On September 22, 2020, President Trump issued an Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping that prohibits federal contractors and grantees from engaging in many forms of diversity, inclusion, and implicit bias training.
The Order requires that government agencies to include in every new government contract, provisions barring the contractor from using workplace training that inculcates in its employees any form of race or sex stereotyping or any form of race or sex scapegoating, including concepts that:
- one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
- an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;
- an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;
- members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
- an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;
- an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
- any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or
- meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.
The Executive Order also prohibits training that “assign[s] fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex because of their race or sex.” Specific anecdotal examples of training targeted by the Order include:
- Training materials from Argonne National Laboratories, a Federal entity, stated that racism “is interwoven into every fabric of America” and described statements like “color blindness” and the “meritocracy” as “actions of bias.”
- Materials from Sandia National Laboratories, also a Federal entity, for non-minority males stated that an emphasis on “rationality over emotionality” was a characteristic of “white male[s],” and asked those present to “acknowledge” their “privilege” to each other.
- A Smithsonian Institution museum graphic recently claimed that concepts like “[o]bjective, rational linear thinking,” “[h]ard work” being “the key to success,” the “nuclear family,” and belief in a single god are not values that unite Americans of all races but are instead “aspects and assumptions of whiteness.” The museum also stated that “[f]acing your whiteness is hard and can result in feelings of guilt, sadness, confusion, defensiveness, or fear.”
The Order also applies to federal grant programs and may require recipients to certify that they will not use federal funds for restricted forms of training. In addition, the Order instructs the attorney general to assess the extent to which workplace training that teaches divisive concepts may contribute to a hostile work environment under Title VII.
The Order becomes effective in 60 days and includes a notice posting requirement for contractors. The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is directed to establish a hotline and investigate complaints of prohibited training. Potential sanctions for violations include terminating, suspending, or canceling contracts, or debarring contractors. The Order does not prevent contractors from promoting racial, cultural, or ethnic diversity and inclusiveness in a manner consistent with the Order.
The Order is certain to be the subject of legal challenges on multiple bases. For now, businesses with government contracts should closely monitor the situation.
For assistance with training issues, contact any member of our Labor & Employment Group for further assistance.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2021 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Partner
Mark Chumley has experience representing management in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has handled numerous cases before state and federal courts and state and federal civil rights agencies, including claims ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Coronavirus
- Employment Law
- Labor Law
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- NLRB
- Discrimination
- Department of Labor
- IRS
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Retirement
- NLRA
- Arbitration
- Employer Policies
- ERISA
- Race Discrimination
- Accommodation
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Litigation
- Social Media
- Reasonable Accommodation
- National Labor Relations Act
- National Labor Relations Board
- Employer Handbook
- Employment Litigation
- EEOC
- Wage & Hour
- 401(k)
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Title VII
- ADAAA
- Workplace Accommodations
- Sexual Harassment
- Employer Rules
- Unions
- Transgender Issues
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Technology
- Securities Law
- Privacy
- FMLA
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Disability
- Workplace Violence
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Sixth Circuit
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Disability Discrimination
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- OSHA
- Overtime Pay
- Religion Discrimination
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Representative Election Regulations
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Department of Justice
- Benefits
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Environmental Law
- Privacy Laws
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Healthcare Reform
- Telecommuting
- Electronically Stored Information
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- American Medical Association
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Disability Leave
- Social Media Content
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Welcome 2021 - 5 Things for Employers to Consider
- Congressional Proposal Extends Tax Credits to Companies Providing Paid Leave, but Allows Requirement to Expire
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: EEOC Issues New Guidance on COVID-19 Vaccinations
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Non-Compete Agreements - Five Mistakes by Three Parties
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Employment At-Will – Myth or Reality?
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: COVID-19 Immunity Laws
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Reductions in Force - Key Factors to Consider
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast
- 5 Things Employers Should Know About Military Leave
- Ohio Passes COVID Immunity Law - Employers Beware