C H A P T E R 8 Gender Equity Chapter ??

Chapter Objectives After reading this chapter, you will know the following: The various federal gender equity laws and how they apply to sport The history of Title IX, how it has been interpreted, and how it is applied today The definition of sexual harassment and how it is regulated in sport The various types of employment discrimination laws

Underrepresentation Women have always been and continue to be underrepresented in athletics 2011–2012 college athletics 195,657 women 257,690 men 2013–2014 high school athletics 3,267,664 girls 4,527,994 boys (continued)

Underrepresentation (continued) Yet there has been substantial growth in women’s participation since the passage of Title IX College athletics 16,000 women in 1971 195,657 women in 2011–2012

Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” Title IX applies if any department in a school receives federal funding; the law applies to the entire school. (continued)

Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 (continued) In response to Grove City ruling, Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 Today, institutions receiving any form of federal assistance must be in compliance with Title IX

Grove City College v. Bell (1984) Case dealing with the application of Title IX One of the biggest setbacks for women since passage of Title IX in 1972 Court found that Title IX was applicable only to those parts of the institution that received federal funding; thus, athletics were excluded

Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 Legislation reversed the findings in Grove City College and applied Title IX institution- wide Thus, if any part of an institution received federal funding, the entire institution was subject to the specifications in Title IX

Regulation and Enforcement Department of Education 1975 regulations focus on equal opportunity Program areas (i.e., equipment, locker rooms) Effective accommodation of interests and abilities and selection of sports for both sexes (continued)

Regulation and Enforcement (continued) Equivalency in financial aid 1979 policy interpretation provides ways for schools to measure whether they comply with Title IX and the 1975 regulations Part 1: Financial assistance Part 2: Equality in program areas Part 3: Effective accommodation

Three-Part Test Prong 1 Prong 2 Prong 3 Are participation opportunities for both sexes substantially proportionate? This is a safe harbor if participation of underrepresented sex is substantially proportionate to other sex. If so, then stop here, because compliance is determined; if not . . . Prong 2 Can the institution show a history and continuing practice of program expansion? If yes, stop here; if not . . . Prong 3 Have the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex been fully and effectively accommodated? (continued)

Three-Part Test (continued) Do not need to meet each prong Any one prong of the three-part test, if met, demonstrates compliance with Title IX

Cohen v. Brown University (1992) The university, needing to cut its budget, eliminated university funding for men’s golf and water polo and women’s gymnastics and volleyball Brown challenged Cohen’s argument that women were interested enough in sport opportunities to offer a proportionate number of sport programs Regarded as a victory for women because the First Circuit Court of Appeals took the position that Title IX meant that equal representation for women in sports had to be proportionate to the student body population

1996 Clarification Reiterated that three-part test is really three individual ways to comply with Title IX Prong 1: substantial proportionality only an issue if there are enough athletes to sustain a team Prong 2: to meet this, school must continuously expand opportunities in response to women’s interests Prong 3: must effectively accommodate interests and abilities of admitted and enrolled students

Separate Teams Schools may sponsor teams for members of one sex If selection is based on athletic skill If sport is a contact sport There is no contact sport exception Contact sports, even if predominantly male, are still taken into account under prong 1

Cutting Teams Cutting men’s teams is allowed under prong 1 of the three-part test Done to bring number of male participants into substantial proportionality with number of female participants Not favored: 2003 OCR further clarification (continued)

Cutting Teams (continued) Miami University Wrestling Club v. Miami University (2002) 1997 MU student population: 55% female students, 47% female student athletes Men sued after university cut four men’s teams Court dismissed their complaint because members of overrepresented sex (men) do not have a claim under the three-part test (continued)

Cutting Teams (continued) Equity in Athletics v. Department of Education (2011) Fourth Circuit found that an advocacy group may have standing to sue the federal government because its members are former athletes and the universities made the cuts to male teams to comply with federal law Could open the door for future Title IX litigation related to cuts made to men’s sports

Cutting Women’s Teams Men from cut teams have never won a lawsuit against a school Cutting of women’s teams is never allowed, because women tend to be the underrepresented sex Existence of women’s team is evidence of interest and ability (continued)

Cutting Women’s Teams (continued) Roberts v. Colorado State Board of Agriculture (1993) In response to disproportionate numbers of women participating, the university cut one women’s team and one men’s team Women sued Court ordered school to reinstate women’s team

Recent Guidance 2005 additional clarification Allows for Internet surveys to show interests and abilities and meet third prong of three-part test Counts nonresponse as lack of interest, but school must receive 85% response level to proceed

Disclosure of Information Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (1998) Requires all universities that receive federal student aid and have athletic programs to disclose information related to financial aid, athletic revenues, and other resources Information available to the public at http://ope.ed.gov/athletics

Title VII Prohibits discrimination against any employee on the basis of sex in compensation and other benefits associated with employment Plaintiff merely has to show some negative job action (for example, termination) that was taken on the basis of the employee’s sex

Employment Discrimination In 1972, 90% of coaches for women’s teams were women In 2014, only 43% were women

Equal Pay Act Prohibits discrimination in wages between employees on the basis of sex for equal work on jobs that require equal skill, effort, and responsibility under similar working conditions Equal work Two jobs do not have to require identical skill, effort, and responsibility The jobs must be substantially equal except for the fact that one employee is paid more even though he performs what is basically the same job

Sexual Harassment Title IX covers sexual harassment in educational settings Quid pro quo harassment involves sexual favors requested in exchange for benefits or educational or employment opportunity Hostile environment interferes with ability to perform (continued)

Sexual Harassment (continued) 2010 OCR letter Made clear that schools must eliminate hostile environments to prevent reccurrence of harassment Schools must provide clear notices prohibiting bullying and adopt clear grievance procedures

Risk Management Implications Failure to comply with Title IX can be costly to institution: Financial burdens Image of institution Satisfaction of participants Coaches and administrators Sexual harassment Lawsuits involving EPA and Title VII