According to the Digest, one example of the impact of the bill would be to “require an employer to allow an employee to appear or dress consistently with the employee’s gender expression.” In contrast, under current law an employer can require an employee to dress consistently with the employee’s gender identity. Pacific Justice Institute is preparing an analysis and opposition to the bill for lawmakers.
“Instead of ‘refining’ the meaning of gender, AB 887 is attempting to blur the distinction between the sexes,” said Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute. “This would allow a male transvestite to cross dress at a sale’s call and the employer would be unable to require the salesman to dress appropriately while representing the company. Not only does this touch on the absurd, the proposed changes will be done at taxpayer expense,” Dacus continued.