A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Is LGBT workplace discrimination protection the next victory?

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
By now, our readers are surely aware of the decision that the U.S. Supreme Court handed down late in June, ruling that all denials of same-sex marriage by the states are unconstitutional. This is a big victory for advocates for LGBT rights in this country, but the fight for civil rights is not yet over. As the Los Angeles Times reports, the next step could be achieving the right for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people not to be subjected to discrimination in the workplace. The District of Columbia and 22 states, including California, have laws prohibiting employers from discriminating on the basis of workers’ and job applicants’ sexual orientation. A handful of other states protect public workers from this form of discrimination, but not private sector employees. Workers in the rest of the states may be subject to firing, demotion, or harassment due to their sexual orientation, with little or no ability to fight back. This is similar to the marriage right issue, in which there was a patchwork of rights, depending on which state you lived in. Ironically, as one attorney told the Times, in many places a person can now get married to their same-sex partner over a weekend, then get fired from their job on Monday. Whether federal anti-LGBT discrimination will come through the courts or from Congress remains to be seen. The legal director for the Human Rights Campaign, an activist group, believes that lawmakers will pass such a law within the next six years.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.