Talk:Protected group
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Protected class was copied or moved into Protected group with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Merger proposal
editI propose that Protected class be merged into Protected group. These are a single concept. I think "Protected Group" should be the preferred name, although "Protected Class" is probably more standard USA terminology. I looked briefly and could not find a comparable term in discussions of other countries' legal codes. This article on French law uses the term "Protected categories", but it's written in English, so that may reflect the author and audience. Daask (talk) 00:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- I support the proposal to merge Protected class and Protected group. I'm not a lawyer, but as an employer reading a number of cases in Employment Law, it seems to me that Protected class is the more highly used legal/regulatory term. Barcr (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Daask and Barcr: I agree re: merger. The terms are used interchangeably by the U.S. Dept of Defense,[1] the UN high comissioner for human rights,[2] the UK Equality Act, and the EU charter,[3] to name a few. They also pretty much all use some variation of "protected categories" and/or "protected status" to mean the same thing too. IMO, we should be WP-bold and just do it. I'll try to remember to come back to it a little later, but I was in the middle of editing a different article that led me here, so I'm going to go back to that for now... —PermStrump(talk) 23:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Merge completed! Arbitrarily0 (talk) 19:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Daask and Barcr: I agree re: merger. The terms are used interchangeably by the U.S. Dept of Defense,[1] the UN high comissioner for human rights,[2] the UK Equality Act, and the EU charter,[3] to name a few. They also pretty much all use some variation of "protected categories" and/or "protected status" to mean the same thing too. IMO, we should be WP-bold and just do it. I'll try to remember to come back to it a little later, but I was in the middle of editing a different article that led me here, so I'm going to go back to that for now... —PermStrump(talk) 23:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Protection beyond employment?
editBanderson5342 (talk · contribs) just changed the article from asserting that US law protects employees from discrimination to saying US law protects people from discrimination. This article currently cites only a single source[1], which specifies only protection for equal employment opportunities. Are there legal protections beyond employment? If so we need sources. Daask (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Protected Group Member Law & Legal Definition". Retrieved 2008-12-21.
Addition of sexual orientation
editI think we should add sexual orientation to the list since Executive Order 13672 has made it a protected class. --MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)(please reply using {{ping}}) 11:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)