Under federal employment discrimination laws, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age, citizenship status, and genetic information are protected classifications. Most states have a list of protected classes that closely mirrors federal law, and many states have even added more protected classifications. However, three states have largely left civil rights protections in employment to the federal government.
Mississippi has no anti-discrimination statute and therefore has no protected classes of its own. Alabama and Georgia prohibit age discrimination and unequal pay on the basis of sex, and Georgia additionally prohibits disability discrimination, but Alabama and Georgia otherwise have no protected classes. As such, employees who work in those three states are largely dependent on federal law for protection against employment discrimination.
Employers in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia may feel they benefit from lesser regulation, as fewer anti-discrimination laws may translate into fewer discrimination charges, as well as less time and lower legal fees devoted to administrative investigations. Many states with more robust anti-discrimination laws conduct civil rights investigations that employers would just as soon avoid. However, the lack of regulation could cut both ways. In fact, those same civil rights investigations that employers dread often prevent lawsuits, as a no-cause dismissal from a state civil rights agency often persuades an employee not to file suit.
Because of their minimal state law protections, employees in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia are likely to pursue any discrimination claims at the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. But the EEOC has largely abdicated its duty to investigate charges of discrimination in the past five years, instead simply issuing “right-to-sue” letters that provide said employees with an easy path to court.
Consequently, employers in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia may pine for state civil rights agencies to play a more active, gatekeeping role–minimizing costly and time-consuming discrimination lawsuits.
