Two recent cases, one from the Middle District of North Carolina (Kadel, et al. v Folwell, et al.) and one from the Middle District of Georgia (Lange vs. Houston County, GA, et al.) remind us of the importance of compliance with Title VII. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sex, among other things.

In a Supreme Court decision rendered in June 2020, Bostock v Clayton County, Georgia, on the basis of sex includes gender identity and sexual orientation.

In both of the above referenced cases, the plans refused to cover gender affirming care for participants or family members. In both instances this was found to be a violation of Title VII.

As a reminder, Title VII applies to all employers employing 15 or more employees. Employers will want to make certain that their plans are administered in accordance with Title VII.

The information contained in this Benefit Beat is not intended to be legal, accounting, or other professional advice, nor are these comments directed to specific situations. This information is provided as general guidance and may be affected by changes in law or regulation. This information is not intended to replace or substitute for accounting or other professional advice. You must consult your own attorney or tax advisor for assistance in specific situations. This information is provided as-is, with no warranties of any kind. CBIZ shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever in connection with its use and assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any changes in laws or other factors that could affect the information contained herein.