything from the size of their ears to their parents’ accent to their lack of fashion sense, so all parents need to help their children develop coping mechanisms and strategies when peer harassment arises.

As a legal matter, particularly instructive is a U.S. Supreme Court case, Palmore v. Sidoti, in which the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Florida court’s change of custody from the mother to the father. The reason custody had been switched was because the white mother was involved with a black man whom she later married. The Supreme Court acknowledged the reality of bias and prejudice, and that the child might be teased, but refused to cater to those prejudices or give them the force of law by changing the custody arrangement that previously existed. In a statement of constitutional principle applicable to all, the Court unanimously stated, “The Constitution cannot control prejudices, but neither can it tolerate them. Private biases may be outside the reach of the law, but the law cannot, directly or indirectly, give them effect.”

Can a court keep my kids from visiting when my partner is present?

Courts have the power to do this, but should not do so unless it is clearly in the best interests of the child.  Connecticut courts have rejected the notion that any particular lifestyle, in and of itself, will harm a child and insist on specific proof.

What standards should same-sex couples with children who are breaking up maintain?

Same-sex couples with children who are breaking up should:

  1. Support the rights of LGBT parents;
  2. Honor existing relationships regardless of legal labels;
  3. Honor the children’s existing parental relationships after the break-up;
  4. Maintain continuity for the children;
  5. Seek a voluntary resolution;
  6. Remember that breaking up is hard to do;
  7. Investigate allegations of abuse;
  8. Not allow the absence of agreements or legal relationships to determine outcomes;
  9. Treat litigation as a last resort; and
  10. Refuse to resort to homophobic/transphobic laws and sentiments to achieve a desired result.

For more detailed information about these standards see the publication Protecting Families: Standards for LGBT Families at: Protecting Families: Standards for LGBT Families.

Blog

Celebrating Historic LGBTQ+ Representation in the 2022 Elections

While we don’t know the full results from Tuesday’s midterm elections yet, we know there are many things to celebrate, including the historic representation of LGBTQ+ elected officials. We are celebrating:

  • Maura Healey was elected the first out lesbian governor in the country, as well as the first woman governor in Massachusetts.
  • Oregon’s Tina Kotek was voted in as the nation’s second openly lesbian governor.
  • Andrea Campbell won a historic victory as the first Black woman Attorney General in Massachusetts.
  • Vermont has elected its first LGBTQ+ legislator – and first woman – to Congress in Representative-Elect Becca Balint.
  • California Representative-Elect Robert Garcia became the first openly gay immigrant elected to Congress. He is the third openly gay representative elected to Congress from California.
  • Montana and Minnesota elected their first transgender state representatives:  Zooey Zephyr in Montana and Leigh Finke in Minnesota.
  • New Hampshire Representative-Elect James Roesener became the first transgender man ever elected to a state legislature.
  • Minnesota elected Alicia Kozlowski, the first nonbinary member in the state legislature.

Along with so many firsts, voters supported a number of positive ballot measures:

  • Five states voted to protect access to abortion: California, Michigan, Vermont, Kentucky, and Montana.
  • Vermont, along with Alabama, Oregon, and Tennessee, passed constitutional amendments banning slavery and involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime.
  • In a crucial win for voting rights, Michigan and Connecticut expanded early voting.
  • In Massachusetts, voters upheld a law that protects access to driver’s licenses for all people who live in the Commonwealth, regardless of immigration status.

Celebrating our victories fuels our hope, and our hope will sustain us in our work for justice.

The path to protecting democracy and truly fulfilling the promise of freedom, equality, and justice for all is long. It extends beyond any one election cycle. This election held some good news and some setbacks, but we must all stay engaged every day for the long term. With you by our side, GLAD will be here to keep fighting every day and every step of the way.

Connecticut Name and Gender Marker Clinic

Are you a member of the Connecticut LGBTQ+ community who is looking to change your name and/or gender marker?State ID illustration

Stop by the free legal clinic on November 5 for support navigating the process.

We will provide information, assistance, and a limited number of stipends for filing fees.

No registration needed. The venue is manual wheelchair accessible. If you require other accommodations, please email TransID.CT.Clinic@gmail.com.

This event is co-sponsored by the Metropolitan Community Church of Hartford, Health Care Advocates International, University of Saint Joseph’s Dept. of Social Work and Equitable Community Practice, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), and the law firms Shipman and Goodwin LLP.

2022 Florida Event: An Evening of Equality

Join us for light hors d’oeuvres, drinks (including a signature cocktail), and lively conversation about the movement for LGBTQ+ equality.

Featuring:

Janson Wu
Janson Wu

Janson Wu, GLAD Executive Director

Hosted by Paul Goulet, Rick Smith, David Hayter, and Dan Borges.

 

Register for Free button

 

Street parking available. Please take care not to block driveways.

Please do not attend if you are feeling ill or experiencing any symptoms of COVID-19.

This is a Florida casual event.

 

Questions? Contact CJ Tran at ctran@glad.org

Justice for All 2022: GLAD’s Connecticut Event

Sunday, April 24 2022

1:00 pm – 3:00 pm

The Studio at Billings Forge
563 Broad Street, Hartford, CT

About the Event

Thank you to all who joined us for a fantastic afternoon of community and celebration. Our congratulations to Rep. Allie-Brennan once again! Our gratitude goes out to our sponsors and to the staff at the Studio and Kitchen at Forge City Works.

About the Honoree:

CT State Representative Raghib Allie-Brennan

Raghib Allie-Brennan proudly represents Connecticut’s 2nd Assembly District in the state’s House of Representatives, having been first elected in November 2018. After graduating from Bethel Public Schools in 2009 and Marymount Manhattan College in 2013, Raghib worked as a policy advisor in the U.S. House of Representatives.

He is one of only two openly gay members of the General Assembly and has been instrumental in advancing proactive LGBTQ policy. In 2019, he successfully led floor debate on legislation to establish a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Health and Human Services Network to make recommendations to the State about how to work toward a safer and healthier environment for the LGBTQ+ community. He has fought discrimination through bills like banning the Gay and Trans Panic Defense in criminal cases and restoring state benefits to Connecticut service members who were denied an honorable discharge due to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Raghib is a former board member of Triangle Community Center in Norwalk and resides in his hometown of Bethel.

If you have any questions, please contact Mads Ouellette at mouellette@glad.org.

Co Chairs

Jeff Currey
Christiana N. Gianopulos
Anne Stanback & Charlotte Kinlock

Host Committee

Kenneth J. Bartschi & James M. Salemi
Linda Estabrook
Meghan Freed & Kristen Marcroft
Brad & Flint Kleinerman-Gehre
Daniel Livingston
Diana Lombardi
Rev. Aaron Miller
Alice M. Pritchard & Dana Bugl
Gretchen Raffa

As of  April 27, 2022

en_USEnglish
es_MXEspañol de México en_USEnglish
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognizing you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

To learn more, visit our privacy policy.