Settlement Approved by Kansas Officials
The state of Kansas has agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a federal anti-discrimination lawsuit brought by a former Highway Patrol employee who claimed to have been fired after coming out as transgender. The settlement was approved unanimously by Democratic Governor Laura Kelly and key Republican legislative leaders during an online video conference on Thursday. The agreement, pursued by the state attorney general’s office, required the approval of the governor and top lawmakers.
Allegations of Discrimination
The former employee, who served as a buildings and grounds manager at the Kansas Highway Patrol’s headquarters in Topeka, filed the lawsuit after being terminated in June 2022. The patrol asserted that the firing was due to allegations of sexual harassment and a lack of cooperation with an internal investigation. However, the lawsuit argued that these reasons were a pretext for discriminating against a transgender worker.
In court filings, the former employee, identified as Dawes, claimed to have sought to socially transition at work from male to female. The lawsuit aimed to recover damages for lost wages, emotional suffering, and other related claims. Dawes’ attorney stated that top patrol leaders discussed Dawes’ transgender status and made plans to terminate Dawes because of it, a claim the patrol acknowledged was discussed but framed as a meeting to obtain legal advice on accommodating Dawes’ transition.
Court Rulings and Settlement
The settlement comes four months after U.S. District Judge John Broomes denied the state’s motion to dismiss the case before trial, citing “genuine issues of material fact” for a jury to determine. This ruling emphasized the importance of allowing the case to proceed in light of unresolved factual disputes.
In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against sex discrimination in employment also extends to anti-LGBTQ+ bias, reinforcing the legal foundation of Dawes’ case.
Alleged Harassment and Termination
The Kansas Highway Patrol argued that Dawes’ termination was unrelated to gender identity, instead attributing it to complaints from a female colleague who alleged that Dawes made inappropriate comments about her appearance. According to court documents, the colleague interpreted these comments as sexual advances. Although Dawes acknowledged the interactions, Dawes’ attorney maintained that no disciplinary action had been taken before Dawes’ firing and that the expected punishment for such behavior would likely have been a reprimand.
The patrol further stated that Dawes was terminated for refusing an initial interview related to the allegations, citing a violation of patrol policy requiring full cooperation with internal investigations. Dawes argued that the delay was due to a desire to have legal representation during the interview.
