UPDATED: Governor Issues Executive Directive On Discrimination (LG and AG respond)
Today Governor Bob McDonnell’s office released Executive Directive One on state standards on discrimination in the workplace:
Employment discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated by this Administration. The Virginia Human Rights Act recognizes the unlawfulness of conduct that violates any Virginia or federal statute or regulation governing discrimination against certain enumerated classes of persons. The Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution prohibits discrimination without a rational basis against any class of persons. Discrimination based on factors such as one’s sexual orientation or parental status violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Therefore, discrimination against enumerated classes of persons set forth in the Virginia Human Rights Act or discrimination against any class of persons without a rational basis is prohibited.
And the Governor closes strongly:
Civility, fair treatment, and mutual respect shall be the standard of conduct expected in state employment.
View the full directive here (PDF).
UPDATE: LG Bill Bolling’s office also released a statement:
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR BOLLING ON EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
RICHMOND – Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling today issued the following statement regarding employment discrimination policies in the Commonwealth:
“In recent days, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a letter to Virginia’s colleges and universities informing them that their internal employment discrimination policies could not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation because such prohibitions were not authorized under state law. While the Attorney General’s legal advice is consistent with that of other Attorneys General before him, it has created some understandable confusion and concern.
“Earlier today, Governor McDonnell issued a directive reiterating the policy of our administration as it relates to important employment practices. I agree wholeheartedly with that statement.
“As the Governor has said many times, we do not support and we will not tolerate employment related discrimination in any form. In this administration, personnel decisions will be based on qualification and performance, and prompt and appropriate disciplinary action will be taken against anyone who violates this policy.
“While various federal and state statutes set forth certain classifications in which employment related discrimination is prohibited as a matter of law, our policy and practice will be much broader than this. All state employees should take comfort in knowing that we will not tolerate employment related discrimination in any form or for any reason, including sexual orientation.”
UPDATE 2: AG Ken Cuccinelli responds:
Comment from Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II:
I applaud Governor McDonnell for the tone he is setting for the Commonwealth of Virginia. I will remain in contact with the Governor and continue to work with him on issues important to Virginians. I expect Virginia’s state employees to follow all state and federal anti-discrimination laws and will enforce Virginia’s laws to the fullest extent.
Category: Government
Loading ...
“against certain enumerated classes of persons.” – so, not everyone?
DC – rest of the sentence – “or discrimination against any class of persons without a rational basis is prohibited” – so everyone.
[...] Gov. Bolling on Non-Discrimination Issue By Tom White, on March 10th, 2010, at 4:01 pm Bearing Drift has the statement from Governor [...]
ok. It just doesn’t feel like it when the attorney general makes statements like this:
“In recent days, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a letter to Virginia’s colleges and universities informing them that their internal employment discrimination policies could not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation because such prohibitions were not authorized under state law.”
So, can they prohibit discrimination or not? Has the A.G. amended his statement? or does this recent statement by the Governor cancel out the A.G.’s statement?
DC – The AG’s office was simply stating what is in Virginia Law. It is a complete misunderstanding to believe that Ken is declaring open season on gays. He stated his legal opinion based on Virginia law. Bob and Bill went to the 14th amendment and I believe beyond that to say discrimination for sexual orientation – or other reasons unrelated to the job – will not be tolerated. Period.
One’s sexual orientation has absolutely nothing to do with how well you do a job. It is, and should be, a non issue.
I think these statements put it in no uncertain terms. Discrimination because of sexual orientation will not be allowed in the State while Bob McDonnell is Governor.
Thank you for the clarification.
I think many people are a little skiddish re: the new Governor and see his early moves (guns in bars, no school breakfast for needy children, etc.) as unnerving shifts to the right. Whether or not these concerns are founded, the general feeling is he is moving our state embarrassingly backwards. Let’s hope the Governor proves his naysayers wrong.
kudos to Mcdonnell for todays decision!
So glad he did this…
I find it humorous (not to mention a tad hypocritical) that the previous post on Cuccinelli’s statement took Governors Kaine and Warner to task for protecting gays by executive order when they are not protected by law (“Under Warner and Kaine, they knew that they couldn’t have a new “protected status” pass the legislature, so they added it as an executive order.”), but then this post says nary a word of criticism when McDonnell, who criticized Kaine’s move when he was AG, did pretty much THE EXACT SAME THING.
So, an action by Democrat=wrong, same action by Republican=right. Am I missing something?
FWIW, I agree with both governors–it’s senseless to evaluate state employment by criteria other than qualifications and performance.
Well, for one, Kevin, it’s two different authors.
Second, I do think McDonnell is wrong here.
Third, this issue is a legislative one.
White Men should be asking why they are now the ONLY group of citizens in America who do not have any special protections under the law.
We truly have a Republic that is just like Animal Farm, where some citizens are now, “more equal” than others.
Let the revolution begin!
Good job Jim!!!
Fair enough regarding the different authors, Jim, though I’m still waiting to see the same kind of snarky comments aimed at McDonnell that have been leveled at Kaine for taking the same action.
I disagree that the employment policies of the Commonwealth are necessarily a legislative matter, however. In fact, such functions are traditionally executive in nature, with the legislature stepping in only to set limits. It’s the executive’s job, within the bounds of the law, to decide what hiring and other practices will work best for the state. The idea that you can’t grant more rights to your employees than the law allows is silly–the law sets a floor, not a ceiling.
Let’s say, for example, that race was not a protected class (wasn’t THAT long ago it wasn’t the case). Are you saying that in, say, 1964, the Governor of Virginia couldn’t have prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of race in state employment even if he wanted to?
Kevin,
You’re right to point out the difference in tone. However, we’ve never been shy about stating we are a conservative blog that favors the GOP.
Language is generally different between friends and foes. I don’t think that’s even an issue.
I appreciate your bringing racial civil rights into the discussion – and while the governor can certainly provide some protection, permanent and legally binding protection doesn’t occur until the legislature acts.
It sounds like you are agreeing with me on my hypothetical. I don’t think anyone’s ever said the governor has the power to provide some form of permanent protection via executive order–the governors who follow him can always rescind the order. So, if Cuccinelli (who seems to have started running for governor already) is elected, he can always do away with the policy when he becomes governor. That doesn’t mean that implementing the order is beyond the governor’s authority, just that it’s not guaranteed to outlast his administration.